Disruption of Events in PvP POT's...

Discussion in 'Housing & Lots' started by Cupid, Jun 25, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Drocis the Devious

    Drocis the Devious Avatar

    Messages:
    18,188
    Likes Received:
    35,440
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    The long term solution is not to have guards one shot killing players, that's lazy.

    But the INTERIM solution, to help balance things now, IS to have them one shot kill people. Players should see guards (now) and say "ok I'm not going to screw around". That fixes a ton of use cases today and gives the devs time to fix all their bugs while we play in an imperfect pvp system.

    Eventually, guards would have much more sophisticated AI and have to be managed by POT owners, and would come at a cost and this would all roll up into other macro pvp systems like factions and conquests etc etc.... but for right now today the best thing we could do is allow PVP POT owners to have NPC Guards that just killed everything in short order.
     
  2. Drocis the Devious

    Drocis the Devious Avatar

    Messages:
    18,188
    Likes Received:
    35,440
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    How many people would it take to unflag before you realized that your version of PVP was hurting you as much as anyone else. You can't PVP with a population of 1. Everytime someone unflags, you lose an opportunity to PVP.
     
    PK U likes this.
  3. blaquerogue

    blaquerogue Avatar

    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    6,668
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Skara Brae
    But you have an option not to PVP! Deal with it!
     
    Minerva and Ravicus Sales like this.
  4. Brass Knuckles

    Brass Knuckles Avatar

    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    7,707
    Trophy Points:
    153
    I love that statement, but again we have diffrent views of what that looks like.
     
  5. Drocis the Devious

    Drocis the Devious Avatar

    Messages:
    18,188
    Likes Received:
    35,440
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    You would rather Rats Nest didn't allow pvp at all, rather than it having NPC guards?

    Really?
     
  6. Ravicus Sales

    Ravicus Sales Avatar

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I think its pretty simple really. The mechanics need work, not the pvp town system. You cannot ban people from pvp'ing in a pvp area. PvP towns are a pvp area regardless of price paid. Its the choice made. I agree that guards could be in the area but they should not be super guards (not one shot wonders). If there are guards they might be purchasable from the add on store and they could bolster a defense of a town ( again with no absolute powers). If you start banning people or locking people out of public pvp areas, regardless of what areas that are opted into pvp then this game is over for pvp, stick a fork in it. You will have consensual pvp at most, and that will be limited as well.
     
    Minerva likes this.
  7. Brass Knuckles

    Brass Knuckles Avatar

    Messages:
    3,958
    Likes Received:
    7,707
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gaurds would be a blast, you can get a couple buddies and kill them etc. But its not a solver of this issue though they add more content to pvp towns.
     
    Ravicus Sales likes this.
  8. Gideon Thrax

    Gideon Thrax Avatar

    Messages:
    2,497
    Likes Received:
    6,771
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Are POTs considered public resources by Portalarium? I've always thought POTs were considered as privately owned add-ons to the game; Portalarium isn't responsible for any accounting of residents. If these are public resources, there's much to be considered.

    I think knowing how the game looks at POT resources is critical to the conversation.
     
    Brickbat likes this.
  9. blaquerogue

    blaquerogue Avatar

    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    6,668
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Skara Brae
    heres something to think on Baron Drocis, this thread is hurting your POT more than helping it. Personally i probably will never go to your town for anything , since if i did YOU would control the way I PVP (i dont pk unless you deserve it) so i am an average PVP'r i would say. By wanting to control PVPrs you are actually keeping them away from ever wanting to visit your town, i dont think many PVPrs want to go to a place where YOU tell them how they can PVP. Again im all for you banning people from your town i dont think it would effect any of us the slightest bit! What i dont understand is you say you want PVP, and then say you dont want it? Pick a side of the fence man! Im quoting you somewhat here "I dont want to ban people from my town" but you want to ban their way of pvping because you dont approve of it! You are in no place to tell anyone else how to play the game, you are neither a designer of the game or Head of this game. You are simply an owner of a town or 2, and there are people on here that have much more invested in the game than you do, and they are not screaming to change it to their liking, they are dealing with it. You probably spent more than me on it im sure, but i didnt join this game so one person outside of the designers/owners can change it to thier liking and to my disliking, so like everyone else who has issues with the game i too am just dealing with whatever comes. If it goes without PVP im sure a lot more than you think would quit, and word of mouth travels faster than anything, for every one person that quits this game they are telling a bunch others how crappy this game set up is, as to the reason they quit. So if you take from one you may lose many.
     
  10. blaquerogue

    blaquerogue Avatar

    Messages:
    3,822
    Likes Received:
    6,668
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Skara Brae
    I would rather be able to PVP how i want and not how you want me too. No need to worry there will be no reason for me to go to your POT, so what i want doesnt really matter.
     
    Ravicus Sales likes this.
  11. Lord Andernut

    Lord Andernut Avatar

    Messages:
    3,340
    Likes Received:
    10,087
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New Britannian Market
    It would be nice if there was a way to prevent someone(s) who have targeted you as a person or a group and decided that you should not have fun, or that the only way they can have fun is by ruining your gaming experience.

    I don't think granting special powers to governors is the answer (though if we ever did, there would need to be a reporting mechanism to report abuse). I think the situation sucks for the OP though. I like that events can be disrupted, but not that there is no way at all to combat the disruption (there's little penalty for death really).

    [Aside - I think a good way to have a pvp-like event, such as violent gustball - would be to have a mechanic where large groups or guilds or parties can go to war against eachother, but not to the entire game.]

    Probably a pvp town is going to always be susceptible to disruption of events, and I think that is part of the allure of holding events in a pvp scene, and as well one of the drawbacks.

    I don't really like banning in non-pvp towns either, because that feels exploitable. If I offend Violation by outbidding him on that shiny vintage record player and he decides to ban me from his town, and all the auctions are in his town, I now can only bid on them if I am able to bid by proxy with another account and can hide my identity somehow. If all the best events are in Paxlair and I offend Winfield by catching a bigger fish, and he decides to ban me, I have no recourse.

    I don't like banning as a solution really, but it does suck that you cannot really prevent someone(s) from "wrecking" your event. I guess you can hold it in a basement of a non-pvp town and control who enters it.

    If I want to disrupt a pvp tournament all I really need to do is charge in and attack one of the combatants, and if I die.... there's no penalty to me. If I get 10 or 20 other people to do the same thing, it sucks that we can get away with it - and that it doesn't matter how weak we are, we can just keep resurrecting at an ankh all day long.

    At what point is it "just something you have to deal with in an online community" vs. harassment where someone is trying to systematically ruin your gaming experience by targeting you with their buddies until you quit? And should there be a penalty for either case? Should there be GM's in-game that can respond to it?

    I've never played a game where this happened. The games I played with pvp in them didn't mix much RP into it because it was pretty much expected that you're dueling this dude and someone is probably going to walk around the corner and stun-lock you or something. If you wanted a duel you went to an arena and paid to enter and set a wager (1 item, all items, gold, whatever) and that couldn't be disrupted. Everything else was just living on the edge and dangerous :)
     
    Minerva and Peeps like this.
  12. Ravicus Sales

    Ravicus Sales Avatar

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    18
    every advantage must be acted on and used in this game for a pvp'r. It is consensual pvp. If there is a flag for pvp, then there is a reason to kill that individual. Do not flag if you do not expect pvp. Its really simple. To limit the pvp in this game at this point is a death strike to pvp in this game. Do not water down the pvp any further, its already at the consensual mark.
     
    PK U and blaquerogue like this.
  13. Ristra

    Ristra Avatar

    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Location:
    Athens
    Can you elaborate how that would work? A KOS list is in effect a ban list if the guards 1 shot people.
     
  14. Gideon Thrax

    Gideon Thrax Avatar

    Messages:
    2,497
    Likes Received:
    6,771
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    Just keeping it in perspective... I know a lot of you are trying to make this just about PVP... it's not. It's about PVP in POTs and what POT owners can do to make PVP enjoyable in their towns.
     
    Ravicus Sales likes this.
  15. Violation Clauth

    Violation Clauth Avatar

    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    7,594
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    I disagree. As someone who has just watched a verbal harassment occur, a pk hit as a response, and then a raid on the player in his hometown, and a ban so retaliation wasn't possible.... bans have no place in the role play. No place. You want an RPG... you want a PvP town... you get bandits, thieves, and murderer mindsets and all that comes with them. You don't want to put together a guild based on virtue and trust to fight it and you want to tax the thieves and make mandates over the bandits and then use invisible forces to enforce them? That's not rpg... that's pay-to-win.

    Banned from a lot is far from banned from a town. It takes a lot of players working together to get what we have in Vengeance and a lot of testing. A half dozen guilds worked together and worked on all of these edge cases you guys are addressing and gave feedback to the devs. What we were told back was simple and made a lot of sense and I agree with it completely... this was a pre-alpha stance that is subject to change but for now we will allow banning from lots to solve grief issues.

    IMO banning someone from part of a game they purchase should be exclusive to the developers. In non-PvP towns the ban is way less important because spo can access the majority of the game you got removed from... in a PvP town if you get banned you're 100% removed... you can't PvP in single player mode. I personally wish I could block single player access to all PvP towns... it's unfair that people can walk into my town in single player and then log into multiplayer... that's a system I want changed. We mentioned it as an issue at the Shooter event but I haven't heard anything back on it yet.

    Lot bans are more than I wanted to see happen buy I fully support them as someone who has been griefed I know it's needed. Town bans for PvP I do not support. I purchased my town to get PvP player towns... if banning goes in you can kiss PvP town purpose goodbye.

    I saw people promise keys to tenants for months before the developers noticed the intent of that and clarified it so people didn't get scammed. To date the developers have discussed these exact topics with people in baron+ round tables and at duke+ gatherings and the concensus after everything is weighed has always been that bans have no place in a forced PvP town... your force them to go PvP on entry ... you get to deal with the results.

    Who knows. Maybe I'll have Vengeance reset so it's not PvP and use it as an example of how successful a non PvP town can be at having PvP events... probably not though. I really enjoy the old UO lifestyle of living in a PvP town :)
     
    PK U, Minerva and blaquerogue like this.
  16. Violation Clauth

    Violation Clauth Avatar

    Messages:
    3,247
    Likes Received:
    7,594
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Gender:
    Male
    The way that you want guards? Yes. I would rather you're forced to go non-pvp.
     
    Minerva and blaquerogue like this.
  17. Ravicus Sales

    Ravicus Sales Avatar

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Well, to some of us it is about pvp. I do not mean to sound harsh at all, but if you have a pvp tag on, in a pvp town, your going to possibly get pvp'd. I do understand that the mechanics of the game right now are restrictive because of bugs and lack of features, but pvp is by LAW in this game consensual, and you must flag to enable it. If one does not want to pvp then they should not have a pvp town. It is pretty simple. If one wants to add game mechanics to put pvp at a disadvantage in a pvp town then the game will be judged by this. You might as well become a pve game and just get rid of pvp.
     
    blaquerogue likes this.
  18. juko

    juko Avatar

    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    El Paso TX
    I think POT owners should have a permanent kill button for anyone that is disrupting events in there town I think it will eliminate this problem quickly.......
     
    xX_Lacey_Xx likes this.
  19. Ravicus Sales

    Ravicus Sales Avatar

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    18
    they do, its in a pve town. Make the town pve and you can ban people that disrupt events. PvP, not so much. You have to be able to defend your events and actions.
     
    blaquerogue likes this.
  20. Peeps

    Peeps Avatar

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Redwood Isle
    I think @LordBritish and @DarkStarr should come play an 8X8 event in a PvP town and then get just 2 people that are just there to disrupt the event so they can see how damaging a small number of people can be to a much larger group of people when attempting to do PvP events. The event should also be something you can not do in a PvE town, I can easily set this up....
    Once they see the problem first hand I have a feeling they will have much better ideas on how to resolve the issue. Or they just dont care, and in that case I guess I will have to spend another $25.00 to unlock and remove a PvP flag. I do not think that is the best answer though.
    The button for a PvP town says nothing about the fact that it will remove governor options that are available in PvE towns. If it is going to remain like it is now, maybe there should be a better warning?
     
    Vesper Merchant likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.