Wandering guards for the criminals

And it wouldn't bother me either. I don't mind appropriate consequences for criminal activity, that is to be expected. What is not expected is for the intended and purposefully created rogue character type to be hounded out of existence. I really don't think Richard would have created the role if he intended to nerf it from the get go.

 

Your past couple posts have been exactly what I've been wanting to say, but I haven't been able to find the right words. Thank you!

I also want to add that there are a couple people who are pushing the "slider" issue too far.. I've seen some throw out ideas(as if they were fact) that there will be 8 different points on the slider such as RP/pvp, RP/pve, pvp no loot, etc.

I personally think a two piece slider is enough... Anything extra is just overkill and separating people even more. Just because you want to "play like that, with a slight twist," there doesn't need to be an option for that.. There comes a point when some people need to suck it up and accept that this game, and no game ever, will give you %100 what you want.

"Pve'ers" (quotations bc I know I'm grouping everyone together and I apologize) are getting exactly what they want.. Especially with a slider.. But they still want to tell us what we need and don't need.

Just like in the real world, a crybaby/"if I don't get what I want, ill quit" attitude should get you nowhere ever.. And I'm seeing that a lot.. It's becoming very obvious to me that a lot of people here haven't spent too much time with the general population of the world and it's kind of sad.

 

The suggestion this thread is about wasn't intended to hound playstyles out of existence. Programming NPC encounters with the express purpose of making a playstyle extinct would be a waste of development resources.

 

Yes, Arkhan, and what I said did not to pertain to just your suggestion, but to the obvious (to people on this side of the discrimination) ongoing, never ending theme found over many topics of exactly what I and others have tried to politely as well as not so politely (in my case) point out. The interesting thing is that mixed in with a lot of the pve on pvp hate is a lot of interesting ideas that do have 'some' viability such as yours. The problem is that we can't have honest discussions about most of them without it turning into a pve vs pvp slant with the heavy emphasis on anti pvp. I don't want it to be that way. I wan't to discuss your ideas and other's with honesty, but i'm not the one coming up with ideas to make the majority of your desired game play ever increasingly more difficult to enjoy. (well, except for the ones that I threw out in sarcasm lol, but they don't count because they were as ridiculous as some of the ones on the other side)

The truth is:
Pvp'ers don't 'hate' pve'ers
Pvp'ers don't want pve'ers to not be a part of this game
Pvp'ers don't care whether you want to participate in pvp or not
Pvp'ers are perfectly content to let you have 80% of the game if we can just have 20% the way we like it
Pvp'ers want to have a full rich inclusive game
Pvp'ers (most definately with the history of UO) have just as much right to be a part of this game as anyone else and not be treated as 2nd class gamers

The bigger picture of the last part of your statement is really not that it would be a 'waste' of development resources, but it would be purposeful exclusion of a very quantifiable percentage of high achieving, risk taking, cash paying players from this game. How can that really be good for the game that clearly offers 'considerably' more pve content than pvp content AND at the same time offers a 'pvp off' switch AND the option for single player mode? Considering that portalarium plans to make their money, not from monthly subscriptions but from box sales and . . .. . oh I don't know, selling 'cough' gold?, selling in game trinkets and housing plots, and commisions from real money transactions between players, selling addons, am I getting warm? . . . don't you think that they would want to include as many people into that robust economy as possible?

We will never get along on most any topic until pve'ers come to terms with the truths stated above and understand that it is okay to compromise, and that pvp and even pk are not bad words in the column that really counts, and that's the profit column.

 

..No idea what discussion is going on, but from a few tidbits, it's flamey.

I'll just throw my opinion to the fire here, and hope it either detracts the argument, or at least doesn't explosively combust.

Some people want PvP simply because it adds an ever changing aspect to the game, because people are people and not a program. Some people want PvE because they can predict what a program will throw at them, and are more comfortable with it. Some people like both. So long as one does not ruin the other, they can be in the same game, even if they interact with eachother (such as contestable materials).

But I like my PvP seperate from my PvE. I don't want to just randomly get killed by someone who felt like doing it when I have no interest in doing it to them. If I cannot opt in or out of this happening to me, I will blacklist the game and move onto another one.

If anyone would like to inform me about how PvP will work in this game, please do, as I am clueless and have never played a Ultima game before nor do I know much about the one in the workings right now.

 

I love your opening statements

so very true

It will be real simple. If you want to pve without interruption from any possible pvp, just turn off your pvp switch and voila!, presto! and other super magic stuff and suddenly you are pve only. Feeling a little froggy? Ate your Wheaties today? Well flip that little switch on and come find what it's like to wear big boy pants. It's genius.

 

I am all for this, then. I could have simply looked it up, sure, but talking to a person is more fun.

Thank you for informing me on it, 'preciate it!

As for original topic.. sounds okay to me. I don't, again, understand how the criminal system works, but I saw that being banned from a city was mentioned. While realistic, having all the odds always stacked against you seems.. eeeh.. a bit much. Maybe the patrols only go a certain distance from a town that knows what you've done?

I have no idea what I'm talking about, do I? <_>

 

Sounds like you are right on to me. Thanks for your participation and welcome to the forums.

 

The only concern I have with your response, is that I've looked for all this hateful behavior from the PvE crowd, and I can't find it.

I've found comments about the PvP slider, mostly to the effect of "I don't want forced open PvP, so I like the slider!" vs "That's lame, if you can just turn off PvP then there isn't any!"

I've found LOTS of comments to the effect of "If you can't handle PvP then you suck and need to grow up!"

But I have yet to see a single comment from a supposed PvE player stating that they don't want PvP players to be able to PvP, or that they object to there being an OPO setting on the slider, or that people shouldn't be allowed to kill and loot each other when both are willing.

I just don't see any HATE. I do see a lot of people defending their right to play their way, and with a single exception, I think that's a great thing.

That single exception, is that several of the self proclaimed PvP ers have stated that NON PvP ers being able to evade PvP combat diminishes the game. I don't think it does, and I don't think that opinion has a place in an adult conversation.

 

Really? Not seen even one? hahahahahahaha
unbelievable

 

No, not even seen one. Could you perhaps give me some evidence? Maybe cut and paste one of these vile attacks so the rest of us can see your so called Posts of Mass Destruction?

 

I would also like to see those quotes.

PvE players typically simply ask for a way to opt out of PvP, preferably without unreasonable "penalties" for doing so.

The closest thing to PvE players "attacking" PvP I have seen was more a defense than anything else. When PvP is defended on the grounds of it being realistic, some PvE players point to what truly realistic consequences for crimes would be, with things like perma death for players caught murdering others. This isn't really a suggestion, but more a way to point how defending PvP on the grounds of realism is absurd.

 

All I know for sure is that if I don't PvP I won't be a big boy. Instead I will suck, as well as lack testicles. Considering the importance of reproduction to the humans species, nobody can want this fate, meaning we all are for Open Full Ego PvP. Problem solved.

If anyone really wants to resolve the issue of PvPers vs. PvEers (I frame it like this to point out its foolishness), why don't we start discussing real issues, like how we can balance economies within the slider, and stop pretending that we can't get along and both be satisfied? Or, to keep to the OP's topic, why don't we talk about wandering NPCs, not to punish PKs and make the PvP slider a simulation of Trammel, but as something different for a PvPer to occasionally do when they're bored?

Also, why is it that when anybody says, "guys can't we find some common ground to address these issues from?" they are labeled as a PvEer? I know there are PvPers who are mature enough to take an interest in mutually beneficial solutions too.

 

Nope. Sorry to contradict you, Mordecai, but I have to confess that I do not actually exist. I am in fact a figment of your twisted imagination.

 

It's. not. An. Issue.... HOPEFULLY.
Why are we still arguing about this when....... Slider(maybe)?

On the issue of roaming guards... If there are roaming rogues/brigands, why not roaming head hunters?
Few and far between, but STILL there.

 

I do enjoy the random encounter in Skyrim when you're wanted and an NPC comes after you for whatever reason. I dispatch them without issue, but in an MMO such as this, an enterprising PC could also lie in wait and capitalize on an opportunity and attack while I'm fending off some NPCs. Or even hire some NPC bounty hunters to come out with them.

But nothing would beat a posse of PCs who are Out For Justice.

 

I've seen the wandering NPC encounter done in a few games, my favorite was the fallout series. Honestly, while FO3 and New Vegas HAD the encounters, the experience in FO2 seemed more interesting, and I think the reason was the variety. When you had a random encounter in FO2, it could lead to anything from summary execution to a battle (of varying difficulty) to treasure or amusement all the way to some epic powerful item.

If the encounters in SotA could be somewhat like that, with NPC merchants who would be interested in selling their wares (or helping you empty your bags) because of your political affiliations, a passing healer who would restore you to full life, maybe sell you a few bandages/potions/spell components on the cheap, a temporary companion who would adventure with you for a little while "while your paths lay together" and then dissapear, that would make all the COMBAT encounters that much more believable, acceptable, even entertaining.

 

The encounters in Fallout 2 could be like that because of the dual scale map; it guaranteed that the player reached the encounter at the "right" time to meet the NPCs and make a meaningful difference. Free roaming adds too much uncertainty.

SotA does have a dual scale map, so something similar might be possible.