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

The word trammel shortens explanations down a bit. Its just a slang word I guess.

 

Welcome to the forums, Gonzo.

 

Full loot works fine for me. Even if the cost is phenomenal. Probably because I play the rogue type character that doesnt carry weapons or armour I just loot and scavenge. And, the way I see it wearing the high level gear is all the more to your advantage if everyone else is naked. You will have the upper hand because your willing to throw on the halberd of power. >=-)
Its hard to not look at it like UO because we dont have a full game yet. So as of right now its easier to compare it to UO. Its just a habit.
And yea... ill admit even I might start off playing my game dangerous, chicken out a bit, and think "whoa maybe ill turn it down a notch" and join some parties of people who are pvp free. Then switch back to full loot PvP again when I feel like it. But for the most part ill play my game dangerous. Im assuming most people who want only consensual PvP will most definitely engage in it occasionally. Ill admit, sometimes ill be playing the game safe once in awhile depending on my mood.. But my mood is usually all for full loot pvp.
Thats the beauty of selective multiplayer, and ideally there should be many options available. Even the high risk ones. If your not into high risk, just don't do it. But hey if im willing to throw 500 bucks down on the table and see what happens thats my win or loss.

 

I understand why you desire it...it's just that I don't see it working unless the game mimicks the economy system of UO. I don't think that's where they are looking to go.

There are so many little issues and big issues to deal with to make it work:
-Naked players(just silly and a workaround the full loot)
-Quest items
-Cost of replacing items making coming back into pvp prohibative(see first point)
-Driving down competition if that is what you are looking for in PVP, it is pretty simple logic less will play with more to lose.
- Driving the rest of the game to change in order to make items cheap/basic enough to be ok to be lost.(this is a work around to make it actually work instead of naked players) this however makes the game rather boring.

I'm all for it being an option...but not at the expense of other systems to support it. I do not want a basic weapons game balanced for PVP only. (standard disclaimer: I don't mean WoW levels of equipment).

People want challenge and risk etc, there has to be more to that then one setting(full loot), try and step back and look away from UO and think of how to do it and still have people out using their things. This definately isn't a black and white issue.

 

Well, problem with UO was that you were effective at PvP even while naked. This is going to raise a bit of controversy for some, but perhaps being naked should mean that you won't be as effective at fighting. Either that, or theres need to risk to enter dungeon x. Must have a sword of *blah blah blah* to slay the dragon with. Something ya dont want to lose. Perhaps theres lots of treasure in dungeon x. If thats the case its not going in thats a real scary thing its leaving. Because if you pick up the treasure you dont want to lose it. Theres another thing, perhaps you dont need the stuff you bring into the dungeon to be lootable, its the stuff you pick up and have to walk out with. I feel like that is probably one of the biggest things that needs to be considered. Maybe we don't need to be able to loot all the things that you LEAVE town with. The loot that a person acquires on the quest though.... That would be fair game. So you could take that powerful dragon slaying sword in the dungeon and not lose it. But you couldn't leave with the loot you got from the dragon safely.
But... then again... maybe you could reap some extra benefits if you go into the dungeon fully lootable with the mighty dragon slaying sword. >=-)

Anyway... The trick is to allow the high risk option for those who want it, and integrate them into the same world. Its a tough issue, I cant resolve it with my forum posts. I can only state what I want. Its going to take lots of actual testing and playing a model game(alpha/beta testing) to get it to work FOR REAL. I got a strong feeling it is doable. To integrate all the players into one world and let them all have what they want without destroying the economy for either group. Neither the small minority of full loot pvper's nor the consensual pvp only environment.

 

Too often the subject of PvP devolves to an all or nothing choice. I'd remind people that Trammel was not PvP free, it was PvP among trusted guilds. I played Trammel for years and was killed and looted many times while on that facet. I did not object; in fact I enjoyed the conflicts (even tho my lack of prowess meant that I played as cannon fodder). The reason our community of guilds moved was not to avoid PvP but rather to avoid the random, meaningless attacks that became too frequent, too costly and too disrupting.

It's not that I (and I assume many others) wish to avoid all PvP. I wish to avoid the kill-everything-in-sight mentality that is prevalent among many PvP-centered players.

In EVE Online there is the concept of NBSI and NRDS, or Not Blue, Shoot It and Not Red, Don't Shoot. I fall distinctly into the NRDS camp.

 

I think EVE Online proved that full loot can work well enough. Nobody is fearing ill fitted ships there and even with the "only use what you can afford to lose" there are plenty who use the most expensive stuff to pvp just to get an edge.

That being said, I don't think SotA really needs full loot but the aruments against it seem to hold not much water in my opinion.

 

Have you read about Item Affinity?

 

Is that it then? All there is to do in SotA is either PvP or farm endlessly? I feel sorry for the game if that's the content.

PvP doesn't have to be about profit or loss: no need to endlessly farm in PvE to offset that loss when it's not there.
PvE doesn't mean farm till hyper inflation: PvE is about many levels on content.

I reject this premise.

PvP will have a purpose. Open PvP will be an option for those that want to add that to every element of their play. As long as PvP does not have a major over head then there is not force driving the need to toggle into some safe private area to farm in safety.

There will be people driven to horde currency. I don't want the content to be designed to cater to that mind set.

 

A bit (Didn't sound interesting to me) but I dont really see how his is an argument against full loot.

 

Then I suggest you go back and re-read it.

 

I think the only connection Affinity has with full loot is that it gives players one more reason to obsess about their gear.

Love of gear is the root of all evil.

 

Go back to where ? Is there any centralised information about item affinity ? Because I've been here since kickstarter and in my mind, item affinity wasn't even a sure thing. But I really like the concept and would love to read more about it (especially an explanation about how affinity ties to repairs).

 

Which reason did I give that didn't hold much water?

If a game is designed from the ground up for full loot I fail to see how it will work.

 

Then why would gear be included in full loot? Wanting to keep gear and wanting to take gear would fall into the same roots.

 

I thought EVE's open PvP was only in Low Sec areas? I didn't play the game for all that long so I don't quite know, but I went to Low Sec because I knew it was PvP.

 

As I have mentioned before, gear as loot has tactical and strategic value.

Tactically, it removes a person from the fight until they have an opportunity to re-equip. Consider the res time in R8, and you will see the value this provides.

In a guild war, or a war against a rival alliance, full loot is of strategic value in that it drains resources from your enemies. If you drain them badly enough, you may leave them without the ability to wage further war.

 

I suppose with the current thinking on loot/ransom, that guild wars will just have to last a great deal longer.

 

If current thinking holds, you are probably right.

Pity. It would make a nice option, I think.

 

You'll just never have the luxury of giving those PK's a break my good Sir