I was so excited...

Unfortunately, because turning players into Loot Pinatas is not a good mechanic, as has been demonstrated by other titles in the past 15+ years of the persistent multiplayer online game genre.

Or put another way. In what persistent multiplayer online game, other than UO, since 1997, has full loot pvp been a production mechanic? And then, how many players, today, play that game? And when I say full loot pvp, i mean you can take EVERYTHING, including all armor, weapons, equipment, money, and the complete inventory of the victim.

 

Don't forget their body parts.

It's true. The mechanic was great when it was a new thing, but I feel like people are looking at it with rose tinted glasses. It ran out of steam and became a bit of a chore after a while. Full Loot/Open PVP mostly just leads to empty adventuring.

I ran around for a few years straight mostly just looking for people to slap around. Eventually I got bored of running around the woods and such and sought people out in dungeons. Half the time, you can't find anyone, or they go running away the second they see you. So, you can chase them around while humming the Benny Hill theme, or you can go do something else.

So I figured "Jee, I might as well just kill all these demons and stuff instead." Killing creatures and getting random loot is alot better than killing some mage with a bunch of stuff I don't want, anyway. That's when we started getting more into roleplaying on UO. Sometimes we would play D&D in my house, on UO.

mind = blown.

 

What is the problem if crafters easily replace lost gear?

That was never a problem in UO. I resurected and restocked in 5 minutes and was back in business in no time.

I suspect many players that is against full loot actually never played a full loot game as UO.

 

I played UO with full loot, and saw the economic problems it caused, hence my arguments here.
Precisely due to your comment of "I resurrect and restocked in 5 minutes and was back in business in no time" is the strategic element, but that's only a part of the issue.
If players offer more resources than NPCs, players will be hunted more than NPCs. To the point where you will end up with very few participants. This is demonstratably true, given the history of UO, as Arkhan's anecdote highlights.

But moving on to the strategic issue, removing someone from combat is the oft-cited reason for full loot pvp, and yet, as you've specifically stated, Ara, it was not a deterrent for anyone remotely interested in PvP. You resurrected and restocked immediately and were back in combat, within a very very short time.

In my opinion, for SotA, a different mechanic, like temporary land-hex banishment would be a superior solution, from a strategic value perspective. I'm willing to consider options that have not been demonstrated, historically, to encourage players to stop playing. (like full loot pvp).

 

I believe you are right, but mainly because many players that are against full loot simply won't give a game with full loot a chance.

BTW, I gave games with full loot a chance in the past. I'm not going to do that again, though; if a game forces me into non-consensual PvP with full loot, there is no chance at all I would play. That is how much I disliked full loot.

 

No reliable information about that yet. For all we know SotA might be "split" in more than just "Trammel" and "Felucca", with a third option that has open PvP but without looting. I don't think the devs have decided that yet.

 

It's precisely because I played UO pre-trammel (I was in the beta) that I am against FORCED full loot PvP. Emphasis on "FORCED".
I don't mind it as an option for those whose multiplayer fun comes down to a mindless gank fest. To each his own. But there has to be option for those who want a bit more out of their games than that.

 

lol ? why aren't you defending yourself or picking safer places then ? why are you considering yourself as victim always ? you clearly weren't in uo beta, even lord british could be killed (and was killed).

 

When i and my guild PvP it is far from a mindless gankfeast. You have to remember that ganking isnt what i call PvP. PvP is as best when same numbers fight it out and the winner was decided cause they had better playerskills and tactics. Communication (ventrilo at first and now we have our own teamspeak channel, sometimes we use skype) and leadership is also important. During UO we had superior callers (decided targets and who to heal) that made just about all the difference. Timed heals and attack spells were also important.

Mindless ganking is just boring. No challenge and pretty lame.

During our Darkfall session we never lost a fight and were usually outnumbered at least 2 to 1. To win such fights you need to be smart and have alot of individual skills. We also created the first tier 3 city on EU1 so we were not just PvP players, we were also crafter and diplomats cause without diplomocy and social skills you didnt come far in a game like Darkfall.

Calling it a mindless gankfeast tell me you most likely didnt play UO that long and definetly not on my level.

 

Oh yes, I remember that, Lord British was killed because of an exploit/bug. It's partially Richard's own fault anyway, he forgot to turn his invincibility flag back on after a patch. It was funny, but still, it confirms the general rule about FFA PvP... exploit, kill weaker people, gank in numbers. Fighting "fair" is rarely part of FFA PvP. It's all about having the "high ground" and crushing the opponent.
17 years of experience with PvP MMORPGs. Always the same result. If there are no limits, it's "bully land", roleplaying is non existing, it's all about ganking, and preferably the weaker side.

 

I agree with Korrigan. I don't have a problem with PvP if it is guilds battling it out. But the reality is too many players go around killing weaker players just because they can and for the most part never experienced any major consequences for those actions. The UO developers responded to the problem of the large number of people leaving because of the player killers by creating Trammel. If anyone is to blame for the downfall of UO it isn't the developers or the casual players, it is the relentless player killers. Yes, I agree having PvP does make the game a bit more exciting as it makes for a more challenging game. However, after being killed dozens of times just trying to do the simplest thing such as gathering resources gets old very quickly. Not everyone can dedicate 8+ hours a day playing a game. The only way I see PvP with full loot to work is there needs to be consequences for player killing. Either with a working prison system or something I just thought of is the ability to put a non-detectable explosive on your body that in the event of being player killed and looted the bomb goes off, thus killing the looter at least severely wounding them, possibility even just destroying all the lootable items.

 

Boobytrapping yourself so when you're looted the killer is blown up... that I've gotta see. Thank you Furious, you just made my night with the visual.

 

I have my moments.

 

Yes... so turning off Open PvP should mean playing Single Player in the "spirit" of things. I do agree there.

Cause if we are going to base it on that, then we must also base what the Online version had.

 

Not this guy again.....

 

What I want to know is, how will the market in-game be affected by people's choice of what kind of looting and PVP they are partaking of?

 

I could not have said this better! I am excited to see what is to come!

 

So you are saying that in pre-trammel UO, roleplaying was non-existant. It was all about ganking?

Please...

 

It's the impression I got out of reading about the game back then.

Which is why I never got into UO, despite loving the Ultima series (at the time I wasn't as dead set on not exposing myself for PvP as I'm right now; that came from playing over half a decade of WoW on PvP servers and attempting to play a few PvP MMOs, including EVE).

 

For me PvP and RP go hand in hand. I had my best RP moments in UO, UO RP-PvP Shards, EVE Online and RP mandatory PK MUDs.

I still puzzled why so many people think that RP is the opposite of PK...