PVP IDEA I THOUGHT OF

This is a idea I actually just thought of, let me know what you think. Let's say they make this game OPEN world only/full loot. In this game you can be a DEFENDER and one of the perk's of a defender is instantly porting to defend a person. Basically, if one person attack's you a defender could instantly port to your defense and you are left with the option of fighting along side the defender's or porting out. This is the perfect idea because it would allow a pve person the full opportunity to risk it all and fight *get the ultimate revenge* if they wanted to and in doing so would cause odd's against the attacker's. Also, as a perk, if the person decide's to stay in and fight along side the defender's they recieve ALL the loot of the attackee's. Risk vs reward. Basically if two attacker's showed up, two defender's come in, if you choose to fight it's 3v2 if you leave it's 2v2. See what I'm saying?​

 

This would bring the pve and pvp community together instead of trying to seperate them which I think is a bad idea.

 

not going to happen, really don't get why people cant get through there head that there is as much chance of this game being an FPS as there is of there being non-consentual PvP

 

This is NOT non-consentual pvp. In non-consentual pvp you don't have ANY choice other then fight. This give's you a choice to fight or not to fight. How the hell do you get non-consentual pvp out of what I just typed. My mind is blown.

 

I'll bite. I agree that splitting the playerbase is bad in some ways, but you can't put justice in the hands of players. A player vigilante system (even with auto-porting) would be too lax a justice system to compel the PvE group. When it comes to solving the world's PvP issues, the key to success is being able to compel all major groups of players (whether or not this is possible has yet to be seen).

 

NirAntae: It's the defender's choice to play that way, noone is forced to play as a Defender. Casual pvper's outnumber hardcore pvper's. I created a system of my own like this on Ultima, it's what gave me the idea. Read my post on Glass half full it describe's it in full detail what I did on chesapeke.

Mordecai: It would work because the pve player alway's has a escape route. The defender's porting in do not. Not sure how it's to lax.

 

Yeah, your proposed 'choice' is to stop what you were doing and leave where you were because some jerk wants to play their way with no respect for how you want to play. Great solution. -- It went over my head NirAntae. Yea, I figured this would be said not sure how I misread it but with this system if it was set in place would allow anyone attacking anyone to really give it alot of thought because 1: The odd's COULD be against them 2: They could lose their armor/weapon's and it give's people the option to not participate if they want to which is the main complaint I hear from everyone. The biggest reason I like this idea more, the pvper's will meet more pve people and pve people will meet more pve people. Seperating them, will be a mistake.

 

This seems... odd.

 

I'll bite, and assume you are earnest.

What in blazes makes you think that having to escape from whatever you were doing at the time because some random other player decided to interrupt you would even be considered vaguely acceptable to someone who does not want to engage in PvP? You'd just be changing the kind of grief.

 

Assuming there are always enough defenders online to combat the world's PK population (which is a poor assumption to make in itself), who is to say that the defender(s) will even win? When you have thousands of battles being created through an auto-tele system, you have to expect that roughly half of the time (if not more), the PK will win (as you noted, PKs tend to be the best PvPers). Even if somehow the defenders were victorious 75% of the time, that still leaves a 1/4 chance that a PvEer will have to PvP (or die) without consent. My point is that the PvE players wouldn't always have an escape route. Do you agree that the PKs will sometimes defeat the defenders and the defendee?

 

If anyone can be attacked which is what your system says, then its non consentual PvP no matter how you try to package it to hide that fact. Once again, get over it, its not happerning

 

Lonestranger: It wouldn't seem odd if you actually went and read what I posted. Coren: Well, it's a idea and apperently you can't please everyone. I'm not sure how being "bothered" is so bad and I thought, maybe just maybe a PVE person getting the option of turning the odd's against the PK/Attacker's would make them druel. I guess not.

 

Sounds like an interesting idea - out-of-the-box thinking, I like!

Though, I'm curious. As a PvP player, what is there to stop my friend from enlisting as a Defender and then teleporting to the 'victim' when I attack, only to just stand there and let me kill him....or even better, join in and help me? Is there something in place to prevent this?

I don't mind a PvP topic such as this where someone is offering up a possible solution to a game design challenge.

 

Early Ultima Online was non consensual pvp. To say this sytem is non consensual when you have the option to not even fight, is not accurate.

 

I was referring to the person being defended, not the defenders.

 

@Bubblewrath, Once again, I have no problem with the existance of PvP with full loot RIGHT up until you say the word "only". Suddenly you aren't asking me if I want YOU to be able to PvP however you want, you are asking me how I feel about you doing it in my bedroom. Once again, my response is instantly "F that". I am seriously not interested in that option. *IF* I had the option of occasionally dipping my toes in it, I probably would, every so often. If instead, I HAD to play that way in order to play at all, I would never bother. I'd ask Portalarium for my money back and go looking for a game that delivered something I was actually interested in.

 

Dracowyr: Though, I'm curious. As a PvP player, what is there to stop my friend from enlisting as a Defender and then teleporting to the 'victim' when I attack, only to just stand there and let me kill him....or even better, join in and help me? Is there something in place to prevent this? --- As a defender you would be playing as a protector of the innocent, if you stray from that path you are removed. I'm sure I could think of something else to prevent this, Id have to think for awhile however. It would be something that would occur now and then but not very often because it would be hard to predict and time correctly.

 

NirAnte: I realized that and replied before your post.

 

What if the defenders lose a fight? Does the defendee just have to get PKed and looted?

 

MalakBrightpalm: Suddenly you aren't asking me if I want YOU to be able to PvP however you want, you are asking me how I feel about you doing it in my bedroom. -- Malak everything is being done in your bedroom/house because that is where your computer will reside.