PVP & Death: Current Thinking Megapost

Instaced PvP is probably the biggest insult to a PvPer. It is like sending me to prison, or in the 'sheep field', trying to control me by giving me a cookie but making sure i don't eat the whole box. Well please don't dictate me if i should eat a cookie or two.

Instanced pvp is an abberation, one of the worst concept ever created. It totally kill the competition, the randomness, the chaotic aspect of pvp. It is some kind of 'prison' you send me in, so you make sure i don't 'hurt' anyone outside of it.

Don't you agree ?

 

No, I don't. The entire game is instantanced. How are you planning to avoid it?

 

I don't think you understand what we are talking about here Owain, hehe sorry buddy. We are talking about sending PvPer in an instance that is not related anymore to the normal instance...anyway, try to understand If you can't i will draw you something.

 

What do you mean ? Why i played world of warcraft ? Because there were no other mmorpg to play. Quake 2 and CS arent mmorpg by the way.....

And i will add this, WOW pvp got screwed when they came up with instanced PVP. They then gave us Arena so we have some competition, but i just hate that kind of system.

I'd by far prefer guild vs guild over a turf of land or a castle, which would affect a 'real' area in the world then some instanced pvp, that when the game or the tourney is over, in no way did you impact the world.

 

I can't wait until they implement gambling

Players can put their money where their mouth is.

 

LOL .. What is the PvP in CS ? Is it an open world or instanced map?

"Instaced PvP is probably the biggest insult to a PvPer. It is like sending me to prison, or in the 'sheep field', trying to control me by giving me a cookie but making sure i don't eat the whole box. Well please don't dictate me if i should eat a cookie or two.
Instanced pvp is an abberation, one of the worst concept ever created. It totally kill the competition, the randomness, the chaotic aspect of pvp. It is some kind of 'prison' you send me in, so you make sure i don't 'hurt' anyone outside of it.
Don't you agree ?"

Your words..

At least now I can't stop replying to you.

 

Okay buddy ! You are a genious. hehe you win.

 

I'm not sure it's going to work like that. If you are in a guild war, you'll see others, but they will be non participants. If it's a PVP zone, it's open to everyone. If you are flagged for open PvP, you may still see PvE players. We don't yet know enough to tell.

 

Yes i know, we will see in time. I am sure they will need to think about server performance before anything else anyway.....

 

There's no way to get around the instancing. We'll see what they do with various objectives. If you can do things like capture a bridge of a mine where you become king of the kill for all instances, then I think it can work. e.g. this bridge has been captured by <team blue> if you want to pass this way, you need to enter their PvP instance and take it from them...otherwise you're walking the long way around.

If they can pull off something like this, the PvP instancing might not be so bad.

 

Exactly..

Everything is instanced now to maintain performance. UO didn't need it, well there were some lag wars lol. SWG tried larger battles and whole planets would crash under the stress.

So in a sense there will always be caps now. Its just the number 50 v 50 or 8 v 8 that comes into play.

 

Try Darkfall.... anyway, you can instance zones so it feel like there is no instance. We are totally off the topic here if we start talking about servers technologies.

 

I actually like the ransom idea system. Though perhaps there could be improvements so that the pvp'ers can have their cake.

How about their be two sets of ransomed item lists: primary and secondary.

Primary: The victor gets to choose 1 (maybe 2) item in the losers inventory regardless of equipped or not equipped. The ransom amount is set to 25% of the losers total net worth (bank and inventory). A lower value limit would be put in place (a value that is equivalent to what someone would effectively earn in a week of playtime) to counter those players who would stash all their gold in some other person account to game the system. If the the loser does not have the money in one hour, the victor gets the item(s). There would be an upper limit of what a player could earn in 3 weeks of play time at an average pace of play.

Secondary: A ransom is placed on all other items in the losers inventory. The ransom amount is set to 3% of the losers total net worth. The lower value limit would be set to a value that it would take a player to earn in 2 hours of game play. The upper limit would be set to a value that does not exceed a week of average playtime.

What this does is gives the victor an opportunity to choose the items he wants. The cost to the loser is pretty high for the primary items, so the items better be worth the cost. The maximum values were put in place because if a player has played a long time and has stashed up a horde of gold not playing pvp, he shouldn't be punished with a fee exceeding the value of the item by an amount of 100 times. This gives the victor a chance to get all of the items. The cost is set low so that it doesn't kill the loser's bank if he really wants to keep everything.

The value of gold per hour could be based upon what the average player makes per hour in the game. Or what the player himself makes on average per hour. I prefer the former as the latter option could be manipulated/gamed by the player. Though there may be some players making large quantities of gold compared to the average player.

I still am against full scale open pvp. I love the guild/quest/pvp zone concepts though. The guild/quest thing allows people to pvp anywhere but in towns without guard repercussions.

I haven't read every page in this topic, so I don't know if this is original or not. If it is not, I apologize.

 

*************************************
Well I don't agree that weapons should not be the same for PVP and creatures. A weapon is a weapon. Assuming that PVE ers will never PVP is just an assumption. You never know. This game could be different and draw some PVE'er to do occasional PVP or even a lot of PVP, who knows. Why make it all so complicated? I hate the idea of separate gear and separate weapons for PVP and PVE.

 

There are 2 choices:

(1) Make all the gear capped, say at GM strength/power. (which SotA is not doing)

(2) Have separate gear to not create an imbalance.

If you are gonna have more and more powerful gear created (through all 5 episodes) , its gonna be difficult for a PvPer to acquire said items if you need to PvE , do boss fights or raids etc.

2 different play styles.

What would I prefer? Basic gear, capped at GM and never how to worry about gear again for 5 yrs. Sword is a Sword.

 

Most pvper will out PVE the pve'r....

 

Well, I guess we're lucky that PvE isn't a competition.

 

hehehe True

 

My only concern after reading this is regarding the cost of repairs. In many MMOs that I've played, the cost to repair your gear is trivial compared to the item's worth, even if the item is completely broken. On top of that, items tend to take forever to need repairs if you're not dying frequently. I haven't seen item repair used as an effective method to take wealth out of the economy. Given the focus on crafting that this game will have, I expect we'll have lots of crafters making lots of items. If repair costs are trivial, and we have all these new items entering the world, the economy is going to break down.

I would like to see item repair not merely be a "pay X gold" type of deal, but rather require raw materials equal to the production cost of the item. If you need 10 iron ingots to make a two-handed sword, I'd like to see a 50% damaged two-handed sword require 5 iron ingots to repair, not just 30 silver coins or whatever. This will create demand for the crafting materials strong.

Also, I would like to see normal use of items do more damage to an item than in typical MMOs. I think an ideal part of the game-loop would be stopping by the crafting hall to repair your weapons, even if you didn't die multiple times.

 

Likely you will try it, get rolled and then go back to pve. If thats the case would you habe them completely bork pvp or just go play friends online mode so you dont see pvpers? I dont stand the other guys who refuse to play friend or any mode but full online and then gripe about pvp when they can avoid it