On PVP - The beauty of choice.

So what it comes down to on these boards and surrounding this topic in general is that some of you folks would have a hardcore uncompromising PVP system which will allow full loot while others say they don't want that sort of thing at all. I think if we take a look at the stage of history we will find that older online multiplayer titles (Ultima Online!) have already solved this issue for us.

Obviously everyone will have a different opinion on the matter but the facts remain the same both types of people are passionate towards their preferred type of gameplay. In the MMO's of past we always had the option of multiple servers which dictated specific rule sets to cater to different tastes, what is stopping us from achieving that here but doing it in our own way? I am of course talking about utilizing the unique method of selective multiplayer that SotA is seeking to implement to meet the needs of different players.

For instance, let's say that I am a player who greatly enjoys full loot hardcore gameplay. Simply ticking a "hardcore" tab on my character creation sheet would dictate that I end up playing online with other like minded players when in the adventure fields. I could then ensure that I am to get what I want out of the game, full loot FFA pvp craziness. On the reverse side of that coin if all I really want to do in SotA is adventure and never even bother with anything shy of the occasional duel I could leave that box un-ticked and maintain the exact experience that I desire.

Obviously this would splinter your player base to a degree and I am aware that SotA wants to achieve a healthy dose of player driven economy and community so I suppose the one concession to this rule would be that players of either variety can interact and trade freely amongst one another in neutral zones such as towns. This would ensure that we are all utilizing the same cities and merchants. I could even see this being something that gets left on the paper doll as a toggle if enough people would prefer it as such allowing you to play with friends who may not have the same tastes as you.

In a world where your online interactions are to be dictated by statistics rather than a set server rule structure I don't see why such a system couldn't work out. Variety is the spice of life, and the sandbox is all about giving the player the power to play the way that he/she wants to play.

 

Hell to that man, make it mandatory! The people who claim it's not fun will learn to love the chaos eventually...

 

Nah, those people just end up leaving the game frustrated and some never come back, which is sad. I am pro-choice lol

 

Good riddance? lol.

Its already selective multiplayer. They dont want to pvp, cool we will never see them. If they dont pvp, why should they care if there is looting? For years ive had to suffer their game style, its sbout time we get ours noticed. Im starting to see a lot of ex Uo players around here too.

The crew here are awesome every dude i met on release 9 was all about the PvP funtime snd spent hours fighting each other snd refining our builds.

 

Start a thread on the forums, invite anyone and everyone that wants full open PvP and add them to your friends list. Then you can sit in FPO and have your full open PvP and never see another person that is not PvP.

 

Well I think you have already touched on this with the beauty of choice.

As the current plan is, there are a few different choices players already have when it comes to pvp. Players can choose to do the oracle quest to be semi-permanant flagged for PVP. They can join a guild that declares war. They can also choose to venture into a PVP zone. Even Duels are planned for those that want a once in a blue moon event.

What the sides split on is what are the rewards for those choices ( Strictly PVP, not discussing Loot at the moment). If I am flagged for PVP even in a PVE area, what benefit does that provide me? I can not hide behind a tree waiting for a lumberjack to finish his route and then JACK THAT MOT************ and take all his hard earned logs. I can get jacked up by another PVP flagged individual though while the lumberjack happily goes on his way with his particular choice.

Now, if there was a bit more incentive, like being flagged gives you an X amount of boost to production/gathering/harvesting/skinning then it provides a boon and a interesting choice verse those that decide to play it safe, gather in safety, and dodge interaction for fear it might set them back what they got. If instead, being flagged allowed you to harvest, as a lumberjack, a specific In-Demand ingridant that those who did not CHOOSE to partake in the flagging of pvp, that does certainly add a delightful incentive.

Looting, well that is a whole 'nother beast. If PVP means a random stack of gold, might as well be flagged for very little to loose. If Looting meant you lost everything on you except maybe your equipment, but still all your reagents, logs, gold, hard fought treasure loot... Well that does make it interesting as well.

Regardless, I do not think with the current plan, or even tweaking it a bit is means to set apart a whole section of the playerbase. I do believe we can find a compromise that includes both sides with good incentives and I look forward to seeing what is delivered.

 

Seems safe to say that SOTA will offer PVP choices in different forms as said above.

On full looting, remember that every PVP game already offers this choice if you really want it badly enough. If the game mechanics themselves don't do it, players simply need to role play it by stripping down to their underpants, and trading their gear to the player who bested them in combat. Those interested in that just need to agree to play by those rules with each other. The only thing the game does by having a system coded is force people to play by those rules. But it certainly could be implemented in any PVP game by guilds aligned that way.

 

What you talk about here is an internal balance the dev team must address (which they have)

No loot vs Full loot at two extremes. 0% and 100% for both penalty and reward. The devs have little control once the implement either of these.

With the current plan they can adjust the penalty and reward to what they feel is right. They are currently bringing in other elements such as durability to give the penalty more of an economic impact. (as looting simply chances hands it does not remove)

The very very strong common theme with the dev teams design has always been dials and knobs so they can be directly involved with everything. Full loot and no loot do not allow for that.

Also, segregation of the community is not desired. Choice to move out of the way is one thing splitting the people out right so they never need to know others exist is another.

 

That pvp option sounds so... inorganic. Can you list any games where this has actually caught on?

 

lol what a discriminating way to scare off old pvp uo players , instead of separating them into different hexes if you are pvp or pve flagged. if you invite only friends who will be your enemys good vs evil ??

 

Just as discriminating as the post it was directed tward. OPO is the mode that most will play in. Saying go play in some other mode is no different than telling players to go play some other game.

 

Fixed that for ya!

 

On PVP - The beauty of choice.


Full PvP Full LOOT for me !

Thanks !

 

I laughed when I read this a lot. I doubt the non pvpers would do this. Same as in real life most of the people crying for fair treatment only want it when it benefits then.


Equal when beneficial is what I always say

 

I can see his point was totally lost on you.

 

I dont get it..

Its selective..

I want PvP....

I want to loot....

Ergo I dont want to play with you, you dont want to play with me.

Ergo I should only be able to play with others who want to kill and loot me......

So wtf do you care if there is full looting?

Dont want to segregate people? Fine have a couple of trade hubs, couple of PvP arena style hubs...done.

I dont diss your playstyle, Im sick of non pvpers putting their simplistic opinion (ie PvP equals less funds/Lootings leads to ress killing etc) and using the WoW format in the PvP Forum.

Let the PvP/Loot crowd have OUR play style like every other play style seems to have.

 

Because you can't see what changes on the full game full looting has. Compare those changes to what the devs have shown as their vision and you get a completely different focus for the game.

Besides, there is always room for increasing the amount available for loot.

• Loot & Ransoms: Our initial plan is when killed by another PVP player, a random item(s) is selected from the player’s inventory (50% equipped / 50% from inventory). The dead player is given a “Player X will take Y unless you pay a ransom of Z” where Z is based on the dead player’s level and the value of the item. You get the option to let them have the item, or pay the ransom. The ransom can be paid from bank funds (and possibly Guild funds). The default for this can be set to “Yes” if a player chooses. We also think that this exchange would have a 1 hour timer till it is final, so the dead player has time to assemble funds. For group PVP, this would use the same sorting algorithms as party loot. We want to explore various options that include providing the killer a list of items to choose vs. selecting only one and/or varying the number of items based on circumstance (i.e. Blessed PVP players might be able to loot more from each other). We will have to put in checks to keep people from gaming this system by loading their inventory with worthless items or running around naked except for reagents. One possible check could be that if there is no loot of X value the loser automatically has to pay ransom.

You can choose to focus your efforts for more loot any where you like. But I suggest finding ways within the current thinking and not trying to band aid it, force feed it, or attempt to get them to carve off a space for your style. They will go with their plan.

 

Uh huh. Just like their initial version of the overhead map that went over like a lead balloon.

I suggest you allow people to voice their opinions without imposing your own preconceived notions or preferred style of game play.

 

As long as you having your play style does not negatively impact the players that don't want to engage in PvP, sure.

But, from the moment it causes issues to players that shun PvP — including if the incentive to engage in PvP is seen as a must have, and having to trade with PvP players to get that reward is not an acceptable answer BTW — you will get a lot of players complaining.

The specific version of the overland map was just a stylistic choice, which is much easier to change as it does not influence anything else in the game; the underlying systems are exactly the same with a cloth map simulacrum or with a 3D map. In fact, if Portalarium was willing to spend enough resources on it, they could provide both systems as an UI toggle.

The choice of full loot, on the other hand, impacts the whole gearing philosophy. If you merely ask for full loot without offering suggestions about what to do with the whole gearing system — including the gear-based gating that is planned for PvE — then I would rate the chances of your plea being heard as quite low.

This is what you have to keep in mind when asking for full loot. It's not just asking for a line of code to be switched, or for some limited and self-contained development like the map issue was; instead, it's asking for a deep change in how gear work in the game, how long does it take to obtain gear. It's far more complex, touching far more systems, than a mere change in the overland map style.

 

If I need a stick of butter to complete an apple pie, I don't go next door, kill the lady there, and loot her fridge. I don't take out my shotgun and shoot the stranger walking his poodle in front of my lawn, just because he has a really neat camo hat, and the retractable leash would come in handy as a restraint on my bluetick coon hound.

I have lived where the butt crack thugs rule, and honest people live in fear for their property, lives, and the lives of their children. Folks, that is not a "game" I want to play, nor one I would invest in. I left that "game" as soon as finances allowed. A world of PvP only sounds very much like that old, thug infested, community.

Many of us are joining SotA with like minded friends from around the world, with plans to make a life in this new world, filled with a mysterious story to be discovered, and an evil to oppose. We have plans to build a town (PaxLair!), to learn a trade to support our explorations and adventures, and lose our "Real Life" personas' for a time in Role Playing a character of our designs in this alternate universe.

For some, PvP may have a critical place in how their story plays out. For others, PvP may prove to be a show stopper, preventing us from achieving the very things we come to SotA seeking. Please don't demand the Developers create a world where both sets of adventurers can't find an enjoyable home.

-Sam