Poll: PVP or PVE - Which Are You? [UNOFFICIAL]

The felucca old UO playstyle.

 

Very illuminating. And what about the Felucia old UO playstyle do you think will be lacking in SotA? Be specific, please, because it's hard for the devs to come up with a workable game design if you do not specify in detail what they need to implement. If you don't know clearly, how can they build it?

 

So if you can't gank people it's not real pvp? There are many agame that allow that now...It's not fun for those of us who want to enjoy our immersive gameplay.

 

Where did i say i want to gank players? I just about always fight outnumbered cause i like the challenge.

 

Non-consensual PvP, full loot.

Edit: a combat system that take playerskills and not luck.

 

Well, you haven't really described what you are looking for at all, other than 'Felucia!!!', so if people attribute the wrong thing to you, they are not the ones to blame.

 

Name me a non-concentual PvP game where you are not ganked? Or at level 10 attacked by a level 40? Can they make it so forced PvP is fair? Only if they make it so like levels 1 at a time can be attacked and never a group can gank...That would be a new technology, very complex...and I doubt they could do it.

 

I may have my Open PvP flag set, but if you attack me, I will respond in a most non-consentual manner.

What about that do you find lacking?

 

So what info do you lack?

Full loot
Non-consensual PvP
Playerskill demanding combat system

 

You said i was a ganker and what made you draw that conclusion?

Just cause i play in a harsh enviroment i dont need to be a ganker.

Stop drawing conclusions based on nothing and dont degragate me without knowing anything about me.

 

So basically what you're saying is, even if you have the option to kill every person you see and take all their stuff, your playstyle won't be available because not everyone who plays the game will be forced to do the same thing no matter their personal preferences?

 

Who says there will not be full loot? That has not been announced to my knowledge.

Who says there will not be noncombatants flagged for Open PvP? They exited on UO Siege Perilous, and there are those who have posted in the forums that they intend to flag for the additional excitement they remember from pre-split UO.

Who says the combat system requires no player skill? We don't know enough about it to make that determination.

You are voicing your fears, not your knowledge.

 

I'n lost. "Non consentual PvP" and "ganker" mean the same thing.

 

Games that have non-concentual PvP are gank games. Sorry if it sounded like I was attacking you, that way it was not my intention. I'm just passionate about not being forced into a situation that will cause 'grief' or an 'unfair' condition. I can hold my own in PvP given a fair setting, but not in a condition where I am outnumbered or outleveled.

Kind of like taking on a boss mob alone....pretty daunting...unfair even hehe...Wow this topic does get heated.

 

Well I think we will be surprised by what PVP will be in this. The problem sometimes is that we compare PVP or PVE to something we have seen in the past. This game steps beyond all of the outside of our walls of the known experiences. Richard says PVP with a purpose and the example below quotes him to how much fun a PVP feature could be. Normally I don't go in for PVP but if it suddenly was fun in some way who know. So read below on RG's take on the PVP aspect he wants to add to the game. It is genius.

'
You know, UO was completely open PvP. The great joy was that…it was completely open PvP! You could go attack anybody you wanted. The great tragedy was that…it was completely open PvP, which meant that — generally speaking — people preyed on the newbies, which actually worked against the success of the game in many ways. But, you know, it was lost of fun if you were the guy perpetrating it.
So, in a lot of ways, few people have dared to do that again, and I think with good reason. On the other hand, the way people have tended to get around it is to make PvP fully consensual, or they put it in a…it only happens in certain raid conditions, or only happens on certain maps that you opt into. And the problem with that is, if you try to make it completely opt-in, only a handful of people opt in, and frankly it’s not very much fun to only PvP the people who have also only signed up to PvP. And it also leaves something a little lacking. So neither of those extremes really seem quite right yet.
And so our plan is to create a game where, nominally, you as a potential prey are safe from PvP; you’re not someone anybody can just walk up to and gank. However, there are story segments of the game, times and places in the game where you’ll be encouraged to do activities which will open you to be the target of PvP. And so…imagine, for example…I’ll give a hypothetical scenario. A hypothetical scenario would be that you’re really trying to earn a bunch of money in this game, and one of the ways it will be very profitable to make money in the game is to run a piece of what I would broadly describe as contraband across the country. Well, it might pay really well, but you also are explained to, well in advance, that by the way, this is contraband, and as soon as you pick up the contraband and start running across the world with it, you’ll be flagged as someone who is operating outside the law, is running this contraband, and in fact it will invoke other players — known to you or otherwise — they will be told “by the way, this player’s running contraband from the east coast to the west coast; look out…there’s a bounty if you manage to catch him.” And so now we’ve put you into the ‘fox and rabbit’ scenario, that now feels like fun PvP (I would hope), because you’re engaging in it in the proper spirit, which is that it’s now a ‘cops and robbers’ portion of the game, with real people instead of just NPCs.'

 

Full loot is not decided yet to the best of my knowledge. You might get it, or you might not. RG was at the start opposed to it because he wanted a system where the most you cared and trained with a specific piece of gear, the better you performed with that specific piece of gear, and player looting would remove a large part of what he wants to accomplish there; given the existence of players that want that he was looking at the possibilities, though even if it's implemented, I would bet on it being optional.

Non-consensual PvP, on a larger scale, won't exist in the sense that everyone can just opt out of PvP before leaving a safe place and be completely safe from PvP until he changes that back. On the other hand, it will exist in a more local scale in the sense that, as soon as you leave a safe place with PvP enabled, you can't opt out of it without first finding your way back to a safe place (or, at least, this seems to be the current plan).
Also, the current idea is that, if you are "flagged" for PvP, you will only see and meet other players similarly "flagged".
In other words, you can attack anyone you see, and that player has to first manually get to a safe place before he can use his PvP "slider" to escape you.
If this amount of non-consent is not enough for you, then your main chance of getting what you want would likely be to convince Portalarium to split the servers into a conventional one and a "siege perilous" one.

Playerskill demanding combat system is exactly what the devs want. But not playerskill in the sense of being able to execute a fixed DPS rotation, perhaps with minor variations, flawlessly; the kind of player skill they want to reward is the ability to evaluate everything happening, including the semi-random set of skills the player has to work with, and react accordingly. In other words, the devs want to reward the capacity to think on a tactical level as much as good hand-eye coordination.

 

I played Lineage2 for about 6 years. It had both consentual and non-consentual PvP.

In consentual PvP (clan wars and castle sieges), you could unload on anyone any time. You could have fair fights and ambushes. There were no flagging / bad karma rules because you were already opted in.

In non consentual PvP, you could PK anyone. You clan mates. You party members. Their pets. You'd go red and get bad karma. This was obviously a huge pain because if you wanted to kill someone (say a friend / alt of a known enemy) you were stuck with karma rules. Otherwise they'd just spy and wait until they had the tactical / numerical advantage and take you out.

We clan warred everyone we possibly could. Because the non consentual rules didn't favor open combat. It was only ganking. If you surprised someone, it didn't help unless you were willing to go red.

There are only a few things in a game that make me wish I could kill anyone, any time. And those really are around kill stealing, node stealing, loot distribution, etc. While I'd prefer that they went the way of gw2, I know I can drop to SPO and get my PvE farming done in peace if it really bothers me.

 

Full loot will most likely not be in the game.

And since we just have 1 server non-consensual PvP wont be in the game.

It will not be UO felucca, thats right.

My old playstyle wont most likely be availabe.

Read my replies and you see i answered this 20 replies ago.

What is so hard to understand?

 

It come from a private chat here. He said he heard it from a developer. So if that is accurate then there wont be full loot.

Non-consensual PvP will not be in the game, comes from developers themself.

I say the combat system wont require much playerskill. I know enough to draw that conclusion.

 

Hear! Hear! My thoughts exactly. Is it still "soplipsism" if I wholeheartedly agree with Guerrilla? And aren't we all being assumptious in this subject? These are opinions we are talking about.
I would never go to the extreme and call you a solipsistic and that my opinions are considered "logical fallacy" over anyone else's.