Disruption of Events in PvP POT's...

For those who may have seen my last post. I deleted because it was off topic. This topic is too important to derail. There are other threads for guild relations.

 

+1 this.

#3 seems to be the meat of this discussion making the other points a bit moot for now except for #4 - discussion is good for both sides of this coin

 

whats bothering me, is the fact that it seems to be at a pvp event.. and by that i mean its an organised event. if getting this person is your sole objective, then enter the tourney, All are welcome, Settle the score Where it matters, not constantly scoring cheap kills... Im a fair player And will defend people who are outnumbered, regardless of guild affiliations etc, So if i am mercilessly beating you into the floor repeatedly ( whoever you are ) Please dont take it personal

 

I do want to make a last post here. Many of you know me, some know of me. I have had to deal with months of issues that I remained silent. I want to craft and dance and have fun parties. I love most in this community and those I don't, it tend to ignor. I stay off the forum for this very reason. I think I shall return to that habit. I do believe that this real topic of how PVP towns function is important. I don't think it should in any way be derailed. I overall like the idea of a closed forum for PVP POT owners is good, I also think that those who have wanted one, but may have set as PVE due to issues should be allowed in.

As a straight up PVE player I hope that PVP grows and flourishes in SotA and we make room for all, the crafter, the knight, the murder and the rest of my family. Okay, I am out of here. Have fun storming the castle boys!!

 

Over 300 POTs already being put in the game and another 30 days of sales remaining... how many are flagged for PVP? If the answer is around 2% then folks need to ask themselves if they're good with the status quo.

 

I think this scene from Game of Thrones sums up my feelings on the subject of "honor" very well. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have tournaments and that we can't strive to have rules of engagement and all that. I think that's great. But we have to allow players to make the choice between what is honorable and what is not, otherwise honor isn't really honorable at all.

The reason my POT is PVP is because I find the lack of PVP to make the game less meaningful. How can people be heroes if they're never risking anything? How can people be good if they're not allowed to be evil by default?

I don't see a problem with players attacking other players when they get a strategic advantage for doing so. That's called being smart. If they're hacking or exploiting game mechanics, report them, I hope they get banned for life. But if they're showing up to your party uninvited, then deal with them. That said, there's currently a severe lack of tools (or design) that makes that "fun" and that needs to change.

 

Our population is so low, it's hard for me to say that 2% flagged would be a bad thing. I'm more interested in how many players that are not flagged are engaging in pvp or going into a pvp area. My guess is that number is very low.

I'm also interested in how many players with less than 400 hit points are participating in pvp.

There's so many barriers to having "fun" in pvp. The largest of which is having a fighting chance when you're just playing the game solo.

 

This is true. There needs to he a balance regardless. If the mechanics aren't fully in place to ensure a fighting chance for those who are on their home turf I wonder if it is potentially worse to address the current symptoms without addressing the root problems. This might result iin sideffects that are worse than the original problem.

If there is a temporary solution that eases the current symptoms that can be done away with once the root problems are resolved that might be better than a total ban (which may actually wreck the PvP in that town since attackers will get bored and leave or never bother with that town again because they are poor sports or cowards relying on a fake protection. The pvp flag in those towns will be more of a symbol rather than a true adventure.

What's worse is if PvPers avoid all POTs because of players misusing a ban mechanism. This might result in quitting and angry people with hundreds of logged hours crying foul in the steam forums about PvP being needed because people paid to owns town and they cried their eyes out etc etc.... You know how it goes they mock and complain about p2w.

So just rushing in and giving these town owners what they are asking for my not be giving them what they want. Patience for a few more months might be the best call at this point. Also letting players respawn inside the castle walls should prevent res kill camping scenarios. Using the log out and exit the scene might be useful too while being patient for a resolution that gives you what you need not what you say you want.

 

I have a town that is slated to be pvp. We as a guild chose not to Flag it pvp at this time due to the lack of ability to control issues we see. That is why i support that there needs to be more controls for town owners that opt for pvp. with that being said if we give them to much control it defeats the purpose of having a pvp town.

I still Personally do not feel that attacks at the evl event should be considered griefing as the event was not attacked it self. Players were attacking a player who continues to insult and create drama was being attacked and not the event itself. Many wont agree to that and that is fine we all wont have the same play styles or thoughts and ideas on what pvp is and what it should be.

The reason i support more abilities for town owners to regulate pvp in there town in that in time when this game expands its active player base there will be the old Big Red UO mentality guilds who will attack the event its self. They will be there cause it will have a collection of players that never flag pvp and there will be a group of easy kills in one spot. To me that is grifing and I for one would stand with any group to defend a event they are putting on. Regardless of that groups popularity in the game.

I personally wish EVL the best of luck holding there event's. I was accused of never apologizing for attacking an individual at there event. Yet I was also told by a member of EVL that it would be ok to attack that person again at there event that it added excitement to the event. I chose not to attack at the event the next time. Chose to stand down in honor of friendships that i have within the EVL community. However with this being said. Many players will not have made the same friendships i have or will lack true honor and grace in the future and will form bands of players with the same mentalities and will willfully and purposefully attack events. Notice i said attack events. Those players enjoyment will be derived by actually stopping the event and creating hateful choas.

I think this thread needs to focus more on that aspect of the topic than minor disruptions of players with a quote blood feud with another player killing them at a event. Those minor disruptions made have brought this to the fore front of the days current give a damn thoughts and idea's.

As a side bar note. we have created town's in full pvp areas where we controlled the entire inside area. by no means will i say it was 100 percent never able to crashed but any person that crashed it only could crash it once. I do think some things currently could be used to help defend events in the future. I spent over an hour at a town meeting showing different applications of current mechanics to help defend a pvp event.

 

there are so many of you that are making this about pvp and not what the post was about in the first place... EVL loves pvp and our events... we are trying to provide as safe as possible envioronment for people to be able to enjoy them as well... all these hits on peoples heads would not even be such a big deal if it was once or twice but we are going on a month of this at the virtue league... seems excessive to me... chaos caverns is pvp for a reason changing to pve town is not an option... we use it for many events in guild and out of guild... people go down there to practice duel or whatever... I had to move the lot to avoid it being jumped into and add castle walls.. this still does not prevent someone from casting chain lighting etc... we also are going to have to have a 2nd lot just for the gauntlet because of the excess space of the castle walls... part of the fun of the virtue league is the accidental hits to the crowd and the collateral damage... the difference is its accidental and not intentional... we expect it and so does the audience... we aren't pvp-phobic in any way... we just want to be able to have an event without excessive drama... when I ban someone from the virtue league there should be absolutely no way for them to set foot or cast into the perimeter of the lot... town govs & stewards should have the ability to at least temporarily ban from any town but I would be happy with lot bans that actually make the lot safe for the greater goal of pvp entertainment...

 

Your statement based on the assumption that by killing off people whom do you not wish him to be in town will solve the problem. It may be the case when there are lesser or equal numbers of the griefers to the town enforcers.

What if there are 40 people pooling resources to buy cheap gears or going naked rampaging into the town disrupting any events that will be hosted at that place, whether is killing or stealing stuff from the event participants/audience. In theory, you could rally people and start killing these guys, but they will come back and keep harassing the events over and over as long as they have resources (i.e., to pay the price of oracle). Best case scenario, you can have the most fun in PVP you have ever had with large number of people. Worst case scenario, where these griefers do not put up a "good" fight, but instead just attempting to drain your time and energy into killing them. Eventually people getting tired of dealing with the griefers and left, which will ruined the original events.

As a town owner, you would be stuck because there isn't much you can do except keep killing those guys and hope they go away, so you can continue with your business.

Well.. unless there is a harsher penalty for repeatedly resurrection.

 

This discussion is useless. If you want PVP towns you need to accept that you cannot ban people out of it. Make a PVE town instead and do all the events you want to host in safety. PVP town means it can be raided by anyone anytime. I'd hope for giving the town a benefit for beeing a PVP town, but risk vs reward is not in this game yet.

 

Does anyone know if PVP towns allow*lot owners* to ban a player from that lot for whatever reason or none at all?

 

yes you can ban anyone from a lot i think the max number is 10 though or somewhere in that range or it used to be

 

Owning a POT, living in a POT, traveling through a POT, avoiding a POT. Doesn't matter how much someone has spent on the game. Without seeing everything the devs have laid out there is no possible way to balance anything.

Open PvP is the only option, currently. PvP still has no purpose. No structure and unmanaged. Once the devs add that purpose things will be different.

A stable base founded in the moral system would allow for people to PvP their way and live with the consequences. Instead of some ban or instakill.

The moral system is signature Lord British. Where is it and when is it coming.

 

I agree this is an important group, esp if you wanna ban them from areas designated thier original play style. The town owner can decide pvp or no pvp, can boot tennants and lay decorations now you want them to have the power to discrimate and possibly grief other players by banning them.

Imop these town owners should declare thier towns pve they have no place in this discussion. That would be like a pvp town owner with the right to ban or grief anyone role players in thier town. Its a dumb argument im sorry your event got ruined but its a pvp town play in your basement next time then you should have the right to ban them from your property..

This isnt to be confused with me supporting him being killed over and over again thats a mechanic issue not a philosphy issue.

 

a person should keep this in mind when opting into a PvP town. If they cannot handle the pvp mentality then they should probably go pve. It does no good for the game to break pvp just because someone opted into it and then cannot handle it and calls for protection because they cannot handle itl

 

Dude PVP consists of being Pkd, somone eventually gets Player Killed! Thats what pk is it means i decided not to have mercy!, the only advice is have some sort of guards during the events!

dont have a PVP town. problem solved!

 

If no growth in this genre is necessary, I guess all I can say is good luck with your six or so PVP towns.

 

Id rather have 6 true pvp towns than 50 pretenders.