"Battleground" PvP to me seems like a really, really, bad idea....

Oh yes, do what you want to anyone you want...no repercussions....that is always the most fun way of things. It is somewhat shallow to think of what you can take and attack without any ramifications I would think. Of course, the minute anyone brings up punishment or ramifications the video game excuse gets brought up conveniently, realism only affects the things people want them too.

Regardless, the way pvp is set up here is set...it is by consent and has been from the start, so the argument is moot.

 

I dont get you when I grew up the old players you call hardcore was my dad and some friends elder brothers they all had their lives...
Gmes are just getting casual to pick up a larger group of people and so to make more money. I have yet to experience an actual hard (but not stupid or flawed) game out on the market the only one I can think of is starcraft and after playing for a few weeks the only remaining challenge are the player. Oh and codemasters racing games but those became MUCH easier as well on the hardest difficulty.
On the other hand I only know the games from all those big companies so if you know any low budget games that are good share it with us Id love to try them out. I dont have a problem with older graphics as I still play UO and ultima7 sometimes but the low budget games I ran into had major flaws apart from the cheap graphics.

So while I can see the logic in your whole post it makes no sense to me because its not at all what Ive experienced.

 

Why it might seem shallow to some is because you expect others to adapt to your playing style, while you don't want to do the same. But it really isn't a problem because in SotA both can have it their way.

But if SotA is successful then with selective multiplayer this will not be an issue.
Affinity instancing will make it so that you with your PvP flag will end up in instances with other people with the same flag, so that almost all you meet in the wild will be other PvPrs.
The more you play the more this will become true.
In the other spectrum people who dislike PvP will end up in their instances.
So the only problem I can see is for those who like to prey on the weak.

 

Punishment and the lack of the option to do somthing you can get punished for are 2 diffrent things.

who in this world can live the life they want from their deepest dream? I dont think anyone maybe a few lucky exceptions. Why should gaming be the same isnt it all about living a virtual dream? Thats what I felt when playing Ultima7 UO or a game like Grand Theft Auto. Why I always bring up those 3 titles? Thats where you had the most freedom as a gamer. Sorry but Sota isnt going to be that.

About PvP instances: Open PvP servers I played on ultima wasnt full of pvpers. Many crafters and pvmer were there just to feel the thrill of being in danger. Many diffrent skills were required and people had many diffrent options and ways to not get killed.
Some people would prove great skills in running away and hiding others formed alliances to help fight off a threat, some players devoted themselves to guard other players or potentially hot areas and if you were on your own you kept exploring the world trying to find a more quiet but still lucrative place to hunt or mine.
Open world pvp adds fun to a game FACT if u still dont believe it go try it out

 

It all becomes a balance if there is a noob basher out there he willö be dealt with in time, if its an entire guild then groups will be formed to fight them back.
Youre right about one thing thou if sota is successful it wont matter and the companies will go on with piling crap in the stores. UO will come back but it looks like its gonna take a cpl more years sadly.

 

Open world PvP is an option for anyone that chooses it. I don't see the issue here.

 

OK just to let you know Rune will go against you every time the minute you mention PVP. So this will be a long winded repeated arguement, and Silent Strider right behind along with some others that always, have a view on the game with PVP blinders always on. This will go on and on! I for one, am all for open pvp full loot, but everyone against it will CLAIM non pvp is most desired, but no one ever comes up with numbers to prove it other than pulling some random number out of their grab bag!
Understand well, that there are a lot of other players that want the full loot open pvp i dont have a number but i do have contacts in the game!(and not for hunting sheep lol) which will be another term non-pvp people come up with all the time, and blame us for. Understand that a lot of those people were pk victims, that cant take the loss of stuff they have worked so hard for in a video game, mentally, they just cant handle it! They will also come up with lines like this, "I was the best PVPr back in the day!"
I highly doubt that, for if they were they would be used to losing stuff and be like "Oh well, i shouldn't have had that on me!"
Thats right! Im calling all of you out with your excuses! I would be highly surprised if they actually were great PVPrs when they sound more like victims than anything else to me. Also most of them have made themselves the victim of another! talking smack and so forth with reds/pkrs they have come in contact with!
Personally i have walked through many PK towns, red towns in my years of playing and have not been attacked over and over, I have even had friends that were pkrs, as long as they didn't mess with me or my friends we were good! If they did i would hunt them down, they knew it, sometimes i had to kill off my friends, but we realize these games we play are just that fantasy games!
If it effects your life when something in a video game happens, from a mental evaluation you probably shouldn't be playing video games like that! You make yourselves your own victim!.
In my own opinion games like these started going sour when.......You could buy stuff off the internet to win, whether it be gold weapons or armor, when shards got split up like UO. Tram and Fel, basically they took the openness of the game away when that happened! Of course if you went to Fel you'd be attack right out, its something that barely happens anymore, especially since you live in tram! So when one came over to fel it was a new face a new target for the simple fact that what used to be commonplace became a rarity! Thank the game designers for that, not the attacker.
I find most of the time if you don't attack someone for no reason, they have no reason to attack you! If you do get attacked ive also found that if you stand your ground they tend to let you walk by them, (Learn how to PVP) it can save you in the strangest ways.
To end it here for all you NON-PVPrs you have the right to not like PVP, you also have an option to opt out of PVP, so always keep that in mind!
Understand that there are about the same amount of people in SoTA that like PVP as there are that do not. (let us speak and accept the fact you wont have to participate pvp) and for us PVPrs we need to understand that not everyone likes PVP (let them speak their mind) but please most of all stop with the lame excuses for or against either! If you hate pvp you dont have to remind us in every thread that comes out, i think we know it by this time!
It would seem better to have a PVP thread, with only pvp in it, and, a Non Pvp thread, with non-pvp in it, then we could have sensible conversations! But if you try to start one or the other, i promise you someone will come into your thread, and go against everything you may believe in! (The non pvp people have die hard non pvp people, as much as we the PVP have die hard pvp people) I wish we could have a full loot open world, but it doesnt look like it will ever happen!

 

I will keep fighting the good fight and will push for full loot for Open PvP. I'm an advocate of this game's consensual Open PvP system. If you have the Blessing of the Oracle, you are flagged for Open PvP and can fight any other Blessed Open PvP player anywhere. You have no safe harbor in any town and can be hunted anywhere.

Furthermore, the devs have stated in the PvP Megapost that PvP players that are Blessed may be "able to loot more from each other" vs regular PvP. They were intentionally vague because they want to hear from all of the future Open PvP players as to how much "more" that is.

I'll put my vote in and say "more" = "full"

 

Ill vote the same! ill have to figure out how to get the blessing of the oracle (it doesnt really make sense, but if i get full loot open then it is a blessing!) I would rather just pick from the start how i want to play! If its going to be optional anyhow seems like a waste of time to go get a blessing!

 

Personal opinion is that I think that the loot factor should also be able to be decided by the Scene, in combination with your player options. Where the scene trumps the player options.

This because even if the core game and dev scenes might not cater to hardcore full loot PvP I'd like that to be an option for players through the Property ownership system. (Lots and POTs alike).

Selective PvP (my thoughts on how it should be)
Player selection flags
[No PvP] vs [PvP]
[Ransom loot] vs [Full loot]
Scene/Property selection
[Forced peace] vs [Player selection, ransom only] vs [Forced PvP] vs [Forced Full loot PvP]

In [Forced peace] there is no PvP allowed at all, not even duels etc. [When entering you are warned and can cancel]
In [Player selection, forced ransom] which is the default, it works like the devs' intentions, duels and PvP for players flagged as such, this is most NPC towns etc. No need to be warned since your own selection will be in effect.
In [Forced PvP] everyone is flagged for PvP, and the Player Loot Option would take effect, these are your basic PvP areas in the game, like shardfalls, so consensual Full loot only. [When entering you are warned and can cancel]
In [Forced Full loot PvP] if you enter you have no choice, everyone is Full loot PvP, this option is only available for player properties, and will not normally be in the dev controlled space [When entering you are warned and can cancel]

That way if I want a Colloseum with Full loot PvP free for all, or if Vengance want their whole town to be Full loot PvP, then you can set the property to [Forced Full loot PvP] and all who enters do so of their own free will and knowing the risks.

Me for E3 or so, would also like to see a special dev scene where two challengers can enter (Over level 30 to remove exploits or cheapen the context). Then with no interfearance (but with an audience) can fight to perma-death. The losing character perma-dies, his name ends up on a tombstone next to the scene, the losing player is given back the character slot and has to start over. (Well most likely they have an alt, but still). Account remains, so account property like pledge items are kept.

For immersion and RP it makes perfect sense.
The in world explanation for the safety from PvP is through magic. In SotA that magic seems to be related to the oracle.
So if you want to 'remove' that magic safety net (flag PvP) then it makes total ingame sense to go to the source of that magic and 'lift the safety blessing'.

It also makes perfect sense from an ease-of-use perspective, where noobs can't be ganked before they are warned that they might be.
Such a quest is a pretty obviuos clue.

 

Id rather go adventuring and questing in dungeons and stuff than have to wait and do an oracle quest to become pvp only! What if we all started in pvp, and you had to go to the oracle to get the blessing to be fully non pvp? Not much fun from that perspective! and now your forced to be pvp, just like us that want pvp are forced to be non pvp! Thats not really fun for us either!

 

It's very hard for Portalarium to cater to everyone, but they are trying.

Now given that the current business model for SotA requires a retention rate of new users after launch, (which down the line might spend more $ on the game), and that retention rates was a problem in UO due to people griefing and ganking noobs.
Ergo, the devs who have vivid memories of this will not let that happen again.

But I agree that people who want to should get the possibility to go to the oracle for a quick-fix early in the tutorial so that you can "start out" as PvP if you want.

 

Honestly we should have the right to pick it from the start, especially since we can go back and forth between PVP and PVE (Non PVP) I think there will be enough of the two to satisfy everyone no matter what theyre playing! I dont agree that somone should have partial loot and be able to fully loot another! I think if you are attacked by a partial looter the bar for both should drop to the lowest form of pvp automatically!

 

in ultima online you got punished very hard with murdercounts and stats lost.
it didnt happened to often that noobs got killed or camped non stop infront of the town, they not even had valuable loot on them. most pks i met was in dungeons where people farm and you can loot valuable stuff

a lot of people hate to live in a world without catious and roleplaying (good vs evil) a bandit is also a roleplayer , if i want to collect taxes from a player who farm infront of my house or tell him to go pvp with me now or i murder you would rob the game every aspect of fun.
maybe some people would get scared away but i think the most people get motivated to get stong themself for a payback


"Ergo, the devs who have vivid memories of this will not let that happen again"

hope they speak to ergo or let him decide other stuff about decforations or wahtever if he causing the game to be .... maybe he not understand that only people who dislike stuff write the gm

oh no ultima online developers the game is so horrible i cant play it anymore i got ganked i lost my 2 blackpearls and 10 bandages my day is ruined
a few of the murdered people would write something like that.........
but not 1 person would write the gm thievery is so awesome i had so much fun or loot is so cool i can have a crafter and profit out of him without even doing pvp.
or tell the gms about a cool pvp adventure which resulted is some good loot. or a story about looting a house

only people who dislike write the gms so they think it is a bad mechanic because some carebears write the gms

 

Which is why modern games uses metrics as a compliment to user feedback.
What people say officially and what they actually do usually differs a lot. And metrics catches those who never provide feedback at all.

Again, it makes no business sense to lose new player retention just to cater to noob griefers. Why you'd try to argue that point by saying it doesn't/didn't happen 'that' much is just strange to me. That it happens at all affects the bottom line of the company.

 

They changed UO to adjust for all those players that were quitting. The players that thought the changes were bad mechanics would be writing the GMs. (using your logic)

I will stick with RG and Starr's insight on this topic.

 

This is some juicy stuff I could really dig into....but why? You obviously still have this misguided vision of what this game is. I really dislike when someone uses name calling to try and get someones opinion ignored, or seen as a lesser version.

I am beginning to understand you are looking for a very simple game that revolves attack/kill/loot....everything else is gravy. Don't let words and story get in the way of that.

BTW, ergo is not a person.

Blaquerogue, it is not your place to tell me what I can and can't say to be honest. Or what I feel and don't feel. I don't hate PVP, I just dislike the black and white postings from posters who think it has to be all this way or else. I also dislike people who play the victim cards, like thier "side" is being picked on. There isn't sides, there is one game that we all get to play and all of our opinions matter even if you don't like them.

 

I agree with you. If it wasn't for the great backstory behind it...it would be almost like they threw a shooter into the middle of this RPG.

What I'm hoping, is that beyond the freestyle fighting arena of the Shardfalls is a more meaningful game of pvp where people attempt to move resources back to their "safe" areas and these "supply lines" and "trade routes" can be attacked because anyone moving those resources must stay open to pvp for some time after they've left. This would be a lot of fun and be a much better fit between the roleplaying world and the pvp world.

 

Exactly this. Anyone who thinks that a large company, worried about their bottom line, is going to make expensive, sweeping changes to their game like the Trammel split merely based on a few complaints is going through life with blinders on. The bean counters upstairs would never let it happen.



I've pretty much stopped posting here, but I keep seeing this particular argument come up here, mostly by the same people over & over. People nagging, pushing, and agitating for non-consensual and holding up pre-Trammel UO as the shining example of why they should do it. lol. Even the threads that start out with ok, consensual but give us "open with full loot," inevitably turn into the campaign for the resurrection of pre-Trammel UO with tales of how wonderful it was, all the nostalgia about the "good times" they had totally ruining the game for some (fun fun fun), and how the "crybabies" ruined it.

The plain simple truth, no matter how much some try to deny it, is that UO was an absolute nightmare for some people and they were losing subscriptions at an alarming rate once other online games started coming out that had consensual pvp. And many did make it very clear to the company just why we were leaving, and had been making it clear for two years that it was intolerable. But an even larger number weren't saying anything at all, they were just leaving. In my own case I had finally had enough after a year and a half of it that I quit anyway. I only went back when Trammel opened.

But for the first two years of UO there was no competition, no choices, no way to get away from the <expletive deleted> pks and griefers if you wanted to play online at all. And it wasn't just newbs leaving, or it hurting the retention of newbs. If the company was only losing newbs, but keeping the existing player base, I highly doubt they'd have made such a drastic change. They may have just put in some newb protection.

They were losing enough of their long established player base who now had options for getting away from pks and griefers and migrating in high enough numbers to alarm the bean counters. And big surprise, to the pks, the majority moved to Trammel and left Felucca practically empty. And they still don't understand why. It still hasn't occurred to then that they brought it on themselves.

I remember all the same arguments for and against the consensual pvp on the UO forums back then. That's when the term carebears came into use as a derogatory, look-down-their-noses term for non-pvpers by pks trying to bolster their egos by implying that they were somehow superior to anyone who didn't like the same playstyle they did. All these same arguments are being reenacted now, 15+ years later, complete with all the same old insults and non-logic.

I'm not saying people shouldn't express what they'd like to see in SotA. Logical arguments are one thing but people have a right to disagree with them too. But so many here keep falling back on the old arguments of implying non-pvpers are just "crybabies" who need to "man up," so that some can get their jollies, or constantly pointing out how many people like some other game that has non-consensual with no reference to how many don't like it, or pointing out (as someone did) that "certain people" will always argue against it every time non-consensual comes up without reference to the other "certain people" who will always argue for it every time it comes up, or one of my favorites where the guy said non-pvps are trying to "nerf" SotA as if it already had non-consensual and we're trying to change it lol. It just gets tiresome.

Edit: I forgot to add my usual disclaimer for those who don't know me, that I make a clear distinction between pvpers who happen to enjoy healthy competition with others of like mind and pks/griefers.

 

i never said your opinions didn't matter, even though we are from two different sides of the track i still listen, and not once have i said you dont have a right to say anything, or how you should feel or not, actually quite the opposite, but you always find a way to start arguing with me! I was actually pointing out that people like you will have there opinions and are as hardcore non pvp( or whtever) as we are hardcore pvp. So if you would point out where i said you CANT say what you want please tell me! if you cant i just proved my point that you will argue with certain people whatever they may post! (especially PVP peeps like me) Maybe you just missed me in these forms! awww! I've missed you too!