a strange idea

Discussion in 'PvP Gameplay' started by Roper Docholiday, Dec 27, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Roper Docholiday

    Roper Docholiday Avatar

    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    tennessee
    this probably couldnt be coded but it truly sounded intersting to me. (was a coloboration of several people together. i cant take full credit for this idea)


    I have always foudn the concept of risk vs reward in pvp zones to be a farce. everyone can remember fel areas totally safe for the big red guild and total risk for any other player. so the concept of risk vs reward is false all u had to be was in that guild and u coudl farm all u want with 0 risk.

    the big idea
    if the red and blue system is brought back
    while in pvp areas reds do not get the bonus for (risk vs reward) in this zone blues would.​
    now in non pvp areas reds would get same bonus as a blue would while being in pvp areas.​
    to create the risk all reds would be attackable by any player in non pvp areas however by attacking a red u now follow whatever the current loot consquences are in place for pvp. so yes you might be able to attack that pvp player withought being flagged but it would temporally flag you as pvp enabled. till either player died.​
    yes their is some issues with if thier is multipal blues and reds in an area that would have to be sorted out but again this is just an idea that while i dont think can be coded but i think could create alot of intersting incursions​
     
    Tahru likes this.
  2. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no system of red vs. blue in SOTA because it's completely exploitable.

    There is Open PVP and No PVP. There are PVP zones where if a player enters they are Open PVP while in that area. That's it. No red and blue, just "I agree to pvp" and "I do not agree to pvp".
     
    FrostII, Sir Cabirus and lollie like this.
  3. Roper Docholiday

    Roper Docholiday Avatar

    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    tennessee
    i agree with you on the current situation. however i do belive that it could be made not that i belive it could complete exp0loit free but the preamiters changed so it wasnt the old way where u had a char u just killed over and over again. not saying by flagging pvp you become red but if you could combine both things together you open up huge game opertunities to get pvm/pvers to jump into pvp areas. currently thier is no real reason for pvmers/pvers to actually go to pvp areas.
     
  4. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    In Release 13, you're right. But the stated game design (something you may not be aware of) is to make pvp zones have a higher respawn rate on rare items. So sure, you can get the same stuff in PVE areas, but if you want a greater chance to find rare resources you'll be tempted to go into a pvp zone to find it.

    In addition, there will be control points (like Vertas Pass) that will be the quickest way to get someone on the map. Sometimes these control points may be owned by players, other times NPC's, and this will make people choose. Do I risk going through the open pvp area to safe time and avoid the NPC spawns that are on the long route? Or do I opt out of pvp and risk the long road full of difficult creatures?

    The plan is to give PVE minded people all the incentive they need to try PVP.
     
  5. Roper Docholiday

    Roper Docholiday Avatar

    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    tennessee
    i fully understand the points you have said. i personally dont agree with them. the concept of risk vs reward for pvp areas i found to be a farce its only risk for those who arnt pvpers. now pvpers now can control those zones with zero risk and stack up huge rewards regardless if its gold resources or whatever thier is no risk. that is part of the reason many pvmers or crafters are so adamently against pvpers. my idea is not so much to eliminate the need for people to go to pvp areas but to truly balance the rewards. this idea along with another im not finished hammering out will create more pvp situations than one of ganking the brave resource farmer. with a limited map that brave resouce farmer wont keep going back if he cant get a reward. that became the main problem in uo i dont want to see the same mistakes replayed here. lureing people by resouces or monster gains is a poor solution to get people to pvp areas greating bounties and a reward system for non pvpers to kill pvpers is a greater lure than resource gains. im sorry i truly hate the belife that by going into pvp controled areas can get you more resources cause of the risk. again i point out the only risk is to non pvpers.
     
  6. Sir Seir

    Sir Seir Avatar

    Messages:
    1,057
    Likes Received:
    1,528
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Bailey, CO
    Probability of real success here? Feels very low to me; I'm all for the idea of optional quests that might involve PvP but the whole "incentive" thing feels like double resources in Felucca; like a trap laid to get the sheeple. Those that PvP (and are good or have a posse) have an upper hand for no real good reason. We should see double or special resources in a PvE environment that scales based on difficulty.

    Don't happen to like it and honestly feel it may be growing a bit too forced but there is plenty else for me to do in game...
     
    FrostII and Roper Docholiday like this.
  7. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    This is a terrible idea...I'd probably just log out of the game till the drama was over.
     
  8. Koldar

    Koldar Avatar

    Messages:
    1,956
    Likes Received:
    4,893
    Trophy Points:
    125
    Location:
    Novia
    Moving to PVP forum.
     
  9. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    I can understand not wanting to be forced into a playing style you don't enjoy. But if the developers want to design a game for people that like PVE and PVP then they need to find ways to bring those people together.

    What PVE people should be doing is not thinking "oh my god I hate pvp". Instead they should be thinking "This is just another part of the environment I can overcome". Hire someone to protect you as you travel through these areas. Problem solved.
     
  10. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    Or you would join a caravan with players that would protect you.
     
  11. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    No, I'd just go do something else and let someone else deal with it.
     
  12. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    Wait..."hire" someone? :p Yeah, no.
     
  13. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    You have that option too.
     
  14. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    Ok, then someone else will hire someone and they will get the resources and you'll pay top dollar for it if you want it. You have that option too.
     
  15. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    What needs to happen here is the routes are only between one PVP locale and another PVP locale, so only PVP players have to deal with this.

    Attempting to lure PVE players into a PVP fight they actually don't want is cheap and should never happen.
     
  16. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    No I'll just get it another way, I am patient and resourceful.
     
  17. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    There will be a PVE route around the pvp areas...it will just take longer and be full of dangerous mobs. (at least that is my understanding)
     
  18. Poor game design

    Poor game design Avatar

    Messages:
    18,208
    Likes Received:
    35,493
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Gender:
    Male

    Good, glad to hear it.
     
  19. Roper Docholiday

    Roper Docholiday Avatar

    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    tennessee
    their was a loop hole brought to the attention before that if you really wanted to transport goods across pvp contoled zones that a player may log into single player mode and just have to deal with npc mobs to ovoid pvp players. im not saying i would do that as i have friends in several of the differant pvp guilds that i might just use one of their services. that is the main reason for these discussions. im a firm beliver that without participation from all 3 major gamer types this game could just become another mmo on the market that does well but dosnt dominate the landscape as uo did and wow does now. i try to act as a mediator. my bigest reason for voiceing my concerns releates more to griefing either side of the lines. where uo was dominated by pvp philosphies sota seems to be dominated by pve/pvm phoilosphies. i act twords more of a balance. by no means am i trying to enpower one over the other. im a firm beliver in that if you dont want to pvp you dont have to. which i fully understand that takes alot away from pvp. so to counter this coming up with new ideas that will honestly get the player base to venture into pvp areas needs to be accesed. i do feel that the tradition aspect of great rewards in pvp areas is not enough to lure people into pvp areas. nore do i think the idea of getting 1 item from a pvp kill is good enough either. the problem i see is that to many people have horrible memories of pvp griefing to take a neutral standpoint on this issue.

    the facts that we know basically leave alot of discussion open on how to gather a greater base

    no non conscetual pvp ( i agree with)
    pvp control points (i agree with)
    ways to circimvent these points allready thought of so make previous point kinda obsolete
    risk vs reward pvp areas better drop rate and mob rates ( i disagree with)

    yall can add more points if you like. but the whole purpose of this thread idea and the other one i posted was to try to create ideas that would promote pvmers to venturte into combat zones. cause under the curret way of thinking i belive will not be enough to get most pvmers/crafters to venture thier or at least in the numbers that would satisfy the pvpers need to beat up people.
     
  20. OoOo lollie oOOo

    OoOo lollie oOOo Avatar

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    2,284
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Female
    The thing is a PVE player doesn't actually *want* to venture into PVP situations, unless they actually want to. No point trying to trick them or lure them into PVP, it's a cheap tactic and should never be in a game.

    Let people do what they want, if there doesn't seem to be enough people doing your favourite activity maybe it just isn't what people like doing.
     
    Sir Cabirus likes this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.