PvP town and Banning Permissions, Does it cross the line?

But it is hard to get everyone flag to visit PvE town for an event involving PvP elements. Also not all PvP events are about killing each other (e.g. Gustball - people flag to be able to gust each other not so any jerk could kill them and loot them). PvP town with permissions is best for similar events.

 

Ahh I see your point. I will try to make it a better representation next time. I did not mean to mislead.

 

I think and hope the devs are working on team permissions, or at least I know it has been discussed. Where as just like a duel, but a party can flagg vs another party. You could in the future possibly use guild the guild war feature where as only your guild vs another guild would be flagged against each other.
I think that pvp arena basements might be probable also as you are only flagged (supposedly) on the arena floor. Like the arena in owls head.

 

As much as needed to hire a "Live Support" team for their internally projected player population post-launch, post-launch + 90 days, +180 days, etc.

Regardless of POT ban grievances and Dev/GM involvement, they need to respond to every single /report for individual grievances, regardless of where that happened. More than likely these will be happening in NPC towns or wilderness scenes and especially Shardfalls / PvP scenes.

Look at it this way, if they can't even have a live support team post-launch for individual grievances -- which will be magnitudes more numerous than POT ban grievances (although a single bad POT can cause headaches for hundreds), then we have much bigger issues with longevity of the game series. So claiming that Devs/GMs need to get involved for POT ban issues (which the debate says will rarely/never happen) is too much of a burden on them, that is minuscule compared to what they already need to support for individual issues.

 

@blaquerogue , what do you think about this? @Ariella

 

It is unfortunate that a few posters got the other POT thread closed as i think we were actually getting to a viable ban solution that provided sone protection to players while still protecting the POT owner.

The idea was a PoT owner could ban for one hour on the first ban and if the player came back after an hour and was still a problem they could ban for 24 hours and that includes a report to Port.

Also, there was talk of rental deeds for set times to protect renters from arbitrary boots.

Seemed like a decent compromise to the no ban.

 

Do you like pvp towns to have banning permissions?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

Long thread with a lot of great arguments but I see PvP POTs as private property with the right to declare some people guests, and some people trespassers. Pretty simple. You own it, you get to make the rules.

 

To what end? Ones that go above and beyond the core game rules or conflicts with them or can be excluded from them? OK, let's buy a metropolis and make up a rule like...you can reset your virtues and can gain 10x the XP when crafting in the POT. Don't like the rule? Don't go to the POT. That seems to be the dismissive response currently.

 

Seems some dont want anyone to look at the PoT system..its really not that hard to fix.

 

Fair enough, but my comment is limited to the OP which is simply the discretion to ban. I'm not responsible for all the rhetorical perversion that's occurred here since the OP. Don't you put that curse on me!

 

The hex on you has been lifted. Well, at least tomorrow morning. For now, just avoid eating anything that is green or red in color.

 

OK. *takes frog out of blender*

 

I can't wrap my head around anything else but this.

If I'm sitting at stoplight in my Chevy and someone enters my vehicle and changes the radio station I'm listening to and I tell them to get the hell out of my car and they say, "Fine, I'm going to contact General Motors about this", I would laugh my way into a heart attack.

 

There is no such thing as non-PvP POT unless something has changed. No such thing as a non-PvP town of any kind in game. Open PvP or flagged PvP are the only options for any scene in the game which is the way it should be.

So for this reason and many, many other reasons, its not acceptable at all to have banning options for POT owners against players who have not broken the ToS of the game. There seems to be a complete lack of foresight and thought put into this ability.

 

POT owner should be able to ban if he doesn't like the way you're dressed IMO, or for no reason whatsoever Nobody has the RIGHT to be on someone else's property.

Furthermore, I doubt I'll ever actually be banned from a POT. Why would I be?

Further the utility of banning a nuisance far outweighs the theoretical concerns of "unjustified" banning, if there even could be such a thing.

 

I find it astounding that the No votes have almost doubled overnight and yet there have only been 2 people actually post they don't want banning in Pvp pots in that time. Someone has a hell of a lot of accounts. lol

 

And so you should kick them out,your car is not an add on part to what 60000 other people are paying for.

 

I wonder how many people who voted actually have a PvP town.

 

Good point, it should be those without the Towns that are voting on this issue, they are the one's who could be Banned.