PVP and looting people

I have been mauling over more things to see if we can find a better way to get more people into pvp.

Most the people including myself rarely flag because of the stuff we carry on us which we really don't want to loose even if the price is fair by the oracle.

That got me thinking on the what if...

What if we could set what items are to be dropped in PVP?

Having an option to right click gear and set a flag as PVP then allows people to:

1. control what they want as rewards for being killed.
2. not worry about being killed and loosing things they have
3. allow for people to not have to pack up all their good stuff before they decide to pvp
4. make Body parts as always drop or chance to drop as the default reward

This right here would make it so more people are more likely to flag more frequently as they would not have to worry about much short of durability loss.

I think that is another thing that needs to be address if you are killed by another player you should not take a Durability hit. My town Silverdale is no loot rules but we still get funny people that like to kill afk people over and over which costs them in the end because of the loss.

This small change here would more then likely get a lot more people at least in the PVE side to participate.


What are all your thoughts on this?

Cheers,

Gov. Xee

 

The ransom system needs to go away, and better incentives need to be added to encourage PvP. There’s would need to be something that cannot be gamed, or exploited.

 

And that is the hard bit. Loss from the victim ensures that it is not a value sum gain from pvp killing a character, thus stopping it being worthwhile to be both parties . Having a gain for the winner and no loss for the loser is nearly impossible to design in a way that can not be games or exploited.


Regards
Spung

 

that is where the player set pvp loot comes into play. no exploit, rewards are set based on individual preference.

1. no more being attacked over and over to get robbed ( only griever would attack someone over and over that doesn't drop)
2. make it so junk loot (shovels, rusty, mob dropped trash / salvage stuff) is still part of loot so min gold from kill comes from that stuff as random loot. its of very little value to players.

so why pvp then? the serious people will most likely provide good rewards. there is also leader boards for fun. nothing really to be gained so nothing exploitable.

 

I quote myself from another post:

Imo there should be something meaningfull that needs to replace ransoms, maybe igg drop, you take a part of igg of your opponents, based on adventure level and gear or victories in PVP.
What I am afraid of is that next release we will not have anymore ransoms, but nothing to replace it because all the good ideas we had probably need a long time to be implemented, and we know how it ends up when something need long time to be implemented, maybe better keep it as it is til devs are ready to develop a replacement?
Would be interesting to have Atos' opinion about what would be his ideal replacement for ransoms.

 

I don't know if i like this idea, making people choose if drop stuffs or not, will drive to everyone choose for no loot but a few, also when the fight is convenient for you ( you are sure you have more chance to win) you activate the loot, but when the fight is unconvenient you will go no loot. We know human nature tends always to do the more convenient and smartest choice, otherwise we wouldn't have been where we are.

 

I've just posted my idea just recently on one of my own threads, but I will post here as well because I feel like this can solve most of the issues talked about concerning PvP.

Obsidian Fragments, a new type of currency, would be dropped from mobs in PvP zones, and with a chance to drop in PvE zones IF you are flagged, basically it only drops if you are prey to PvP. This new currency could be traded with a merchant in Blood Bay or something, which would have ressources, reagents, bunch of interesting stuff, heck why not PvP only artifacts (that would only have an effect in PvP or PvP zones).

With this, people would have an incentive to go out and farm flagged, and even more incentive to go in PvP zones. Players who would die with Obsidian Fragments would lose some fragments, a % of them. If it is mobs or the environment that kills you, you would lose X amount, meanwhile if a player would kill you, he would manage to recover half of that amount.

This would do two things : 1. Give an incentive to go out flagged or in a PvP zone, and 2. Give a reward to the Killer.

This system would not be gamed, simply because the only thing you can get is from mob drops, and if a player kills you, there is still half of what you lose that goes to him, but the other half would be back into the mobs.


The issue I see with your suggestion Xee is that some players would end up not flagging anything worthwhile, and we will be back to way back before when PvP was far from worth it, and this will not help, having no real incentive to pvp.

 

I'm starting to think that PVP only works well when it is consensual full loot PVP. If there is risk of losing everything and reward for taking everything... that makes PVP exciting and scary and rewarding enough to engage in it.

If you want to try to take something from someone else, you can have it all! But, you also need to be willing to risk losing all your stuff too!

If there are restrictions on what can be taken... the killers are not happy and there is no real incentive to kill people.

Those who opt out and don't flag don't have to worry about losing anything... but those who do have a high risk and high reward system.


The only alternative I can think of is a system where PVP is a means of controlling a certain area that is profitable in terms of PVE content, resources, XP, etc. where if you can keep others out you stand to benefit from the PVE content for you/party/guild/etc.

We "sort of" have the alternative here (PVP only scenes) but the problem is that these scenes don't provide the PVE stuff worthy of controlling... and that there are so many of them to choose that if you have competition in one you can just go to another and likely be all alone.

I think if SOTA made the PVP scenes really profitable (either by means of resources/xp/loot) and reduced the number of them available... that would be incentive to spill blood.

Of course, then you have the Non-PVP people complaining that they should have equal access to profitable scenes without the need to PVP... and let's face it, there are more Non-PVP than PVP players... so this likely won't ever happen.

So, as I originally said... the only way it works well is when the risk/reward is high but that risk/reward must be provided by the players and not a reward system that can be gamed or exploited.

 

Suggestion complementing Violette dyonysis
1) No Ranson in pvp;
2) While flagged pvp for doing PVE in open (multiplayer mode) you earn Obsidian essences as a rare drop, like Arcane Catalyst you got from sieges this would be a quest item and cannot be moved from your inventory;
3) When you die you give XX from your Obsidian essences for your opponent;
4) Exclusive items can be purchase using the pvp currency: Trophies, unique capes, pvp titles, exclusive and non trade stuff

 

Agree definitely in everything of what you said, at the same i want to add that having PVP incentive and rewards as you described above could make PVP players maybe more than non-PVP players, reverting the situation, might also attract old players we lost or potential new ones.

 

The thing is full loot PvP would mean people would end up emptying their inventories before they go in a PvP zone or go flagged. They would also make sure they have junk gear, stuff that they have multiple copies of, because Hell no I wont sacrifice these items that either cost me a fortune OR ended up taking me a heck ton of mats to make, why would I risk months of investment into 1 bad fight? Sure, some people might be excited by a concept like that, but the reality of this game is that stuff is either super long to get, super lucky to make, or super pricey to make, so very few would be willing to risk it.

 

I agree, full loot in sota is a bit of a problem cause of as it is designed (getting a good gear takes a lot of money), i was mostly agreeing in the second part of the post where he was talking about controlling a certain area using PVP to get better PVE rewards.

 

I have never posted here on the forum but am a kickstarter backer and have been playing regularly since launch. Most everyone knows me by my ingame name which I will opt to leave out for unbias read of this post.

Pvp is the single most important thing to me in regards to the game. All of the other changes have been "oh that's just SOTA taking another step downhill". But this one takes the cake.

The reason pvp is fun, scary and exciting is because there's a risk of losing big. Without the risk of losing anything (except a rusty sword you've marked "ok to loot") there is no excitement.

However, if @atos does see this as necessary - I would suggest experience. gold and chance for artifact drop in replacement of the oracle. Crafters want to craft for a living, PvErs want to PvE for a living, why are PvPrs singled out and discriminated against? There is no progression for pvp to further one's character as there should be. If you take the excitement away, at least allow us to further characters in some way without the negative effects of the oracle on losers.

 

The only issue with this is that a large % of the player base don't want to PVP, and dont want to have to worry about loosing their hard earned items. The oracle well very fair with prices still is enough to make most players that PVE not interested.

I am one of them that PVE almost alwasys because I spent so much time to get what I have, I dont want the risk of losing some gear and dont want to have to pack up everything when I do.

I dont think everyone has to drop things to make pvp fun. I am not in PVP to become a ganker / player killer and dont care for that at all. That is what ruins the game for many pve players being forced, this game is primary PVE and the player base is mostly PVE. So going down that path is not really an option and would probably kill the game. Where I am looking is how do we engage PVE players to want to participate in PVP stuff. the only way is to come up with like mentioned above a new currency or loot option that does not affect the PVE'er to a point that they dont want to play because they lost it all.

Look at guildwars and other games that are PVE with PVP they dont have open loot and they have a good formula that works with out the issue of loss to players.

 

I don't remember if you were the one I was discussing this with in yesterday's chat, but for the sake of anyone who wasn't there -- what Atos described wasn't taking away ransom, it was taking it away temporarily as a test to determine how important ransom was in keeping PVE players from trying out PVP.

IF ransom were to be removed permanently, what kind (if any) replacement would be needed is a valid question. But if any replacement were added DURING the temporary removal, it would invalidate it. The devs need good data they can analyze about player behavior, not decisions based on the opinions and perceptions of a small percentage of active players who are inevitably biased. And no, that's not a swipe at PVPers -- anyone who actively speaks up on Twitch or the forums is already a small percentage of the population, and all players have their own biases. That's why they need DATA, not just opinions. And you can't GET good data when you have confounding factors, like adding more than one variable at a time. (Given the team's size, I doubt they have anyone highly skilled in multivariate analysis.)

Mind you, attributing casuality to one factor without properly compensating for other variables seems to be exactly what they did when they decided the Isle of Storms was to blame for the loss of new players. So I'm pretty sure that if y'all keep asking, you'll be able to get your confounding variables for December. It just won't help you improve PVP overall, not in the long run, because it'll mean the devs are operating on flawed data so their decisions will inevitably be flawed as well.

 

I do agree its exciting and adds elements that can be fun. But this game is based on real money for skins, and objects that are worth real money. That said its too much work to change out all the gear just to go hunt because one spent crowns to get a skin with $5 which they can loose just leaving the town. etc.

If the crown store did not exist and all armor and weapons loot was only drop in game not bought then perhaps it would be a different story. That is another reason I dont PVP , I run a town and carry deeds, houses vendors, skins and all manor of things to deal with town and again dont want to have to go through my inventory for an hour pulling out all the things I dont want to loose just to leave my house. Id never be out with my good gear or artifacts.

I think the idea of a pvp currency that is farmed is the best option as its not something that would mean much to anyone accept pvpers.

 

I really wish a solution could be found to allow for tiers of PvP. I rarely PvP. But, I know hardcore PvPers can have a tone of fun.

What about something like this:

Flagging options:
- Dual: Meant for one on one combat. No experience gain with only body parts as loot.
- PvP: Exactly as it is today.
- Full PvP: Full loot. 200% experience earning rate when flagged. 2 hour cool down on unflagging. Can only go into solo and open mode scenes.

Any fight with another player not at your level will have the Dual level rules for the higher level player. The lower level player, if they when the fight, will get 50% of the loot from the other player. These battles would always take place at the same Adventurer level.
Example:
Player A is flagged PvP. Player B is Flag FPvP.

Fight #1, A dies and gives up a hand.
Fight #2, B dies and gives up 50% of their inventory/equipment to the oracle for ransom and skull + one other body part


Players have choice. Those that want full loot get what they want with enough incentive to have equal opponents. The PvP-lite crowd can feel safe from the full looters while still having a reason to participate in the overall PvP community.


Just some thoughts thrown together into a half-baked idea. But, I think something like this that allow for tiered PvP where the levels have an incentive to interact would be a good thing.

 

Just make ransoms 1 equiped item. Then you get rid of pvp bags and people dont have to worry what they are carrying.
When you die you will pay around 2k to get your piece back. More than fair and makes sense.

 

How about when you die you drop everything you are wearing, but you can buy it back for its listed value in the inventory (or maybe half its value). If you opt into this option the gear doesn't take any durability hit at all.

Then instead, you can opt out of dropping loot and you only take a small durability hit to the gear you have on.

I like the idea of loot in pvp zones being taken from one player but I think the idea could be expanded on to make it more fun. Its pretty easy in this game to gank someone while they're engaged in pve. A timer should be added to the player that kills and takes the loot so they cannot just flee the zone or log out. After claiming loot you must stay in the zone for 15-20 minutes so the player that was killed has a chance at revenge. They can call in reinforcements or just try and kill them alone. But if the player flees before the timer, the loot is returned to the player they took it from.

This could create some fun battles. In larger zones like blood bay they could be broken up into regions. Leave the region, you forfeit the loot.

And since essentially loot is just moving from player to player, there is no way to game the system.

 

A lot of these ideas are good and would improve the pvp experience some greatly, some marginally. This being said, I would not hold my breath that any change of substance will ever be made unless they just scrap the ransom system all together and replace it with nothing.