Flagged for PVP should equal triple experience points.

Flagged for PVP should equal triple experience points.
Flagged for PVP should block players from entering Single Player Online Mode.
Flagged for PVP should have a significant cool down period.

That's my feedback.

PVE Grind should never equal success in PVP. Right now no one PVP's unless they level up to 50 or above so they can "compete". So the message we send new players is "you can't pvp".

Meanwhile, we're rewarding people for standing around for hours killing stuff in single player online mode so they can "dominate" pvp.

We may have had our reasons why this happened during testing, but as we move towards a more competitive system, this has to stop.

If we can't think of a better way to do it. Players flagged for PVP should get a huge advantage "grinding" over players sitting around in the comfort of single player online, or the protection of the oracle.

@DarkStarr
@Chris

 

No, I dont agree with this.

 

Agreed! I'm currently not even trying to PvP because I'm a filthy casual and can't put in the time other people do. I think encouraging lowbies to PvP is a great idea. PvP shouldn't just be some form of end game content, as, in my opinion, it makes the game feel less immersive to just "transition" into PvP instead of being born in it and having fun with it all throughout.

Although, I would also add that there should be additional protection for lowbie PvPers from being griefed by massively higher skilled people. One idea off the top of my head that might work would be to bring back the idea of reds/greys/blues and make a ratio that would determine if someone is "massively higher in skill" (Skill Points of Murderer/Skill Points of Victim > 2 or something). If a lowbie is a red (murderer) and a highly skilled person kills them, then the oracle offers no protection from anyone killing them. If a lowbie is grey (the player hasn't murdered recently but still has in recent history or is a thief) and a highly skilled person kills them, the oracle will make your ransom not exceed your current max gold in your inventory (so that you won't be horrifically set back) and you turn blue. If a lowbie is a blue ("innocent" in recent history) and a highly skilled person kills them, the oracle will give the murderer a stackable debuff (i.e. the more the murderer kills lowbies, the worse the buff gets), give them a hit to virtue, and will only be able to take/ransom equipment (not body parts - shaming lowbies would only discourage them) with the max gold value not to exceed that which is in the victim's inventory.

This might be too much, but I like the premise.

 

Why, so you could flag PvP and enter single player??

Sorry one of the worst ideas EVER.

Again the reward for PvP is playing against a thinking player not an AI if you don't agree too bad.

There are plenty of game you can play where just killing others is the game, they are out there SotA is not one of them and will never be.

 

Ahem...

*looks around*

*points towards himself with a look of surprise*

*carefully sits down expecting a trap of some grandmaster tinker's sort*

*nothing happens*

Hey you guys know that in early releases I have come to be known as "the chair" ?

*SHUT UP AHU*

Oh okay maybe another time then...

 

It would only be exploited by some PVP'ers sat in their Private Arena's killing each other for triple XP, or using one of their extra accounts to kill and get extra xp.

 

1.

Either I don't understand this point you're making or you didn't read the initial post:

2.

Yes, that's the point of encouraging lowbies to flag for PvP - it makes you think about the players around you and react to them (e.g. "There are two guys in a group, they're grey, and they are clearing this area. What should I do? Should I avoid them, call in for help, attack them while they're low, or something else?").

3.

I don't believe this has been promised either way. I also don't see how the original post had anything to do with only killing players. The original post was about flagging PvP while participating in PvE. The very idea of it was based on the idea that players were doing PvE.

 

Maybe they could just add in diminishing results for grinding that way? But, overall, I don't think this post was about grinding experience/skills through PvP. You do make a good point though.

 

TRUE

 

Your right all I could read was the heading, don't care to read any further, the idea is simply one of the worst, there is nothing anyone can say to validate why PvP should get higher exp., just because they are flagged for it. I don't even know who posted it as they are ignored.

And sadly PvP will never ever be the point of this game. What is truly sad is that some of you out there hold onto hope that it will. There may be places you can go and play with yourselves, but they will be very small and very few will go there and the players that just not to PvP for the sake of killing other players will complain over and over that they have no one to kill. And I hope the DEVs stick to it and keep refusing to try and lure the sheep to the wolves. They say they wont do it, after release we will see how many players out there continue to whine for it. As it stands now only about 10% want anything like this after launch it should shrink even more as the majority of players who are just hopping in to get hats will actually be on more.

 

I'm surprised you'd have any problems with other players with such an accommodating attitude.

PvP is a real thing and an important thing (e.g. choke points). Of course PvP won't be the "point" of this game though. This game *has* no point except player freedom and a winning story line (which goes along with player freedom - you can skip the story for the most part if you'd like).

I don't think many people want the game to be a fantasy/steam punk Counterstrike. I think you're just a little bent out of shape and I'm beginning to sense that PvPers kicked your dog. Your passive aggression is really killing the hope for having a discussion. Maybe instead of attacking PvPers, you could give a detailed argument about why you feel the suggested idea is bad?

 

Reward successful PvP for PvPing and reward successful PvE for PvEing. Too exploitable to give exp for open PvP but battle ground PvP would be fine.

 

Ok here it is since you asked for it - the reason why you do not have to read past the heading . . .

It wants to give people who flag PvP more Exp , anything after that is trying to validate that reasoning - there is NONE, there is no reason to give a player who flags PvP more exp all. It is being brought up to appease the 4 - 10 people on these forums that continue to try and get more and more viable targets out there in the game so they can go kill them. They have no intention of doing anything in the game but kill other players, and they want the game to support that play style, by giving them resources, and exp so they can continue to grow in the game by just killing other players. They have no intention of gathering resources, exploring dungeons, etc. All they want to do is go into a scene and find someone to kill.

And as stated there are not many who want this but they are very vocal on the forums, and persist to give ideas, and examples as to how to draw the sheep to the wolves, which is exactly what this is. There is nothing that can be said to make it appear any different.

As stated the reward for PvP is fighting another intelligent payer . . . . .

 

Well, once PvP is added to the game maybe it will be clearer.

Right now we don't have PvP. We have a glorified version of dueling.

 

No. It shouldn't.
I don't mind if pvp areas award slightly more exp but for sure not three times. Not even double. 1.2 seems ok. Maybe even less.

 

Every area is a PvP area if you're flagged!

The point of this is to make it so that lowbies, who would never survive in the shardfalls, have a reason to PvP.

Agreed. A 20% experience gain is pretty huge. 10% - 15% sounds reasonable though.

 

Are we forgetting that XP is not that useful until it's turned into skill points? I fail to see how this provides any benefit, unless Port totally botches the XP faucet for questing.

 

I will only comment on the first of the three suggestions, which indirectly affects all players:

The explanation you present:

I don't understand how tripling a PVPer's experience would solve the problem that you describe. It would speed up the individual PVPer's advancement to a higher level. But a brand new player would be faced with an even greater number of PVPers who are already at an immensely high level, and the bar to be able to compete would be raised. PVPers who currently grind to "dominate" PVP won't stop grinding. They will grind even more once experience is tripled. The new level for PVPers to compete at will no longer be 50, but 100. (I'm using the term "level" simply as an easy way to explain the principle.)

I don't believe that making PVP more attractive in this way will convert non-PVPers to PVP. Instead, it would start another PVP/PVE war. Non PVPers would be very resentful of the fact that PVPers, being able to advance their skills more quickly, would be able to visit high level areas and complete quests still closed to PVEers.

 

I have to agree with Weins, I don't see any reason to reward pvp flagged people with more XP. I think they should have to grind the long levels just like everyone else. They already have the opportunity to loot expensive critted crafting weapons/armor off victims, that's reward enough. There are also the shardfalls where risk vs reward already rewards pvpers a second time with additional resource nodes.

The lack of pvp prior to level 50 has nothing to do with how we accrue experience, it has more to do with a lack of level targeted or bracketed pvp opportunities.

And a PvP flag should never mean a player only focused on instant gratification leveling should be able to come kill Dragons in a third less time than a PvE minded person who put in the work and got the levels without an automatic advantage.

There is a possibility pvp flagged person will never see another pvp flagged person in leveling areas, and if they do they can just leave and avoid the pvp, that's no risk and all reward.

I vote no.