What PvP Players can look forward to

Out of curiousity, when and where we you promised a PvP mode you didn't get?

 

Open PVP is part of a seamless fantasy world environment, any time you come upon someone and you know you have nothing to fear cause they can't touch you it breaks the immersiveness of the world imo and has nothing to do with the need to grief and take a lumberjacks hard earned logs. This kind of open world, which RG was originally know for, is one you can get lost in and have some truly unique adventures that you cannot plan at a dev table. When you know that the other people you come across can attack you then you behave differently, might not be such a pompous Knight talking down to people. Griefing, Ganking, Crazy Teenagers can all be addressed, I believe, while keeping an open world. Why should someone be able to be a murderer on 1 character and be an upstanding citizen on another? Take that option away and it changes behavior quite a bit. Give characters Surnames based off the account so if they behave badly on one character your other characters are effected, our vendors will not do business with you and our town guards will attack. I understand that these suggestions are not going to change any of the development of this game, just something to think about. The industry is starting to realize that players crave the freedom to do what they want and given the right environment can create their own content, see Smedly's comments on EQ Next. Developers just need to understand that most consumers will take the easy path or take advantage of unbalanced aspects of the game even if it hampers the experience so world quality and detail is extremely important.

Again, I know this won't change or have anything to do the development of this game so please don't put me in my place. It looks like pvp needs to be fleshed out but the basic path is clear. I just don't see enough trend setting in SotA at this point to go up against a fresh ESO, ArcheAge, EQ Next, FFIV, Black Desert and Star Citizen (UO in SPACE).

 

@Acrylic,

There'll be too many players logged into the server for the game to show them all to you. Guess which ones the game will show you? The ones you want to see.

Not sure why you're worried.

 

Then you're following the wrong game. Sorry for the short answer, but that's all that really needs to be said.

If you crave a free for all PvP fest, follow a game that's offering that. To me that's just the obvious thing to do.

If you sit here banging on about it for the next 6 months, you'll only end up disappointed when SotA comes out *shrug*

 

I was here for the entire kickstarter. The way you describe it was never how they sold it other then one post by lord british that a couple days later was clarified. What you propose os having PVPers play the whole world and stick the rest of us who don't have your "love" for pvp in a segmented area with less people to play with and a less important aspect of the game. Which in reality changes very little for the PVPer because all these guys still effect the economy and everything else.

At the moment there are two versions of OPO and that's with or without pvp...no matter how much you fight that, that is a good solution for everyone involved.

 

Yes, which sadly it lacks.

Yes, but RG implied it would be a spiritual successor to UO. At which point he went on to talk about a justice system and all that. Optional PvP is just more of the same... not spiritual successor material.

I think that is the biggest problem open pvp'ers have with this game... nothing about it is spiritual successor as tehy are descibing it. possible the story line, but sadly.. once the story line is over... back to same old optional PvP games.

 

Thank you! I don't know where he is getting this stuff. I was here during that period too, and never did they promise anything regarding PvP like that.

 

I hope it sorts us out....out in the world. I don't care about town so much. Outside I want to know that everyone has opted for PvP.

It's not so much worry as it is a stand against the cut and paste stereotypical PvP arguments about forcing someone who shouldn't be there to PvP.

I hope it's not a clutter of immersion breaking encounters. The only argument from the other side is, you can't grief newbs ...find a new game.

These are the same people who will hide behind game mechanics and mouth PvE-Only grief to other players.

My biggest worry is that the game already hiccups with only a few players. I'm not sure PvP will even be an option much less a calculation to match like minded players.

 

Nice posts eveyrone! I hope this game doesn't turn into another guildwars 2 doppleganger.

 

A good reputation, punishment and notoriety system was all the needed thing you had to implement. Not completely killing off open world and excitement. I think we don't have enough greens in our pockets to make you listen to us a little bit, it feels bad that people still and still think open pvp is pure grief or open pvp is desired for duelling all the time. Kickstarter was a mistake from the beginning, I am not sure what RG really wanted to do but he is now shackled in "threatening pledgers" who have no difference from uo stratics community and kill the game with their insufficient knowledge of designing a game, blindly throwing casual suggestions everywhere and suppressing people who don't share the same thoughts about the game. Just visit Ultima Online Steam Greenlight discussions to see what people really want and why they stopped following SotA after visiting the forums a little bit: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/discussions/249850626

 

This is a strange assumption to assume that PVPers have more knowledge when designing a game...

Also, to a lot of people it isn't just about griefing etc, it's just that they have no interest in that form of gameplay. I understand some do and will get their time with PVP with the system they have here.

Some people never want to have to fight another player because to them it really is just wasted time. To others that's not the case, but that's the great thing here in that it allows for both players to get what they want.

 

Even calling a person "Pvper" reveals enough information.

What even is a PvPer?

 

Good point, it's the point I try to make but it's lost on those that just don't get it. The TV show Game of Thrones for example, would it be an interesting show if the Starks traveling from village to village, town to town never ran into guys that wanted to kidnap them or kill them? If these unexpected cut throats didn't exist the show would be boring as heck, same goes for online games for me,
without unexpected cut throats a game is just boring as heck, boring as heck.

 

I'm not sure what you are trying to imply here but I will tell you exactly what I mean: Someonewho enjoys pvp...In this case full open pvp since that is what we are talking about.

 

I disagree.

Ever see a tv show called Game of Thrones? It's an awesome show, it's very medieval fantasy-ish, in the show the Starks go from village to village, town to town
and guess what happens during their questing storyline? "someone runs up to them, kills them and/or takes their stuff", the entire show surrounds similar immersive
storylines and quests involving getting killed and stuff getting taken, such can and is and will be quest-worthy, story-worthy, I really wonder sometimes the
imagination of someone that writes off killing and stealing as not being interesting enough to add to a quest or story.

 

This is such a bizarre thread. Some of you seem to think if you say SotA needs free for all PvP enough times, it will, somehow, impossibly, magically happen.

It won't.

Like I said earlier, if you bang on about this for the next 6 months, and it doesn't happen (and, trust me, it won't), you are going to be more angry than you already are.

And do any of us want to deal with that in 6 months? No thanks.

 

My motivation has nothing to do with changing anything about SotA, nothing at all. I just like to point out flaws, inconsistencies, false info & stereotypes concerning PvP,
it isn't an evil thing, it's a great thing, it isn't the center of the universe but it isn't the most obscure thing in the universe, it does matter, it's what I like to consider 'End Game Content',
Will I jump into PvP on day 1 and battle all the way to the death in my newbie clothes? Nope. Will I do so when I'm bored one day and have maxed out all the skills I prefer? Yes.
So to eliminate it's importance is to eliminate the importance of End Game Content in my opinion, which is very important in the long run for obvious reasons. Having a house
and riches and skills is great and all, but bank sitting gets old fast, questing can be fun, but can get old as well, PvP can get old but the unpredictable factors involved make it
less boring from the perspective of someone who's seen it all and done it all.

 

All of that may be true, to varying degrees, for yourself and others... that's no problem. We all have things that fulfill us in games.

But my ongoing point is that this isn't shaping up to be "that" game, and I'd rather people think about that now, rather than in 6 months.

My beef (if you can call it a beef), is with these threads which say the same thing over and over and over... but the result isn't going to change.

It's not like if someone hits the right combination of words, or says the wittiest thing, or whatever, that the devs will suddenly change direction on this.

 

But it is going to be 'that' game.

Can you find anything in the above that won't be in SOTA? I can't, that's what SOTA will be for me. If you aren't talking about
my example you really have to be more specific because SOTA will be this game.

 

I think you are jumping to the conclusion that I am only referring to your posts, or your point of view. That is not the case.

To be clear (and to repeat myself in some ways), I am talking about multiple PvP threads, over time, written by many more users than just yourself.