PVP & Death: Current Thinking Megapost

Sorry, the days of non-consensual PK'ing are over.

 

Yes i am sadly aware of that.

 

Maybe not, let's be possitive here !

 

Thus the reason for a system that gives a little protection against complete loss of items. - to get people to be willing to risk their items.

If I defeat someone in PvP, should I be able to hold them hostage, maybe torture them, until they give up the deed to their house and lot, or give me access to their bank? It could be rationalized based on realism. But then players would find a way to hide everything somewhere else, like a 2nd account.

Instead, they want a system that does not push people into the hoarder mindset. Get them out there in their gear, get some form of loot rights for the victor, and some form of protection for the victim. Both get a little and give a little.

Course, the player that loses in PvP a lot is still going to be looted dry. (only with the current system you can get access to looting all the gold in their bank - if they go with the current ransom plan)

 

Okay, I'm POSITIVE the days of non-consensual PK'ing are over.

 

I haven't read through all of the replies, so I am not sure if anyone else suggested this. I think you SHOULD be able to haunt other players: TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I.E.: Player dies in battle/guild war/etc. After the dialogue for ransom vs loot disappears, (assuming there is one), a 'death options' dialogue would follow giving the dead player the option to "haunt" ONE person from their 'Friends' or 'Guild' list. There could be an item, such as a scroll, potion, or spell, (or all three depending on player characteristics), that players can buy or craft that would allow them to resurrect a dead friend or guild member that is 'haunting' them. There are a number of ways that this could be done to make it more interesting or fun.

POSSIBLE OPTIONS:

1.) Players could have an option to 'turn off' haunting entirely, (but a ghost could still 'select' that friend to haunt) If a player 'chooses' a friend/guild member that has this option enabled there could be some sort of additional penalty so that there is a risk to haunting.

2.) If a player in ghost form chooses to haunt someone that, in turn, is unable to resurrect them in a given period of time there could also be some sort of penalty.

3.) Players that successfully resurrect a ghost, or a certain number of ghosts, (rewards could stack) receive some sort of trophy or specialty item that could be claimed from specific NPC's or something. (There could be a token given, for example, and the more tokens you collect, the better the prize.)

4.)Possibility of additional skills for resurrection of a certain number of ghosts.

I am sure there are a number of other ways this could be done to make the aspect of dying more fun and interesting. I also believe that a system like this would encourage players to take a little more risk (possibly balancing out some of the PVP/PVE gear issues) because dying itself would have it's own fun set of gameplay.

 

The loot causes two problems.
1) It gives a large incentive to target and kill individual players, as opposed to objective focus. I'm not at all opposed to this element existing for some people in some areas where people want to play cat and mouse. But I'd like more people showing up for sieges.
2) Many players do love their gear. Even if it has nothing to do with stats. Every player is different. Perhaps there's some solution that does some duping with minimal exploits. e.g. the base item and the cosmetic skin are two different things internally, duping the skin doesn't really hurt anything

 

Travel in group, be friend with pvpers, think strategy, make it real.

 

Well then that means we can steal each others homes, towns, cities, castles and more.
That would be a brutal game.

 

So, you gave money because you wanted rich multiplayer capabilities? When said capabilities are beyond those of combat. That is what that sentence means: multi-player capabilities BEYOND combat is another way of saying multiplayer capabilities OTHER THAN/PAST/OUTSIDE OF combat.

I agree that those who had an eye for PvP combat akin to UO could easily misinterpret that statement, but I think, if you reflect upon it, you will see that this is what was meant all along.

It's more of an unfortunate misunderstanding that it is a broken promise.

 

If there is no reason to be afraid to die in PVP and the killers are not penalized then yea I think the quote is misleading.

 

Dont think anyone thinks of it as a broken promise more like crushed dreams just my two cents

 

Well I didnt have time to read the entire post yet but I would like to express my opinion that I WANT to feel surprised in the unsafe places being attacked against my will... I want to go for example to Buccanners Den buy regs because it is cheaper since there are fewer players that would dare go to a PvP city but I also want to have a safe place where I can mine and work in peace. I think the best option would be the open PvP but with bigger places that are safe and this must be balanced considering the number of players in the server at the moment wich means this needs to be adapted to be changed several times during the day to be perfect, like times when theres "more guards patroling" ( wich would increase the safe area ) and times when theres less players online wich would have "less guards patroling" leading to a smaller safe area. This would help the safe places not get too crowded in the rush hours.

Thats it! I will read the post more carefully then I join the discussion once again soon because a realistic working PvP is a very important part of this game to me, I love feeling the adrenaline of being unsafe while going to one place to another. This would be the true immersive experience and not having this would ruin SotA to me, but also I dont want players expecialy the new ones to get frusted for loosing their stuff and go play some shitty game so let's give them the choice of being in a safe area that is not crowded and go face the open(extremely fun) PvP when they are ready.

thanks,
see ya

 

Yeah but if pvp is instigated by me and i know when and where there is little reason for me to not stash my good items. If it were open pvp people would do the same thing either way its not incentvizing ppl using their good gear and only negatively impacting those who want UO or similar pvp. The player that loses in pvp will eventually be everyone even good players have a bad day and one thing i learned from UO. Keep your good gear stashed

At least if they had looting and open pvp it wouldnt impact the pvp crowd as negatively the way it is now the pvpers lose out and the looters do too

Its just another example in a long line of devs caving in to pvers wanting all the reward and assume zero risk except for the pvpers

 

I for one used my best gear for higher chance of winning each battle, and you are all under the impression that PKers havent evolved from the uo days (If you look at freeshards etc where there is PK there is not whine like in the old days..) no lets all just assume that if we do something simmilar the outcome will be exactly the same as back then. -.-

 

Geeze, this thread got messy again.

Just wanted to weigh in and say +1 for Ristra's idea. If we're not going to get full loot, this seems like a far better option then the proposed one by DarkStarr. Bonus points for keeping it immersive in regards to it taking a variable amount of time to loot specific parts of a corpse.


Take notes DarkStarr!

 

hahaha yes even that statement is just you gloating and yes I can say that you are not for PK cause you have stated that what we want is just wrong several times over.

I also have to +1 for Ristra's proposal, it's far from ideal but far better than what was proposed earlier.

 

Its Episode I, all over again......

 

I never gave loot much thought, but the proposed system seems very unpopular by both sides of the PvP/PvE debate.

IF I decide to join any PvP events due to compelling story reasons, I don't mind losing my consumables and/or carried gold. In fact, most of the ideas for more/different loot are in no way offensive to me as PvE player who might if the dev team is successful in making the story related reasons compelling, join an occasional PvP event.

 

Interesting ideas for pvp and looting...will have to see how it works out in practice.

Question though, how will the system determine the price of an item lost by a defeated player in pvp? For instance, a bow of vanquishing could have been sold for 100 gold to vendors, but in reality cost several thousands of gold in the early days of UO. Seems rather iffy.