PvP - One Hour or More Ban from Zone OnDeath()

I don't think anyone should be penalized for pvping/stealing when the person who was attacked wouldn't take their time to turn pvp mode off, by a Oracle. She is The fundamental properties of the pvp system.

 

Make so Every scene has att least two instances
When you is killed in PvP you gets moved to a differential instances.
This has two advantages

• The winner gets harder opposition as the weaker is moved away
• It makes it harder to Grief someone

 

I would love faction based PvP as well as a forced PvP flag as well as greater benefits for playing in multiplayer mode, hell I'd like those two things and multiplayer mode be the exclusive game mode but that's another post. As far as the current system goes, I don't believe there should be what your referring to as non competitive play when it comes to the PvP tag. If you want non competitive play, dont flag for pvp. If your flagged, there should be penalties for dying and you should be at risk of dying at any time except on over world map or if you've locked yourself in a house.

 

This is also a good idea. I am not a fan of instancing zones so I would prefer a ban from the zone for one hour or a return to bind point but this would be better than the current system imo.

 

Your right, I could have left the zone, gone to The Oracle and unflagged PvP. Then there is one less player flagged for PvP which is a step in the wrong direction imo. My argument is exactly that. The current system unchanged encourages players not to use it.

I won the fight, yet I get no reward, and the player I killed can continue harassing me. Might as well not flag.

 

So what about an adventure level 115+ player that decides he wants to camp Deep Ravenswood or other lower level zones for 8 hours...under your scenario, he's just locked the majority of PvPers out of the zone because they can't kill him?

 

Yes exactly. Then the PvP'ers have to get friends and guild members to join them and help if they insist on playing in DR. I don't see a problem, I see a fun game mechanic that encourages teamwork. Also, how much fun would it be to be that 115+ player dominating an entire zone, essentially becoming a "boss" that must be defeated. Those high level players need something challenging and fun to do.

With the current system, that 115+ player can still dominate the zone however if you do get friends and guild members together and finally kill him, hes back in less than a minute killing you all again.

 

Take some factors into consideration.

Did the attack happen in an area protected by guards or NPCs?
Did the killer attack first - unprovoked?
Did the killer loot?

Create a bounty based on those actions (and possibly actions not listed like factions or warring guilds)
The victim can now choose to the removed from all scene instances from the attack until the bounty is collected.

 

I have a solution, dont want to PvP? Feel harassed? Play friends only online, and youll have nothing to worry about unless you have your enemies as friends.

 

That's not a solution.

I'm just quoting now because your to lazy to read or to dumb to understand. @Korim Rackham

 

No i understand where your coming from, what im saying is if you play online friends only you wont be harrassed, how is that not a solution? And guess what your free to grind all the exp you want unless your trying to get the flagged bonus in multi but hey somethings got to give.

 

The game uses instancing so you'd be locking players out of 1 instance, not the entire zone. It would just roll them over to another instance I'd guess. I'm not a real fan of rewarding the bully. If it's thieves you have a problem with I have an idea for that - it involves recently stolen items being 'in play' .. and if you kill the thief, it returns 2 'in play' items + 2 standard ransom items. The more you steal from one player the greater the risk could be.

The thief must seek out an NPC Fence (owls nest, blood bay, PvP POT's, etc) to clean the items and this lets the thief process the ransom before the victim of the theft is able to do so. But the thief is only rewarded a percentage of consumable goods, as the Fence deems the entire amount too risky. This is based off of the stolen item/ransom timer. The more time that has expired from the theft/ransom timer, the greater amount of consumable items can be fenced. An example would be - a thief steals 100 black pearl, he finds an NPC Fence and after X amount of time he's able to fence 28 out of 100 black pearl. The remaining 72 black pearl sits in the Oracle interface and can still be processed by the victim of theft.

Weapons and armor would work differently - the thief has a % chance to fence the goods and it starts out very very small based on the timer. The more time that has expired from the ransom timer, the higher the percentage of success would be to steal the item. If the thief is able to fence the weapon, he has the opportunity to sell the item to the npc fence (npc value?) or buy it from the fence at ransom value.

A thief can only try to fence the goods in 60 minute increments. If the theft timer is 2 hours, the thief can try to fence the goods in the first 60 minutes, then at minute 61 he can try to fence them again. If the victim of the theft settles the ransom then none of this matters.

Also, I'd like to take this further and say - if a thief gets away with the stolen goods, it creates a perma flag on the thief. Even if the thief goes to the Oracle to turn on PvP protection (unflagged) - the victim of the theft can still activate this hidden PvP flag on the thief. This hidden flag can only be activated once and if players in the area who have been stolen from also attack the thief, this perma flag is cleared for them. Players who haven't been stolen from just see a normal unflagged player. Just some ideas..

 

Clearly you don't understand as your "solution" involves the player to either unflag PvP or leave Multiplayer mode. That is why its not a solution.

 

Ok we can agree to disagree on that point, to further understand your statement, you want to reduce the risk of being attacked while in PvP? ie you want to flag for pvp but only want unique people to be able t attack you once per hour? Doesnt that defeat the purpose of flagging? Basically y ou want to be flagged with big restriction on who can attack/steal and when and how many times?

 

Move to a different Zone? Turn off PvP+?

If you get rid off every possible annoyance you will also got rid of most of the fun. Live with it... Its hilarious what some people want.

// Armd

 

Your wrong on all accounts. I want no limits on pvp interaction unless you have successfully killed another player. In than case, yes I want that player to be punished by being restricted from THAT zone for one hour unless they pay the ransom or the killer forgives the ransom. This makes PvP death and kills more meaningful.

 

You don't think it would be fun to have control over another players access to a zone for an hour as a result of killing them in PvP? You think its m0re fun to have to kill the same player over and over and over? we have different ideas of fun I suppose.

 

A delay is ok which can be provided by in-game means. I see way too much calls for out-of-game solutions in this game community. Dont put a timer on it, use some in-game mechanics. How fast can someone be back? In UO i usually had been back "into action" within 5 minutes average if a buddy would open a gate to my homebank. If not, i would need to walk to the next healer/ank and then bank first. (without getting killed again on the way ) which would take much longer...

// Armar

 

Oh so your suggestion is even worst than i initially thought. I stand corrected. You want to ban players from your zone that you kill. LOL

 

I do not like instancing and I would propose that the killed player is restricted from that zone for the hour not the instance.

I like your idea on pick pocket though, gives the thief a mission to accomplish once they have stolen items that can solidify ownership of their loot.