I don't get all the concerns about Open PvP

If there is to be some ransom system I would push for the winner to have the control.

You kill someone > loot them > find a sword > choose take sword or choose ransom sword for X amount > if take sword > receive loot > if ransom for X amount > wait for accept from loser (or have a preset that on death it preaccepts ransom requests)

This is insurance where the winner gets the insurance money and not some NPC, or they can just skip the insurance and loot the item.

 

@Morkul:
"To play a game that is design for the single propose to kill your your opponent you are taking in to the account that you will be killed. In those cases you and your "victims" are in a consensual agreement and therefore don't ruin someone experience, unless they connected to the wrong server "

To murder someone randomly in a MMORPG game that do not want to participate in PvP do ruin his experience.

Since Richard Garriott all the times speak of the great story in the game I truly believe this can be a great RPG game, but right type of players needs to be attracted."

Your definition of the "right players" and my definition of the "right players" probably differ. However, I'm not going to argue that one player is more "right" than another one. My opinion is that the potential for risk in an MMORPG enriches the experience, it does not diminish it. I do not enjoy games that are monotonous with no repercussions for your actions (World of Warcraft, Everquest, etc.). These games get repetitive when you're grinding out the same instance for the 20th time in anticipation that you might get a piece of equipment.

The point of the example with FPS games is that people enjoy PvP. In an FPS people aren't exactly exhilarated when they're killed, but they still play all the same. The key difference between an FPS and an MMORPG is the amount of time that's invested in developing your character, gathering resources, and completing dungeons. The slider option and enticements into PvP will allow for players to accept the risks before they enter a combat zone.

 

Does anyone have any links to information from the Devs about the 'Magic Slider'? I think this may be where some of the lack of understanding between camps may be coming into play. I'm assuming (and you know what folks say about what happens when you assume) that they're talking about something besides the three styles of play (SPO / FPO / OPO) or entering into hexes which have been flagged as PvP.

I'd been under the impression that those aspects weren't fully decided on their implementation. ie. We didn't have any information on if there would / would not be a magic slider, but we'd been discussing how it should function if there was one, just theres been a sense of fait accompli in some of the comments. That there *IS* a magic slider that we've been told about at some point. And I'm always looking to further get a solid footing on the subject since all I've got was the information from the Multiplayer hangout yesterday that we all should have seen / read up on by now.

 

Thing you miss my purpose of the post so lets quote part of my own post: "Therefore it would be informative to know why this urge to engage someone in PvP against his/her will."

 

You have so right, our definitions of "right players" probably differs. But to clarify what I mean with "right Players": Players that can make this a vivid RPG with a huge player base. That way the game can survive under a long time and bring huge amount of joy to a lot of players. I think the players that are in need of killing other players that don't want to participate in PvP wont get the game to that point.

A game with meaningful PvP combat, where you don't necessary need to participate but you want to because you get extra reward for doing so would be a game that most players from both sides would like to play. We will miss out on player on both sides of this but there is also the balance the devs need to if the games is going to have a huge player base.

 

You're correct. The "slider" is a metaphor. It's basically a way of saying that PvP is probably more complicated than a simple Boolean flag (a checkbox), it's more like a slider. Many games would do the slider based on location, e.g. Eve or even WoW with different colored zones. The slider is a bit of a compromise where both the zone and the user preferences and taken into account for PvP matching. Perhaps there's some area which never has PvP and some you have to be flagged to enter, but most of the world should observe people's preferences.

As has been said before, nothing's final until there's a megapost...and then it's really still not final until release...and then even UO is probably still messing with it's PvP settings 15 years later.

 

The difference is that Dupre would not randomly decide to kill you! Saying that the original one player Ultima games support open PvP is just silly. There were not other players. Just you. Everyone else was programmed and on rails. If you wanted to spend hours gathering things and making things in the original Ultima games, there was no chance that some random NPC was going to kill you and take your stuff.

Your last statement is nearly nonsensical. I had plenty of safe havens to do exactly those types of things in every single ultima game (if it was advanced enough to support those behaviors at all), UNTIL UO.

It's fine if you think SoTA should be like UO. If you love open PvP, that's great, but don't tell the rest of us we have no clue what Ultima stands for, because we don't want the same thing. It's simply insulting.

 

I think that can be done with open PvP as Lineage 2 has clearly shown. Eve also features PvP and it is immensely popular with hundreds of thousands of subscribers. Lastly, Ultima Online is still around and that game started off with open PvP and full loot. These games are a testament to the fact that some MMORPG's which offer PvP can be very successful.

 

EVE are a really good example of a balanced PvP. No matter what profession you like you do not need to go in to low sec but you will gain advantages by doing so, if you avoid being killed that is. So it's far from open PvP but still satisfy a lot of different playing styles.

 

From the current EVE Online New Pilot FAQ:
"
...
In EVE Online, any player may attack any other player if they choose to, no matter where they happen to be. This is because EVE Online is essentially a PvP (Player versus Player) game at its core.
...
As has been mentioned in previous sections any player can engage another player at any time in any place. In high-sec space there may be consequences if a pilot attacks another without just cause, but they can still make that attack if they wish.
...
7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY?
No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. The safest systems are the `rookie systems' where new players start their journey in EVE. In high-sec systems, you are less likely to be attacked since CONCORD will exact retribution on pilots who attack another pilot without good reason. But, for example, if you are flying a ship with a high value cargo, a player may attack you to destroy the ship and steal anything from the wreck if they think that it's worth the effort. Such attacks are known as `ganking' and if the profit they'll make is sufficient, pilots are willing to accept the expense of losing their ship to CONCORD and having their security status lowered for their crimes.
...
"
From what Portalarium has said thus far, SotA is not that kind of game.

 

No, I don't think SoTA is going to require PvP. I think that option may be available for those who are interested in it. I am interested in PvP and I will enable that option for myself, if the opportunity isn't provided then I probably will not be interested in online play. It will be a single player game for me and I'll play it similarly to the way I have played the Ultima games.

-And as always, thanks for the excellent sources!

 

I play EVE and have done so for several years now. Killings in high security systems are extremely rare, if you don't count corporate wars. Thing is that in high sec systems are the gates are watch be CONCORD and if you attack someone in a system you wont get out.

So yes it's an open PVP system but as I said a well balanced one where killings in high sec arias more or less don't happen.

 

Why ask about something that will never happen?

 

Because I'm interested in the human mind. If you learn why people do something you don't understand it's easier to understand their arguments.

 

Suit yourself. There is more than enough to discuss without worrying about something that will never happen.

 

\Maybe the PK guild had a reason to attack Muggly's (RPing their style)

 

But being in a red/Pkr guild thier Rp is to kill you if your in thier area etc.. or closing in on thier area, you know PK's also RP, PVP also RP, PVE also RP. Its just not you,

 

sorry took so long to get back to this thread been battling it out in others! Funny thing here is you just hit my type of character right on t the money! that is how i play my PVP character - he is L:awful good Paladin! and i RP as well.

 

I play the multiplayer DayZ and ive been killed many times by people who ran up on me and killed me for no reason! that just motivates me to go find them and kill them back, whilst dodging zombies! It also makes me more aware of my surroundings! and increases the game play for me making it more ejoyable, especially when i find the one that killed me and kill him! I still enjoy the game, yes it sucked i was killed and have to go findnew stuff cause mine was taken but thats just part of Open wrld PVP and i accept that!

 

Yeah! you just became one of my new buddies!