What PvP Players can look forward to

I'm well aware of that. Indeed, my comments haven't even been in relation to being made to PvP or not.

As a result, I don't really understand your comment in relation to what I've actually been talking about?!?

 

Isn't that simply a failure in game mechanics then ?

Say if the game really wanted to encourage paladin-like behavior, one could code it such that if you are grouped with an active "Paladin" that the number of badasses is actually increased, as a means to offset the loss in experience due to having to share.

One could also have the experience shared disproportionally in such a group. I mean the "Paladin" is supposed to be doing this for the sake of others right ? Why not give them a smaller portion of the experience in exchange for some other less tangible benefit (insert benefit here).

PvP is simpler to role-play in I agree, because the opponents don't need to individually coded beforehand. They act on their own volition, albeit within the confines of whatever mechanics the game provides.

 

What you are discussing is actual play variations based on PVP or not PVE...it has nothing to do with being able to play a paladin or not.

You may want to look at a few single player rpg's ....many of them allow you to play a paladin. I see where you are coming from when used as a healer in pvp. Is a paladin not healing his allies vs PVE not a similar thing? Or does that not fit the style because it isn't a human, but instead a AI?

Risk factor should be there for those that play PVE or PVP...I really hate when people use risk factor as a function of an arguement like this. There is nothing stoping the devs making monsters focus on the paladin who is healing(btw paladins don't just heal...especailly if you take them in context to DND.). I know when I use a paladin in most rpg's I do use his lay on hands a bit...but smite evil and turn undead are used a lot more.

PVP is a play style you choose to play and enjoy, I get that, but it doesn't make the other play styles less valid.

 

Not even talking about gear or monetary things, just basic rule set of PVP, if you decide to go to the volcano areas, dont be surprised if you are killed (ganked) thats just part of PVP. thats what i meant. and in real basic PVP which all of us PVP are used to, all your loot can be taken off your body ( but they have watered that down as far as a ransom and minimal loss so far) pve wins again in a pvp realm! thats my other point.

 

And in fact the use of the D&D three by three alignment grid is pretty much useless here, as law and good are not the values that we will be judged on. In Britannia, the Virtues determine merit.

 

I think it's obvious we expect to get attacked if we go into a pvp zone....that is the whole point isn't it? Why play that line at allin your statement?

basic pvp is not full loot pvp...that's your interpritation...very few games use that. So what you are saying is every other game has advanced pvp rules if we go by that logic.

And please stop the PVE wins PVP loses stuff, it doesn't help and looks ridiculous. If I will have to lose all my stuff to enjoy an hour or so of pvp in a hex why would I even bother? It seems more work then worth.

You tend to speak for a lot of people, when in reality these are your feelings.

 

and i never devalued the other side, just put out there the differences, my view of a paladin, is healer, fighter smiter of undead, and protector. but thats my roll play, not saying it has to be yours.

You said...
"Risk factor should be there for those that play PVE or PVP...I really hate when people use risk factor as a function of an arguement like this. There is nothing stoping the devs making monsters focus on the paladin. "

As it is set up thus far, there is a huge gap in the risk factor between the two! Whether you see it or not! Hopefully the devs will raise the risk factor for PVE, but if they do that, does that effect what pve wants and is it fair as a PVP to say what should and shouldn't be in PVE?
Personally as a full PVP, i could really care less about PVE and i hope PVE get what they want, but that is not the focus of my points. My points are focused on PVP and i get upset when someone who is a PVE, tells me a PVP how it should be played. ( dont take that as a personal attack it is meant as a general statement based on how many PVE seem to want to input on what should happen in PVP or even if it should exist)


of course healing isnt the only role of a paladin! I was using that as something you could do in PVE

the only factor im stating is the fact that one person can go get his whole guild in pvp and come kill me and the person i was trying to protect in PVP which will not happen in PVE. If the designers come up with something, like nonstop hunting of players paladin from NPCS in PVE then we have some sort of balance and equal risk, but alas it will still just be a code that can be for seen after so many times of it happening.

 

in all actuality i speak for the full blown full loot pvp that have to to take pieces cut from our game play based on what pve people think.

personally i have never played a PVP game where all of my loot cannot be taken. So i think maybe your speaking on your own experiences here.

 

n open PvP, anyone walking around in the wilderness can be attacked. In a PKs dream game, anyone walking around in the wilderness can be attacked. Please let me know the difference.

just this part, other than that is seems there is no issue other than that, and its sort of an agreement between us, there is no difference.

 

A world without Tesla towers would more likely be the pks dream. If we are talking about open PvP then punishment would have to be implemented. The punishment is usually the loss of ALL safe zones. Why would a pk settle for an open wilderness as a dream world?

It just doesn't make sense to me that a pk would consider getting zapped by a Tesla tower a dreamy world.

The good type PvP players like Paladins would find it more appealing than the pk because they would not be getting zapped when they go back to town.

 

Well actually no. That 21st century lexicon is probably refering to a different use of the word. In an MMO RPG Ganking in fact means the process in which a group of characters gang up on one or more players that do not have a chance to defend themselves

That is what it means. Sure words can change, but that's what it actually means, that's where it comes from in gaming. So FYI try not to use the word for what it doesn't mean.

 

I just posted facts for you, it is in the Urban dictionary, and the 21st century lexicon.
It doesnt mean killed over and over, that much you are right on, but.......

Just so you understand, when i say gank it means by one or many, either or. Either way im dead, and pissed, and I am seeking vengeance for it! (something flagging PVP allows of me, that PVE wont!)

It means exactly what i said and probably your version of it as well somewhere out there.
Please try not to correct me and tell me what i should and shouldn't say! Im an adult and i can make those decisions on my own, without your approval! FYI for you.
Also gank, or ganking isn't found in the dictionary i searched it, at least the ones im used to using. You can look it up yourself if you like, im tired of researching stuff for you!
Sometimes i just think people want to argue and that's it. Now everyone understands what I mean by it.

 

Actually, you can't really talk about full loot in a meaningful way without getting into "gear and monetary things". The systems feed each other, and how important and hard to obtain gear is plays a huge role into determining how much looting is acceptable.

It's the reason given by the devs for not having full loot, even. Their desire for having meaningful gear progression clashes with the possibility of full loot, which means losing all the gear would be too punishing for many players.

So, if you want full loot, you might as well lobby for easily replaceable gear, like what early UO had. Without gear being easily replaceable the chances of having full loot are slim to nil.

 

Yep you got that right!

 

Im a little bit on the fence about the gear factor..
Part of me wants the joy of just looting someone blind without even bothering what the gear is or the fact that its so easily replaceable.... But the other part of me kinda wants the full loot PvP zones to play out somewhat like a casino where there are high high risks, but big big wins.

 

Wow Blaque, made so much sense, then faced with the most rediculous argument ever, backs off ?

I mean this is beyond anything I ever imagined :

There can be both easily replaceable gear and good gear that stays on your body cause og magical power.

Sorry but what if I have great gear, but I realise that if I wanna go pvp and allow others to have fun, ima sacrifice one of my good but replaceable armors that I'M NEVER GONNA USE ANYWAYS cause I always wear my best magical gear for PvE.

God I can't beleive I'm explaining this !!!

There IS A PANEL that says :

The loyal good paladin also don't seek FAME !!! He will help the lil dude for no reason, expecting no reward. If the game dosen't reflect this and don't make the difference between karma and material posessions and medals.

Then I'm sorry we just have no game...

 

Thats why if we had any sense at all we'd already be discussing on the rules of individual hex sets for example, players that like small-investment and small consequence pvp could dress up as orcs vs whatever and have fun in a map that only allows lootable, cheap equipment that usually gets recycled, since we're operating cloud computing the combinations are infinite.

It's like everyone forgot those things... yes they were short lived, but those incredible stories should be the basis of the soul of this game. This is exactly why noone should try to "stop" those conversations because thats exactly what Lord Gariott is looking to hear, cause he know WE, US, WE deserve recognition and the potentiation of his original vision.

You can have both Robby. Some hex will require you put on the altar very important items so the loot is balanced on both sides...

but there another... umm... problem.

We can't let game mechanics purely dictate the dynamisation and entropy of the lands. Or everyone gets wierded out and stops roleplaying and well the vicious spiral we all know too much about ; dare anyone say the contrary.

 

I just can't imagine why anyone would want another game,
that is the same as every other game
that brought many of you here
looking for that game again
that you left behind you
time and time again
A New Britannia
what a concept
~Time Lord~

 

My big issue with the absence of full loot in Open PVP is that usually means your items are rarer and overpowered which would really effect PVP. Something like what you see on UO Hybrid would be pretty good I think, They have blessed items that are like eye candy or personalized donation items and then your typical Magic items that you get from drops with decreasing drop rates then the nice runic weapons that you have to get from player blacksmiths. It was really a balanced system where you can compete with magic weapons/armor from monster drops and if you wanted a slight edge the high end runics provided that edge with high cost and still gave non-rich players the ability to acquire them through player loot. Again, lack of Full Loot on Weapons/Armor/Regs/Pots leads me to believe the system will be out of balance and someone jumping into the game will not be able to compete. You can make PVE only weapons/armor that de-equip in PVP and aren't lootable, that way a pve player doesn't loose all weapons and armor by accidently flagging for pvp or entering a pvp instance.

Time Lord, it's funny how many times UO Players quit just to return later in life. I can count 5, and I'm getting back up and running on Free Shards hopefully as soon as work allows. All other games can be easily substituted with the next, that's why everyone uses "clone" so much now a days. There are great ideas out there, but most of the industry is just copying success in other games.

 

rune_74 and redfish, I'm getting from what I've read so far that if I want Open PVP I can play Open PVP by flagging for it which effects me in ALL hexes.... Not just PVP Zones (if anything that is a zone YOU can't play just PVE and have to flag for PVP). We don't know if the PVP flag will effect who we see in the hex instances, but if it operates like described they will keep us separate unless we want to be filtered in with PVE. Which we don't (Open PVP players can chime in if they want a ton of people they can't attack in an open pvp hex), this wouldn't prevent a mixed party of PVP/PVE (but I think they expressed a desire not to have mixed parties).

It seems to me that a large part of this pvp discussion is being overtaken and steered by PVE players (rune, redfish, esc) that don't understand that a person that wants open pvp can have it in ALL Hexes (or the instances they appear in) if they flag for it without forcing OPEN PVP on PVE players.