PVP & Death: Current Thinking Megapost

Non-consensual PVP or FULL loot isn't going to happen... Devs have been against it since the start, it might be happening if 100% of the people backing this wanted them. So forget about it already. However in SoTA there'll be incentives for everyone to take part in PVP it seems. People will be fighting over a cause, PVP may shift the world's status, and things like this are much greater than wondering whether we can loot a couple items or have full loot. I'm 100% sure this will work out great, basing this on the current info.

I'm done with the regular MMO grinding. SoTA makes it possible for us to have a changing, dynamic world with meaningful PVP, along with its other amazing features. Everyone can play it their way, solo, friends and open.

 

PK is still very possible IF your intent is to attack people without provocation. If you mean to attack anyone and everyone, even those not interested in PvP, then no this is not the game for you.

Sorry, but consent must be in place. Or the consent is at purchase and people will simply not buy the game, then you end up with only players that consent to PvP. Endless circle of removing players from the game.

 

Ok, Avatars. It's time to take a breather. The purpose of this thread is to provide feedback to the development team, not argue needlessly with one another. Any posts that are argumentative, trolling, or in some other way are a breach of the forum rules will be removed.

Let's keep the thread focused on feedback of the PvP and Death systems outlined in the OP.

Thank you.

 

The reason I gave money was because of this.. deep rich multi-player capabilities beyond combat akin to Ultima Online

 

By the way it is going, if you can afford it, please create a full PvP version server. I am ready to pay for it and i am sure alot of other peoples are ready to pay for it also. Rules over rules over rules waste the actual point of having full PvP and full looting rules. Competition, fear of loosing everything, economy, crafters importance, chaos, random death etc etc were what made UO..... How much cash do we have to give you to get you to create a full pvp full loot server ?

 

Be honest now, neither you or anyone else can say if this game will be like that or not at this time. You don't feel the risk or reward is high enough, cool, but suggesting that SotA will not have PvP where player skill can overcome gear is disingenous at best.

 

I read that as deep rich multi-player capabilities.
They say "beyond", as in surpassing.

It doesn't promise "the same PvP as UO."

I guess it depends on what your definition of "beyond" is.

We have a team of experienced developers that are trying to develop something better.

 

This is sad but ..... i would rather be part of the solution than part of the problem.

This is why, i accept the consensual PvP. I think DS has good idea for PvP.
For cons, the proposal loot system is totally unacceptable.
We need to find a good compromise.

Anyway,
it will consensual.

 

Well having loot in a consensual pvp system is pointless as pvpers will know exactly when they can be kileld thus wont wear anything of value if they think they will die

Saying one wants the chaotic aspect of real combat and then saying people should be safe at all times makes me do a double take cause there is no way the two can reconcile

 

I have to applaud you; you don't believe there is a way to satisfy everyone in one world so you want to know what it would take. Even if I or the devs disagree, that is the right question.

 

That was exactly the point I was trying to make. I didn't mean to put a question mark there. I was making a statement.

 

That was exactly the point I was trying to make. I didn't mean to put a question mark there. I was making a statement.

 

What it meant to me at the time was the fear of being killed and what happens to the PK's who did the killing.
I'm not so sure anymore but they did mention blue and reds so there is still hope.

 

However it's possible via guild wars to have that Open PVP feeling I think.

 

Yeah, I am back and forth on their intent with this PvP gear and skills. People are reading this and their thoughts go to the gear/exp grind, which is BAD, as you point out. My instincts tell me that's not what their intent is. I'd have to go reread everything in the Dev+ post to try to figure out why my instinct say they are not wanting the grind gap.

Not sure it's worth the reread. I am opting for more details from the Devs. I think that's the top of my list for more info, "What does PvP gear and PvP skill mean?"

 

You don't even have to join a guild - the Oracle blessing is not a guild or a faction, it allows you to attack and be attacked with everyone else that is PvP enabled.

 

Well, yes it is what i think. Lord B. said it in his video, if it is what we must do, we will split each party, and i really think it is needed. Let's not recreate the wheels here, UO system was ' E P I C ', let's humble up and admit that you won't create a better system then that haha

 

Yeah that is like opting to be killed or not to be killed irl, makes no sense. this system brings nothing for pks for pvp maybe but thats not what people seem to want (me included).

 

QFT , and i might add a good pvp'ers in UO could take on 1v5 and kill them all ,hell i remember killing 6 guys out of 7 in Shame and the last one didnt die because he was begging me to stop , i decided to let him live so he could tell everyone that shame level 4 was my home!

 

I understand why they are looking at pvp in this way, but I am disappointed. So I would like to add something to thread of some ideas of my own.

Consensual and non-consensual pvp.
These can be placed in the same zone without any worry of one being attacked if they are only interested in pvp. Put into the game towns, mines, lumber mills etc etc that guilds can fight over for the rare resources. With a old feudal system in place so a guild leader could become a baron and his/her guild would become the guards under their employ. The rare resources would be guarded by high level NPC and player guards if needed, but the pve players can gain access to the non resource area easily. So to enter the mine they would have to kill the NPC guards but this would make them instantly pvp viable and a message is sent to the players who own the mine. As long as the players who do not wish to be in pvp do not attack the resource points that are guarded they are fine and immune to attack. If they wish to take the resources then they will have to be flagged for pvp instantly with a 48 hour cool down to allow for retribution from the defending guild. If the attacker takes the resource point then they remain pvp tagged until they loose it or give it up. To remove the pvp flag from the guild would mean to loose the resource point instantly, and the guards and npcs go rogue and will remain neutral until another guild moves in and takes over by killing the "mayor" or local bandit king.

These towns and mines could have forts and keep attached to them where a player guild could use as a base to operate from. Inside could be crafting tables of high quality and stores/bank. Any player living in zone surrounding the fort/keep would have to pay a tithe or tax to the owning guild or be forced out if they refuse. This can be done by players who own the area where they burn down the houses of the players who refuse to pay the tax regardless if they are flagged for pvp or pve. No tax, no house.

On player looting after death.
I would like to see full looting rights, but can see why the devs do not want this which is fair enough. So here is my idea below.
Personally I like to see item destruction in mmo's as a long time player of Eve Online I can see the value of this along with player looting, and in my experience players will often fly expensive ships even at the risk of loosing them. So what I propose is why not have item destruction on death say a 1 or 2 % chance of a random item being destroyed on death and a 20% chance of a random item from the equipped items being lootable by the enemy and a 15% chance an item from the backpack is looted instead. That would leave a 63% chance to keep all the equipment of the player that lost in battle and would be a fair system. I put the equipped and non equipped items at a different percentage to represent who easy it would be to pick up an item off the ground that the dead player dropped over rummaging through the back pack. No need for a ransom system to be put into place this way.


Or we could have an area on the world map called the Boarder Lands where the resource points are, in this area would be fort towns that controlled a certain area and in this area would be the rare resources of one type. If a guild wanted more resources then they would have to try and fight another player owned fort town for it. Each fort town would have plots for player homes and the players in the owning guild would be able to live there at a reduced tax rate.
If you wish to remain non pvp and just do the pve content that is there then stay out of the controlled areas of the player owned fort towns or be flagged as attackers with a 48 hour cool down.
A controlled area could span a radius of 5 miles in game which gives the owning guild plenty of room to roam and pick resources and to patrol their lands.

This would then allow siege type warfare and latter on could implement siege weapons such as catapults, cannons and balista.

The looting could remain the same as mentioned above.