Open PvP with full loot everywhere in online mode?

Would be really interesting to get some information on how the PvP system will work and all different (if any) PvP game modes.

 

Actually I thought WoW PvP was more of a gank-fest than old school UO PvP. I could be wrong. Although the server wars were awesome when the server was set to go down. That was a gankfest.

However in UO I had some really good times going out solo (just me and my chaos shield). Of course I would end up fighting a few guys at once and I would usually also find another couple of chaos guys to help fight the order guys. Very rarely was it impossible odds though... at least before factions started.

 

Yes, WoW were more of a gank-feast.

 

Yep. If the only PvP option includes open PvP in most of the world with player looting I would expect most players that are interested in starting to play PvP to give up very quickly, with only a relatively small number persevering and staying in the PvP game. Depending on how harsh the PvP environment is and how many new PvPers give up early, it might be possible for world PvP to die up from lack of interested players.

On the other hand, as long as I can opt out of PvP without negative consequences, the inner workings of PvP aren't among my priorities. I mean, if there is a PvP mode that avoids the mechanics I dislike I'm likely to play that, but PvP never figured into why I pledged for the game (apart from the promise that PvP will be consensual). Besides, I doubt the people at Portalarium would let a part of the game that is important for a good number of players just die down, so while I'm not sure the game's PvP will be something I will care to play, I'm not really concerned about PvP as a whole failing.

 

I don't feel that the "Red"should be allowed , a "cook off timer", no cool-off.
e.g.] The Red wanting to be "Blue" again needs to be self-addressed , By the PvP Aggressor.

Red & Blure status can (all) be mitagated by the Game Virturs. This can All be talked about much better, once we know more of it's Effect on any /all Players.
Right now the Virture Effect is largley a Black hole subjest.

I won't enter into any Black-Hole discussions. I'll wait on more input from all the Creators of SotA.

 

It's not a matter of the dev's splitting the PvP playerbase - the base is already split. With Selective Multiplayer, the devs are allowing everyone to find their own individual comfort level, and are catering to many diverse player styles.

 

I hope that Lord British, with all due respect, wont forget that pvp was a huge and vital part of UO!!





I am the LAW

 

I have resisted pledging over this 1 reason. Until definitive descriptions of PVP (and how to avoid it) are given, I just don't feel informed enough. I know the devs have backed off some of the earlier hard core pvp goals, but only through hints, nothing explained.

Exactly the reason I dislike open PVP. (Yes I know it's a movie quote )

 

Kind of the same reason for me as well to pledge, I understand it'll take some time but i want it clearly defined. Total open PVP? How the justice system will work? How the slider or flags will work? Then it will be donation/support time!

 

It's why I really hope that the definition comes before the time limit to upgrade pledges at kickstarter rates ends. Right now I'm at the largest pledge I can justify without knowing if I will be playing online, but if I'm able to avoid PvP and still do all the PvE content online unhindered, I'm likely to upgrade my pledge. But only if I get to upgrade to the KS packages, I have no interest in paying for the new, post-KS ones, which is why I actually need that info in the next few months at most.

 

Letting us know when pledge prices will change or end would be good to know to.

 

I respect that.

I have same issue but opposite to you.

My thought are, will i be able to have open PvP, full loot and non-consensual PvP in my game? Will the game slider go all the way to such hardcore gaming or will my playstyle be abandoned by developers?

 

I do hope they are able to pull a rabbit out of the paradox and make a game that satisfies both the hardcore PVPers and those like me that don't want pvp to get in the way of pve.

 

Unless there was any further development, the cut out date is a year after the Kickstart ended. In other words, we have at least until early April.

I'm not overly concerned yet, but the cutout date is approaching.

 

There are several reasons why I believe all of a persons carried belongings should be subject to theft/decay/loot.

1. Consequences - It provides the consequences to adventuring. Adventures are not meant to be a safe haven, and should surly have consequences, otherwise what is the point? Risk vs reward... The Orc that just bested me deserves my items. Ofcourse I should be able to invest in some new gear and try to redeem myself and my belongings. That's if someone has not already killed the Orc and now has my belongings. I can then ask for them back, failing that I may choose to attack said player because I believe I have been served a disjustice, but I run the risk of other players now killing me first as I was the agressor. Or I can just suck up my biterness and move on to the next Orc.

2. Economy - I believe it's vitally important that every item in the game adds something to the economy, otherwise we end up just melting down perfectly good gear just because there is no desire to buy/sell/use these items. If you can't lose your best items then what need is there for normal items? It becomes a grind to get the one best set of weapons, everything else is almost useless.

3. Balance - If items are protected it removes risk vs reward for using these items, there is only reward. For example, if I choose to take go out in my best armour and equip my most powerful sword, the reward is I can take on more monsters and chop them down quicker, thus making money quicker. If I can't lose these items there is no risk to my increased reward and any inferior items become irrelvent and meaningless to me. I become the best warrior because of my items, not because of my play style and weighing up risks vs rewards. If I can lose my items I will take less risks and thus reap less rewards. This creates balance.

I believe someone should be able to don the most powerful axe in the game and look like a legend for doing so. Are they a legend because they have found/made/stolen/purcahsed the axe? No. Are they a legend because everyone cowers before their axe? No. Are they a legend because they are taking a massive risk for donning the axe in public with such great risks? Yes.

 

With selective multiplayer and only one server this should be possible with people who are flagged for PvP. If there are 300,000 players and only 10% of them are PvPers that leaves 30,000 PvPers to encounter. That's a lot. No need to force others who don't want to play that type of a game into PvP. YOu don't need to even see those players becuase you have 30,000 other players to see.

That said they should make the PvP mode an open world PvP experience with full loot.

 

Can we change the name of this thread to "beating a dead horse"?

 

"beating a dead horse with a lootable stick whilst running the risk of being PKed"

 

How about "Use of Destroy Undead Spells on Common Mount Animals"?

 

We have some new members to the community, and based on some of their comments, they don't have a clear understanding of Selective Multiplayer, or PvP as it relates to SotA. I would suggest that people who know all they need to know on the subject, at least until we get more definitive information from the devs, refrain from brushing new people off. If you aren't interested in the topic, stop watching the thread and go elsewhere. In the meantime, those who still have questions or seek clarification can still get up to speed.

There are over 70,000 messages logged on the board. Telling new players to 'search' is not particularly helpful either. There is too much to digest, and if another member of the community is willing to offer a 'Reader's Digest' version on a particular topic, I think that is a better way to welcome new members than criticizing them for 'beating a dead horse'. For them, the horse is still very much alive.