Consensual pvp???? Stay a While and Listen Why this is no fun.....

Obviously you missed what I meant.

I was talking about how people have been going on about how there should be extra rewards for people doing PVP.

 

Ok, but a dead llama body is not the best place to search.

 

I support the current system of making PVP areas with faster rates and larger quantities of rare resources than non-PVP areas. You?

 

I'm not sure where you are going with this...obviously you want me to reply to you for some reason. I think it's fine as long as there is an actual challenge in those areas. However, this shouldn't be the deciding factor of the game of who is successful and who is not.

I was commenting on this line from owain:

There are many players for whom no lure is necessary. Those who want the additional challenge will accept the additional challenge. If that isn't for you, should the option become available, don't select the option.

 

I wouldn't call it "extra rewards", I'd call it rewards for participating in PvP. And then there would be rewards for participating in PVE. Many MMO's out there use an aspect specific rewards system for participating in particular events in the game.

 

Well in that case, two things.

1) I always have Owain on ignore so sometimes I miss the fact that people are talking to him and not the general populace. My apologizes.

2) I was trying to figure out where you draw the line. Saying that PVP deserves no incentive or that PVP is somehow getting too much attention (both things it appears you did not mean to imply) are for me, where I draw the line.

 

Yes, if the extra resources is designed to offset the cost of PvP.
No, if those resources are something of such a value that players (as a whole) that do not wish to PvP feel they must PvP to be economically viable.

 

EA Purchased Origin Systems in 1992. Ultima Online hadn't even been conceived when EA purchased OSI. The whole fantasy that the downfall of UO was because of EA is delusional as EA Took Over 5 years prior to the game launching and owned the studio for the entirety of the game's development.

These facts can be easily checked.

 

That's fair on the surface. I agree with the intention of your statements. But I reserve the right to call horse dung on the people that whine for the sake of being idiots. Who cares what they "feel"...there's a reality regardless of how they feel about it.

Risk vs. Reward should always trump cry baby nonsense.

 

OMG ! He said Risk vs Reward ! He must be right !

EDIT : </sarcasm>

 

Consensual PvP + Ransom on a PvE Server

Non-Consensual PvP + Full LooT on PvP Server

1 + 1 = 2

Thanks !

 

Can we call it Trammel 2 and Felucca 2?

Btw, how'd that work out the first time?

 

Raph Koster explained one time why those sorts of bifurcations don't work: even most of the people who would be wolves in a unified community won't play on a game / server designed specifically and only for that. They want to be where the general playerbase is. That is why Felucca became a barren wasteland devoid of life for miles around, and that is exactly what would happen to any hypothetical 'hardcore' PvP server in this game. Good thing for them (the game designers) that they don't want to do it.

 

Yes. I was asking that question rhetorically. But I appreciate that you gave the correct answer.

Raph Koster is not one of my favorite developers, but in the above quote we agree.

 

That is why I added the (on a whole) part. This is not for the people to decide. The devs need to look at all elements of the game and see what is balanced.

 

We areon the same page then....how you can ignore Owain is beyond me though, he is very entertaining.

 

He's not alone. I'm too prone to reply to people on the forums. If I find that someone just repeatedly lacks a basic logic, common courtesy or fundamental sense of reason, they end up on the list. It's been a happier forum for me since I began doing this.

It's ok if people disagree with me. It's not ok when they tell me the sky is green.

 

I want full loot PvP upon login. Perhaps right at the character creation you meet the oracle and choose your path. Ill be going into the world of full loot PvP. There is no reason the option should NOT be there, because ive got lots of people who are plenty willing to join me. Of course, I feel that regardless of the path we choose, there will still be interaction with those who choose the trammel style of play. If I go into one of their safe guard-protected towns theres no reason we cannot interact. Perhaps I could get into a conversation with someone who is not full loot PvP and we party up and go on a dungeon raid. Upon partying up we choose wether or not we would like to "step into their world". In other words, I could choose to go on a dungeon raid with them in trammel, or they could choose to cross over to felucca with me. Once the party is disbanded we are back in the PvP mode we choose originally.
I dont think that choosing one mode or the other at the "oracle" or whatever should have you completely locked in one style of play, options should be open to go from old school UO style to trammel style and vice-versa, but it should be limited. So if I start off old school UO and become a chicken I could work on changing my way of playing into completely trammel.
And yea, there should definitely be some incentive to go full-loot PvP. Because we are taking more risks theres going to need to be some extra gain to allow us to be economically viable. Argument above was made that resources should not be of such a value in full loot PvP mode that people who dont want to PvP will be pushed into playing in this world. Well same argument goes for full loot PvP players. The non-stop uninterrupted farming that PvE players would be able to do shouldn't be so overwhelmingly more lucrative than the full loot PvP mode that players who don't want a trammel game will feel that they must play trammel to be economically viable. If you can bash a bunch of AI spawn all day long and loot away or just create a macro program and read a book, or do your homework while you sit in front of the computer and never have to worry about human conflict(other than game masters) then your game has become WAY more economically viable. Which means ill be pushed into farming in the loot-free, pvp-free environment that I prefer not to play in.

 

I think you are looking at it too much like UO....and not like a new game.

Full loot won't work if the cost to replace your items is phenomenal.

I'm not sure why you think a person is "chicken" if they decide to not pvp..(wow best one I've read yet.)

I keep hearing arguements that full loot makes it viable...now I hear no no we need incentives.

The major problem with full loot so far is that it demands a system where replacing gear is cheap...else you wil lhave people running around naked or not using their full gear unless you make the rest of the game supportive of that style. Which of course I'm fully against.

 

I don't understand this trammel discussion. SotA isn't UO2 or something like that.