Open PvP Justice System

The problem is none of that works. As had been detailed again and again. We've all played these games. It doesn't work.

You either have a faction system which prevents bad behavior or you leave it to humans to make intelligent decisions and enforce it themselves. Any other system just doesn't work. It's giving outlaws guns but not the good guys. We've all seen this movie hundreds of times over the last 10+ years.

 

You're absolutely right, the more controls you put into place to "stop griefing" the easier it is for real griefs to exploit the system. Just look at Toon Town as a perfect case study.

But that doesn't mean you have to have Open PVP for everyone. Instead, what you need is smart and flexible controls that the players can use to obtain justice. One example of this might be a strong working trial by jury system. If designed incorrectly, all systems can be exploited, but if enough thought and support is given towards a system, the players can adjust and enforce justice throughout the game.

 

Some people say we never landed on the moon. It was all fake.

So I offer the idea of using a basic murder system, and leave the justice to the players. I believe it works.

EDIT: There's proof that it works too, because I've seen it and played UO and know you can keep track of murderers and criminals.

Since PvP is optional in SotA all we need is something that tracks if a person is a murderer or a criminal like UO and allows us to know when it is legal to attack somebody. Unlike UO there is no need for extra stat loss for murderers because PvP is optional. Then just let the people police the world.

 

Systems must be in place, it can't be wide open to players for it to work. A "your word vs my word" turns into the loudest word or the most words (biggest guild). Also, when it the punishment enough, too much, or not enough. Who decides this.

 

or you can throw the griefers in an arena, post a bounty (which i love) or just let the good PVP kill em off

 

i would imagine that all griefers, murders and pkers ( if pking is possible) would be eventually filtered out of the game via the ignore feature. I would guess that that would serve as a form of judicial system.

 

Im all about that! I would train that skill!

 

you could always not agree with that group and attack them exacting your own judgement, the big question would be is that a virtuous task or not.

 

revenge since they told a pk hunter guild.

 

You could also hire players in game to guard cities for like an hour or so and get paid in game money to support taxes on lots, Imagine a board, "this week well need somone to cover this hour or two well pay you gold pieces to buy stuff in game". I would imagine that most of these player run cities etc.. would have a guard force.

 

Would that flag you as someone open to virtuous attack? What if someone was flagged through no fault of their own or lack of knowledge of the system. How long are that to be attacked/punished?

Is killing someone enough or too much of a punishment. I mean, if they killed and looted an innocent person. Then someone comes to the aid of the innocent and exacts justice then finds no loot. Is the kill enough or is there some form of restitution for the lost loot?

 

Dead

 

Why would I trust them to do as they ought?

 

Nope. the PK target can be prepared and not die.

 

thats just the breaks if they dont have anything on them.

 

i would say if the pkd knows hes in PVP , hes consented and it just happens, the PVE have all they need when flagging PVE, it sound to me like "i want to go into PVP but i dont want to die!" so i dont understand if you are Pk'd then apparently you flagged pvp, consented. right?

 

i think if they kill off too many people they should be red like in UO and if you are blue (dont have a murder counts against you), and you kill him it shouldnt effect you negatively, since they are a murderer.

 

I'll Decide it for you all, if i kill off a pk he was bad! Ill just take off all the responsibility from everyone's shoulders! So you can relax and enjoy the game.

 

I keep hearing player towns will have thier own guards? so i was thinking they may have a small militia to keep from being attacked, if thier cities can be attacked. But with thier own people (players)

 

Then what's the point of the bounty? All this is doing is P vs P. Why even have a virtue system

This is beyond consent vs non consent, we already know that PvP is consent. It's not about PvP vs PvE. This is not about PvE being catered to. This is contained within the PvP system.

This is about a moral system were not all times is it lawful to attack someone. Player 1 attacks Player 2 and commits a crime Player 2 reports the crime Player 3(or more) takes the bounty for the crime and hunts down Player 1

Player 1 gets to PvP
Player 2 gets killed
Player 3+ gets to PvP

Seems to me that there should be some mechanic to support Player 2, restitution sounds good to me. The dynamic does not work without Player 2.