Did you know this will be a FFA PVP game?

[Dubanka]

*shrug*

sheep will be sheep.
wolves will be wolves.

so long as you've got to have yours off to attack mine...i mean if you can attack mine without risk, that's bs.

also it would be a lot simpler if 'safe' areas were relegated to certain points on the map...so you couldn't block key resources via a well positioned and invulnerable stronghold.

[Virtus]

As the game grows there will be good tribes that do want to open their lands for that more realistic experience. I have a feeling the regulators will be one of these tribes

[sionide]

No offense to anyone, but I would like it sorted out now please. I need to know what the end game repesents here, or to be quite honest, what's the point in playing the "game" to being with. Guilds need to know what sort of end game group vs group is offering in this game. We are not here to play the sims online. Everything we were led to be believe failed with what Virtus just announced.

I understand your concerns, but I guess you just have to trust the devs. That's really what it comes down to.

It's a sandbox game that already has FFA (outside tribal zones) with full looting. That in itself should give you confidence of what type of game the devs are making and their mindset.

I think they want to take their time and make the system "right." And not just rush in, make rash decisions of this is how it's going to be, and then bonk the whole system when 4 months later people will scream at them saying, "Yeah, but you said this and this 4 months ago."

If that isn't enough for you, then not sure what to tell you, I guess "smell you later."

[bruisie159]

yeah it all looks good to me now... I mean come on does it have be totally black or white!? Havent u guys heard of compromise so we can ALL enjoy the game?? That is aimed at both sides of the argument not to mention any names but pvpers and "carebears".

The announcment about pvp plans is great, its a COMPROMISE! The pvpers already have concessions in a game thats not supposed to be pvp focused, namely.. FULL LOOT - FFA outside of tribe zones. Tribal Warfare. And..the possibility later on of haviong secondary settlements in new area that are fully open to raiding. AND plenty of tribes giving up there safe zone to play a game of pew pew with you!

The carebears get... a limited area that is relatively safe to craft and supply the world with goods. Is that so bad??

It seems to be if thats not enough for you then maybe you really are just looking for easy target non pvp types to gank as apparently some people already have doing camping spawn points.

Anyway, try to understand other peoples point of view ffs and learn to COMPROMISE then we can all enjoy a great game!

[Vandali]

Some people just aren't happy unless they can destroy another's bucket and spade.

[coca]

Even the Lux Arcana in darkfall would think that it is a bad idea to have "safe zones"

Why not give a tribe some defence mechanisims to make it harder for attackers to be successfull in those areas.. but to give land owners invulnerability is dumb.
It will encourage people to sit in their city and do nothing.. people will get bored and quit the game.

One of the HUGE problems darkfall had in the begining is there was no benifit to leaving your city one you made one. People didn't leave becuase they were scared they might loose their pixels... people got burned out and bored.


I would almost agree with some sort of risk/reward scenereo for tribes... Have a few "safe" locastions that had crap resources around it.... you could sit in your safe area but wouldn't get much accomplished or you could go out to riskier places further away from safe areas and your avaialble resources would increase and be higher quality.

[MrKrueak]

Even the Lux Arcana in darkfall would think that it is a bad idea to have "safe zones"

.

and yet people wonder why Darkfall failed as an mmo, ever wonder why all pure pvp oriented mmo's fail?????

there has to be a compromise, eve online to me is the only mmo that has truly pulled this compromise off.

[Doc]

I would almost agree with some sort of risk/reward scenereo for tribes... Have a few "safe" locastions that had crap resources around it.... you could sit in your safe area but wouldn't get much accomplished or you could go out to riskier places further away from safe areas and your avaialble resources would increase and be higher quality.

I looked into my crystal ball and i see that this would be general idea for further depvelopment.

I dont really know what line of thought gets people to conclude some things:

We have initial land area, where we build towns. After a while, resources will be deleted if you happen to sit on one, new lands with new resources will open that will be ripe for warfare, and someone concludes everyone will just sit in theor town doing nothing. Give devs some credit, jeebus, FFA PvP is ingame, future stuff will involve PvP, if it bugs you sooooo much that you cant claim tiny piece of land with town in it that does nothing but looks pretty...i guess this is not game for you.

[BigCountry]

and yet people wonder why Darkfall failed as an mmo

Darkfall never failed. Behind Shadowbane and EvE it is the #3 mmorpg far as open pvp during this decade. Darkfall is very much alive and kicking, it just lacks in created sandbox content - everything you fight over is static.

[Doc]

Darkfall never failed. Behind Shadowbane and EvE it is the #3 mmorpg far as open pvp during this decade. Darkfall is very much alive and kicking, it just lacks in created sandbox content - everything you fight over is static.

Yah, lol, but, i mean, i have to ask, but, are you serious?

"Darkfall didnt fail, theres just pretty much noone that wants to play it" Shadowbane? Please. This is ridiculous.