safe zones poll

[Trenchfoot]

OK I think I may be changing my mind somewhat as I understand more.

Will two warring factions be able to fight one another in non-pvp safe zones of a third tribe?

[Jadzia]

OK I think I may be changing my mind somewhat as I understand more.

Will two warring factions be able to fight one another in non-pvp safe zones of a third tribe?

I'm sure they will be, they already can as far as I know. A safe zone is only safe for the owner tribe's members, anyone else can fight on that land.

[Trenchfoot]

Starting to sound better than I thought.

What's to keep a pvp tribe from finding a non-pvp tribe, plopping down next to them, and preying on any non-pvp'rs that wander out of their safe zone?

[Jadzia]

Starting to sound better than I thought.

What's to keep a pvp tribe from finding a non-pvp tribe, plopping down next to them, and preying on any non-pvp'rs that wander out of their safe zone?

I'm glad you start to like the system

And the answer is nothing, that can be done right now and I guess will always be possible. Its important to find good neighbours.

[maelwydd]

Starting to sound better than I thought.

What's to keep a pvp tribe from finding a non-pvp tribe, plopping down next to them, and preying on any non-pvp'rs that wander out of their safe zone?

Nothing really (that I can think of). A player who is in a peaceful tribe still needs to be careful when they leave their tribal lands as normal unrestricted pvp still exists outside the safety of their home.

[Trenchfoot]

Can the non-pvp tribe then retaliate against the pvp tribe in a way that cannot be done to them? So that essentially, a non-pvp tribe decides who settles next to them because they're invincible on their own land and pvp tribes aren't?

And if you say 'Well the pvp tribe wants to pvp don't they?', I say sure they do, but fighting an indestructible enemy is hardly competitive.

This only works if the players who opt out cannot attack other tribes on the other tribes land either. If we can get around that, I'll be sold.

[Jadzia]

Can the non-pvp tribe then retaliate against the pvp tribe in a way that cannot be done to them? So that essentially, a non-pvp tribe decides who settles next to them because they're invincible on their own land and pvp tribes aren't?

And if you say 'Well the pvp tribe wants to pvp don't they?', I say sure they do, but fighting an indestructible enemy is hardly competitive.

This only works if the players who opt out cannot attack other tribes on the other tribes land either. If we can get around that, I'll be sold.

From the update thread again : Non warring tribes would keep their area safe, but don’t gain the ability to raid or conquer other tribes.

So no, no unfair advantage to the non-warring tribes.
And being non-warring won't be a switch, it will somehow based on the tribe's actions. So if they keep bugging the warring tribe they might lose their non-warring status eventually.

[Trenchfoot]

OK I'm convinced. This doesn't sound unreasonable.

[Jadzia]

OK I'm convinced. This doesn't sound unreasonable.

Yay Thanks for being reasonable and honest.

[Trenchfoot]

Well I'm still resistant. :P

I do have to admit this doesn't sound unreasonable in theory. It just might work if you think of the non-pvp population as part of the scenery. I can also see opportunities for pvp to work together with non-pvp. On the other hand I suspect this will cause 'alt non pvp' tribes to pop up as well (think that through).

Through past experience I would tend to say this mix of systems would never work. So I'm still highly skeptical, but lacking a solid argument (you've addressed everything I can think that's a major issue) or evidence, the only thing left for me to do is try it out and see if it works like they say it will.

And of course I still want an FFA that has terraforming, crafting, and worldbuilding. For me pvp is the icing on that cake. It's what ultimately gives those non-pvp things value. That and the fact that I'm at home, safe, now. Which is why I enjoy being 'in constant threat of danger' in an MMO. It gives your accomplishments weight and value. Besides there's nothing more engaging than doing battle with another human being. AI simply can't replicate it. If it were practical I'd say let the payers log in and play as the mobs if they choose to. How exciting would it be if the bears were as spontaneous and unpredictable as human beings? Maybe even hire some out of work child actors to play some NPCs?

And you're right these are all just my preferences. I can't tell other people what to like. But I'll still be waiting for that seemingly pie in the sky game. One in which it's safe where the players make/keep it safe, and where they don't make/keep it safe it isn't.