The PvP Enigma

Not flagged as a criminal, but as an active participant in a guild war, which if you help someone in a guild war, that is what you are, even if you are not an official member of the guild. The only people who would be able to attack you would be members of the rival guild, which is as it should be. If you don't want to be included in a guild war, don't participate in a guild war.

 

I hope the villain and hero can clash here, with the virtue effect found in the early uo. We will see. Blaquerogue's philosophy and mine closely parallel. We want to PvP and possibly will not be able to do so unless we join a Guild.
There is no problem here, except I'm a rogue and have a great aversion for Guilds, for very good personal reasons. His view could be a lot different however, I would really enjoy free choice is all.

I do know the KGB is the Best and Honorable Guild. *Plugs Owain's Guild*

 

ok then ill just let you all die!

Ill already be pvp so it wont be a big deal to me to help maybe your enemy heal, if they are bad guys then ill just be a bad guy. I hate guilds because they never follow through with their members, they help you a bit at first then forget about you because your not as high level as they are when you log in again, i have to work, have a family etc... so by the time i get back on again everyone has gone up in levels and they don't want anything to do with you at that point, every guild ive ever seen has been this way! Except for my own guild who worked with all players no matter how low or high in level, if you a low level and your other member is a high level just taking me along with you and telling me to sit still while you kill everything, and soak up exp isnt training me how to be good, its just a way for you as a high level to boast about how good you are! Thats what ive seen pretty much every time on every game! If thats not you or your guild youll have to prove it so many empty promises, so i dont join guilds!

 

It doesn't matter if you are already flagged for PvP, because that isn't the reason why a rule like this is necessary. It should be possible to conduct a guilt war without being flagged for Open PvP. If people who are not members of your rival guild are not flagged for Open PvP, then you can't attack them at all, but they would still be visible to you. In that case, it would be bad game design if they were to be able to heal members of the enemy guild, but you were not able to retaliate for them doing so.

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/loadFeature/8105/The-Most-Wanted-Indie-MMOs-of-2014.html

Who said it wasn't an mmo? Was it this thread?

 

This ^^

It sounds like a pvp server would be the perfect answer to this problem, so all the Oo's that suck at pvp don't have to worry about being looted. Then again I do enjoy farming them =)

 

I don't like magically protected gear. Maybe stuff like the prosperity items that we bought and also don't provide a tactical advantage.

Even if there isn't full loot, the ability to loot weapons and armor is important to keep a person from being raised to life and immediately becoming combat ready again. We should have the opportunity to loot the weapons and armor to force that player to go back and re-equip himself before joining back into the fight.

I agree that there should be no super tiers of items either, but I don't mind if there are items that are powerful enough that a person thinks twice about using it in PvP for fear of losing them. I had plenty of great magical items in UO that I very rarely took out into PvP. So even if you have an invincible warhammer of power you might opt to use a slightly lesser quality item when you go out alone in PvP mode. I think that's what you guys are referring to as well.

 

As mentioned repeatedly in the past, if strategic removal of the combatant is a/the primary design goal for PvP, there's a wide range of ways that can be accomplished without the economic & social damage caused by full loot.

In other words, looting a targets weapon and armor is not the only way to prevent them from being raised to life and immediately becoming combat ready again.

 

sure there could be temporary penalties for their skills etc, or bang up their items so they need repairs. However the looting of the gear provides a type of reward for the victors. This is better than gold in many respects because metallic items can be resold or reused, or even melted down into ingots.

So even if there isn't full loot, the ability to loot somebody's weapons and armor would be nice.

 

I've heard you drop this nice sounding line before but can you please elaborate. You refused to do so, when challenged, in the last thread I read as well.

The 'damage' you speak of can be flipped and looked at as, 'stimulous'

The more people are looted, the more items circulate, the more thing get purchased, traded, repaired etc..
All POSITIVES for crafters, both economically and socially.

What is the "damage" economically of losing my rare sword of Mongbat Slaying???

What is the "social" damage, other than the player who lost sword being sad and hurt and have to either go and kill another greater Mongbat for a new sword.. Or.. Go and BUY a new sword, again, stimulating the economy and trade?

 

There are plenty of ways of making a system that allows for the strategic removal of players from the current field of combat, and more effective than full loot.

Of the top of my head: remove in combat healing and turn the role of healer into a triage roll. The healer controls the damage but does not restore the player to full combat readiness. The full healing is done out of combat and takes time and skill of a practiced healer.

Each wound a player receives reduces their over all combat readiness. Until they eventually hit the point where they must step out to recover.

Add in equipment damage and you have a pretty solid dynamic of control for players to use strategy to remove the enemy from the field.

As for "social damage" it's quite simple that some people do not respond well to conflict. Allow a mechanic such as full loot and you can quickly see this in action.

On the "rare sword of Mongbat Slaying" in a full loot game, they leave that one at home and bring out some throw away weapon, OR they use the one they looted from someone else. No economic impact there, unless you count the lack of use of the crafted gear that is really of any value.

 

People who don't like conflict don't like conflict regardless of full loot or not right?

I feel like you proved my point tho as far as economy goes... They bring the one they previously looted (items exchanging hands), or the "throw away" weapon, (Weapon purchased from crafter, not "throw away" just common)

 

Conflict, being human conflict, not combat. They are not the same. The toxic part of the human nature does not need help to come out in the public, anonymous, venue. Adding a mechanic that gives it a center place is not going to help.

So you are saying that PvP should stifle the economy to the point that crafters can only sell a product that is trivial enough to be consequential to loss in combat? Then crafting becomes mundane, no need to make the product that is meaningful or challenging. Just make the stuff of bulk. Simply because that is what sells.

 

With Selective MultiPlayer, there is no need to have separate servers, along with the headaches associated with different code bases for different servers.

 

Such hostility...

The meta server potentially has the ability to parse out PvP from PvE, why would there be a need for 2 different servers? This can be used to effectively make that separation.

 

Wow, someone is seriously misguided and uninformed on the various offline/online modes and how Selective Multiplayer will work. And, they haven't even revealed how PvP works in the game yet.

Someone seriously needs to read this article and watch the video on the various modes of play.
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/portalarium/shroud-of-the-avatar-forsaken-virtues-0/posts/429763

 

"Potentially" ?

Can you tell me where the Dev's have posted this information confirming that the meta server has the potential to parse out pvp from pve, I would love to learn more about it.

Thanks!

 

Seriously, watch the video. Skip to 4:50 for your answer.

 

Thanks for posting that smack.

As it stands according to the spiel about "Relevance" ranking system, possibly 24 players will be able to see each other on the same screen, and this is decided by the game itself, not the player.

Let's hope this new untested and unproven technology works, because there is no point in using a tried and tested technology to bring pk's together right?

 

If full loot is the implemented system, then the looting behaviour is the norm and not a toxic behaviour. It is accepted and expected after someone dies in combat.

Not at all what I am saying. What I am saying is, a mythical epic uber weapon looted from an epic spawn that is super rare and hard to get is different than an upscale well crafted weapon from a crafter. The crafted weapons don't need to be 'trivial'. I'm saying, when you go to battle, knowing you might die, you equip a weapon that you are ok with losing but still doesn't suck. I'm saying crafted weapons are more common that rare drops. That is all.
My second point was that if I'm able to loot you, I can take that rare weapon from you. And sell it, keep it or whatever. But You, who have died, now need to re-equip thus stimulating, not stifling the economy.