Guild Warfare Feedback

I don't understand or agree with this point at all. As someone that plans to flag pvp full time at launch I would have no problem grouping with someone that is not flagged for pvp - especially as a roleplayer.

The idea that someone that is not pvp should be able to step into and influence a pvp fight is just too easy to exploit. I do understand the reverse of this, if you're out fighting NPC's and you want to heal the guy flagged for pvp, yes that makes sense to want that. But to ruin and unbalance pvp to that degree is not something I can support. PVP has to be competitive and as free from exploit as possible to remain fun for people other than griefers and masochists. This can't happen if non-pvp players are opportunistically creating uncounterable advantages.

 

But your failing to look at this from the other more impact full perspective. Read my post above on it. And I'm sure you will agree that blue healing is the lesser of the two evils.

 

PK U, I see your point, but I disagree respectivly. I think the exploit outweighs the benefit here.

 

I read your post and do not agree at all.

This game has Friends Only Mode. This game is 100% pvp consensual.

If your argument is that you need to be able to be flagged for PVP AND you have to let your friends help you even when they're not flagged for PVP in the event that someone attacks you while you're questing. I have no sympathy for that use case. Go into Friends Only Mode and have a nice day.

PVP is not something that should be experienced in small convenient doses. PVP should be on an even playing field where everyone has the same opportunity for success or failure. There's absolutely no way that blue healing is good for pvp, it's an exploit and a casual mechanic for people that don't want to take on the risk of full pvp, unless of course they have an opportunity to remove the majority of the risks associated with their actions.

 

Blue healing is the equivalent to allowing people to enter a pvp zone like a shardfall and not be attacked as long as they don't attack other people.

 

It doesn't happen often but i agree with Drocis.

 

Agreed. Should not be tolerated unless there are significant consequences(temp flagging is not really) to doing the act.

 

that assumes many things.
whole guilds are coming over already established, to this game.
many casual guilds do not have such strict guidelines such as play styles, etc. they do not force membership into certain actions.

this system contradicts that entirely. it will force a guild to go all in, or all out. and in many cases, that decision will be made 'of game' not 'of system within game' by those guilds. why alienate entire guilds, who wish to remain intact. thats the 'guild killer' mentality i'm talking about here, which directly equates to loss of funding in chunks.

 

So many different thoughts, might aswell add mine

PvP/Guild Warfare
I am a pvper myself and have been in any game I´ve ever played. Though I have to agree with ppl. disliking the idea of beeing flagged for pvp as a result of guild warfare. However, not agree with their drawn conclusions.
I too think that participating in the guild warfare should not flag you for pvp in general - for several reasons - e.g. consider the other side, atleast for the possibility to have RP-guilds have guildwars amongst themselfes without beeing "dragged" into pvp in general. That should in fact be seperated imo.
However(!) if participating in the guild warfare should result in everyone beeing flagged for pvp, ultimately it is neither the fault/responsibility of the System or Devs, but the responsiblity of the Guildmaster/guild in general to figure out what they want. If the decision within your guild goes against your personal wishes, well then you can feel free to join another guild or have a seperate guild allied in some way.
Clearly the current System as proposed is a rudimentary one, which is intended as such and also most certainly not in its final form, so maybe take a breather and see whats coming.

Blue healers
Worst thing ever! I guess everyone who played UO and experienced it has tons of examples where the possibility for blue healers destroyed or at the very least disruped pvp for a very long time. Faction relaunch comes to mind for one. If you are not flagged for pvp or involved in guild warfare, there is no way you should be allowed to perform ANY beneficial acts on such target.
The only thing it will get you is ppl. doing nothing but running around and either disturbing ppl actually pvping or "pvpers" run around with blue healers to have sort of an untouchable backup force.
Temporary flagging them isnt going to be a disadvantage at all. Whether it is until you leave the scene, you die or with a certain timer on.


Which brings me to another - in my opinion - valid Point, allthough maybe a bit off Topic.
Many ppl might disagree with this, but as witnessed in various games - like UO ofc - pvpers are an important part of the community and regulating the market. Maybe its worth atleast listening to them every once in a while.
Projection from UO where PKs/pvpers helped regulate market prices and keep them from dropping to virtually nothing for a very very long time, simply by working against the notion that everyone can farm everything all day long without every beeing disturbed. In my opinion, if this is not the case, it very often leads to radically dropping prices and as a result ppl dont bother going out anymore to do stuff themselfes, since its way easier to just buy eveything, because ist worth jack s..... This also results in ppl getting bored of the game faster. Thats a very easy path to diminish a community imo.

I dont mean to argue that pvp is the most important thing to consider, but it impacts many aspects of a game and shouldnt be twisted and crippled to fit some personal preferences or avoid discomfort.
It is what it is, not more, but certainly not less either. If you dont wish to get involved, dont. Its your choice.

 

Uhm????

The fears outlined in your post has nothing to do with the response in the post you partly quoted.


I'm guessing you didn't read through the post he was quoting in turn completely? There is no guild killing part there, none whatsoever.


Those very close and loyal friends will be able to have the exact same experience in my suggestion. While if SotA continues with the 'Guild' trope they need to divide into different 'Guilds' depeding on demographic.
Check out the alliance proposal that @Winfield outlines. Your close and loyal group of friends would have to be divided into different guilds so that they are not affected by their difference in play style choices. ...and that would still not mitigate the base issue, that the leader can affect all members in such a group due to a feature set existing which was not designed to fit their purpose. (for example in Winfield's outline in the alliance post the PaxLair Crafters who does not want to PvP would still have a leader who could by choice or mistake make that whole guild's membership open pvp).
Then check out that @Womby actually had to leave his guild due to the 'Guild' trope limitation affecting the feature sets.

So it is the opposite of what you state. With my suggestion that close and loyal friends group can continue to be so and would be supported by the game's systems, while in the only one generic 'Guild' trope they would have to split up if they have different play styles.

 

Alright then how do you deal with the situation where my clan/guild pays to declare war and you don't have many people wanting to war. If we chose you for a 20v20 and you have 2 people or whatever sign up and don't participate how is that any fun?

Mabey make losing steep where if encourages more members to join that doesn't sound right either.

I expect that as the game gets on less and less clans will declare war except a handful that thrive on the thrill of it. Give the ability to declare multiple wars if your going to do the toggle out system. I don't want my strictly pvp focused clan chasing 3 people who barley pvp or play spo to avoid combat.

 

I agree with this. But I must say, If the guild leader did this, and accepted that it would be like that, they deserve to lose. the problem would weed itself out!

 

Accept people have diffrent perspectives for some people the W and the L may be a motivating factor but others may love the carnage and don't mind being out gunned. The leader of the guild is accountable to his guild for his action bad leaders will find they have a small guild. This is not Portalarium's problem it's the guilds/leaders concerns.

 

I can understand this. I do.

 

Regarding the blue healer mechanic, I think a compromise option, which would render the oracle even less needed, would be the following:
1-Non PvP players cannot affect in any way PvP players
2-Anyone can flag themselves PvP at any point, Oracle not required. (it could still flag you, but it wouldn't be a requeriment. After all it has agents everywhere).
3-Flagging oneself PvP notifies of the fact to other players in the scene or nearby and starts a global skill countdown. This should be long enough so others in the scene can be aware and react to the new "trheat" BUT short enough that the newly flagged PvP player doesn't become a sitting duck /this is the most complicated and critical point).
4-Removing the PvP flag can still only be done at the Oracle. None of this "temporal PvP".

IMO, this would allow enough interaction mechanics while reducing the griefing opportunities. Point 3 is the critical one: We would want enough warning that a player is being flagged PvP so it can't surprise-attack while being invulnerable. We would want enough time to react to that, making flagging yourself PvP in a combat situation naturally risky, so noone can insta-assist while being invulnerable. But we wouldn't want that player to not be able to do anything and just become a sitting duck, so that period should be reasonably short or only affect some skills (perhaps still allowing defensive ones? I don't know...).

 

That's interesting @Kether, and it seems to me that it addresses the "surprise attack" objection that many have. So, you don't become PVP by attacking PVP players - instead, you have to "announce" in some way that you are transitioning to PVP. This starts a countdown, and the imminent PVP flagging is communicated to other players (preferably with some visual indicator like a flashing aura). I like it, but then I don't do PVP so my opinion isn't worth an awful lot.

Having to unflag by visiting the Oracle adds a bit of necessary weight to the decision, however that brings up the possibility of people setting up an ambush around the Oracle.

Technically though the self-flagging seems OK.

 

I'm following the above line of thinking and I can sink my teeth into it.

 

I could support this, not sure how difficult the coding would be though.

 

This does not remove the surprise attack, which is one of my biggest greivences. In addition the oracle is there for a reason, and it should stay as the only way to flag outside of pvp areas. This is a story driven game and we cannot eliminate the story I

 

Maybe they could flag guild warfare more like factions in UO. You could not heal or res some one if you where not in factions. Factions is simular to this suggested system as you had faction rewards just like you will have guild rewards in this system.