PvE with PvP Interaction

He can be killed. Did i state no. That is wrong.
He just can only loose the stuff he finds during the mission. Not all he had with him.

Else PvEs might not do those Guard options i think

 

I personally believe that something like this is the way forward and an answer to computerized ebb and flow of PvP/PvE areas and also provide a unique selling point, or discussion point that RG could point out in any of Portalarium's advertisements. It's no that complicated, yet is at the same "Time"
Anyway, I do hope it stimulates some better or deeper thoughts into this vastly argumentative subject matter

"The Simple Game of Life"






What does everyone think about something like this?
~Time Lord~

 

Ahh ok

 

PK´s protection money

As PK´s had often as income source only "killing Players" , to lead to more options i would like to suggest the possibilty to give them the opportunity to take over NPC Vendor Outposts , or Taverns etc.

They will need to successfully kill for example the Guards around a NPC Vendor Outposts, what may not be that easy, as PVP good players may help against it.

If they succeed not much will change, only that grey Bandid Guards will be around the NPC Vendors, and the PK´s will get a % of all Sales and transfers the NPC Vendor receives.

The only change will be that the PK´s will have NPC Guards trying to reclaim the spots again.
Also PvP good players may try to reclaim these locations, so it will be wise for the PK´s to frequently check the spots.
Also to go even further , maybe enemy PK Guilds may try to regain those NPC Vendor spots.

For the PvE the motivation will be to help kill those grey bandid at the NPC location as this will reduce the price of the goods again to normal or even restore a NPC Healer that will be not available at this Vendor Location anymore.

 

...and make bets about who"ll come up on top while vendors go around selling food & drinks.

 

How many players do you think this game could see? UO had 100,000 to 250,000, Guild Wars 2 had 3,000,000 and World of Warcraft had 10,000,000. The instances will be restricted to 60-max 300 players at a time, the filter won't need to mix the play styles and there won't be enough bandwidth to do it if you wanted to.

Unless you made this battle across 100s of instances of that hex then it wouldn't work cause vendors exist on all instances and I believe you'll have 10s or 100s of instances with players you won't even see. So 1 player earning income from all those instances, wow guys you better go out had get some of those 5,000 house spots cause if you want to make money from this game that is HUGE. I don't need to so I'll let you do it. Go buy up all that you can so they can invest in some next level Japanese servers or something. Solid State drives and 100x core processors esc.

 

That's an interesting comment Talmanes, observant +

What do you think about any ebb and flow movement of PvP/PvE areas? ... Sort of like a "Liquid Felucca"?
~Time Lord~

 

how about this :
let the PvE player do PVP whitout risk ( and olso no reward ).
thy had this in EQ for a brief moment and i loved it .
put somewhere a npc mage who is looking for volunteers to test his new spell .
once you accept the quest your character logs out and you get a new loading screen where you can choose different monsters(NPCs).
you then get the skillset of that monster and you spawn or replace a npc monster in a PVP area where pvp flagd players are .
(you will not be abel to talk or comunicate in any way with player characters)
you will be of cource restrictid in movement to where the monster you are playing dwels .
but you are in full controll of him during combat whith the PvP flagd groep or player that will try to kill you for loot or experience.

pros:
the pvp gets wat he wants a unpredictabel oponent to fight.
the pve players gets to try out fighting another player whitout losing his gear.

and its always a surprice ( PKers have to grind thyr weapon skils on PvE content olso ) wen you are fighting your 20th dark elf mage who sudenlie doesent do the same old routine of just stand there and lob fierebals until you kill it but sundenly tries to kite you ore ducks behind a pillar wen you want to shoot him whith your arrows and stuff .

 

wmidgard, I've always wondered why that don't let people play AI in games. They have this desire to make tons of races and balance them out, but I would play a soft but quick golbin that spawns with base lvl skills (enough to fight like a goblin) and maybe lvl a bit and when it dies it dies. Or a Troll that was tough and strong but slow.

Great Idea.

 

Expanding on that idea
What if you get an extra button at login that simply allows you to play one of the "monsters".
When you click the button, the game assigns you a random monster in a player-occupied hex, and you play with the skills and stats of that monster.
You get no xp or loot or anything, but it would make no distinction between pvp or pve.

My question is, would the "strictly no pvp EVER" community object to this sort on "non-consensual pvp".
You'll have no chance to lose your stuff to the monsterplayers.
The game assigns the monster-pvpers randomly, so there's no option to "gang-up" on someone this way (it may be hardlocked into maybe maximum 2 or 1 playermonsters per instance).
From the pve point of view (as far as I can tell), one of the monsters would appear to have a stronger AI, needing some tactical adjustments.

Don't worry, if there are any objections to making this pvp and pve, I'll drop it there and then and agree for it to be consensual pvp only.
I am just curious about the answer, just to see if it's "on the table".
Myself, I would enjoy something like this a lot, both as pvp and pve.

-edit-
And if you die as a monster or the players leave the instance, you get the option to respawn as a new random monster in a random location, or return to the login screen to play the game normally. (so you can quickly continue the monster rampage without having to go to the login screen each time)
Maybe even increase the xp the monster would normally give, to compensate for the dificulty spike.

 

Maeryck


I don't know why I've always enjoyed the way people that live in Belgium think... I find so many that I agree with

Changing that concept a step further, yet staying with the entire built theme.... If a player choose to log on to the monster side of things;

Possibly this could become a PK marathon quest, where from the moment the player logged on, they would be given a low level monster from one already existing, or originating from an area that spawns them, yet with total freedom of normal movement throughout the map. There after, the PK could have a set number of players that would be needed to be killed to achieve a larger or more powerful monster to be spawned automatically into from a spawn area where that monster normally spawns. Then if successful, the PK then progresses through each monster until arriving at the top of the food chain. If then they have arrived there without ever having been killed, they could have achieve a special "expendable reward" which once used is then all used up and therefore has no value or physical ingame residual leftover.
Such a thing could be transferred by way of the account through the online store by using a special awarded coupon achieved by completing the quest. Yet at the highest monster of the game, there would be a limit to the number players killed needed to "win" and therefore auto logged off or monster's auto death resulting from the completion.

Just some thought's to add to such a snowballed good concept of a New sort of PK, for a New SotA Britannia...
What do you all think about all that?
~Time Lord~

 

I like it Time Lord, I bet they could tie the ability to play bosses to a special tier of payment. $10,000 let's you play a dragon complete with a lair and goblin minions. Man it would be tough to slay a player controlled dragon. You'd have to be able to snare it cause a smart player would probably swoop in attack and get out. Maybe damage it's wings and a leg first so they can't flee.

 

I can't speak for others but personally I'd have no problem at all with something like this, with the conditions you guys have mentioned. Might be downright funny, in fact, having a certain monster you've grown complacent about suddenly behaving differently.

The biggest problem I could foresee for pve people (and pvp too for that matter) would be the aggro range they're excpecting from an npc monster. Obviously a player controlled monster would have an aggro range equivalent to their field of vision which could be quite a distance. Could become annoying after the first few times. Not sure how that could be addressed.

 

not really.
before you are attackt you can onlie move as far as the monster pathing woud allow.
so if you spawn in a elf camp you can onlie move around in that elf camp ( if its big horay if its smal your out of luck ) .
but if you spawn as a wolf well you got most of the zone to roam around in ( since i have seen wolfs in olmost every spot on the map )
or if your a skellie in a dungeon you got the whole dungeon ( since you can find or get attackt by a skellie in most of the dungeon except the few meters at the entrance)

i have seen a lot of places where a monster shoud have a desent range to roam around and find players wile stil staying whitin the bounderies of where you can encounter a npc monster.

after thy attack you or thy are at your aggro range ( not your field of vision but the monster aggro range, for instance by a messidge on screen "good hunting sir")
you can follow them all over the zone ( you dont have to run back to your spawnpoint if thy run away but you can chase them down and kill them ).

 

As for expected aggro range: I don't know yet what to expect, but I assume and hope the pre-alpha is not the final range.
I have played 2 extremes of PvE aggro range: Warhammer Online, where you had to almost be on top of the enemy before it aggroed, and Darkfall online, where LoS was pretty much the aggro range. Of the 2, I preferred the Darkfall PvE by far because it was more realistic in that aspect. (and the monster AI was the superior of all the MMO's I've played so far)
I can't stand the sight of a field full of monsters in plain sight, almost equally spaced apart, just standing/roaming there waiting until the player is in melee range before reacting. I prefer a bit more challenge in my PvE instead of just whacking one loot pinata after another.

But in that horrid field of stagnant monsters, the monster that appears to move freely will be easily identified from a distance as a player, and would be easier disposed of.
(In Warhammer online, I would often play a dark elf, sneak over to the high elf side, and "act casual" among the dark elf NPC mobs roaming that area until a player came along to ambush. If I didn't try to blend in with the PvE environment, I would get slaughtered in no time.)
I see no need to restrict the allowed movement area of the monster beyond staying in the scene. An elf camp could realistically have a scout roaming the aera.

I like choices and options, so I'm also in favor that each player has the option to never encounter player monsters (but this option would default to "off"), so if there anything in this proposed system which may ruin a specific player's enjoyment (or simply gets annoying after a while), they can always opt out.

 

Cool Dark Elf Story and Darkfall AI sounds like what I would hope for. I didn't think about it before, but that AI would really change PVP in monster infested areas.

 

With the option to see or not the "player monsters" as the player desires I wouldn't be against it. Though I likely wouldn't take part in it in the way described because I prefer to not mix PvP with PvE.

 

I agree with you Silent Strider, I'm actually hoping another idea will come from it. Lord British had said in an early vid that he had hopes of allowing guilds to have some powers to put on their own quests and this could become one of those ways.
~Time Lord~

 

hmm that can work for restricted PVP .
wat do i mean whith restricted:
guild A and guild B declare war on eachother.
you as a meber of those 2 guilds can choose to go PVP ( proudly wearing the colors of your guild quest) or not ( stil a member of the guild).
but the PVP flag is onlie for the 2 guilds that are at war.

 

Time Lord said: ↑

I agree with you Silent Strider, I'm actually hoping another idea will come from it. Lord British had said in an early vid that he had hopes of allowing guilds to have some powers to put on their own quests and this could become one of those ways.
~Time Lord~​

hmm that can work for restricted PVP .
wat do i mean whith restricted:
guild A and guild B declare war on eachother.
you as a meber of those 2 guilds can choose to go PVP ( proudly wearing the colors of your guild quest) or not ( stil a member of the guild).
but the PVP flag is onlie for the 2 guilds that are at war.​

Sir wmidgard, I do appreciate what you are saying here and is taken well regarded as an option.

It's the spirit of Lord British's thoughts that haunt me within his freedom loving nature, which maybe able to apply within the further plight of the PK (or, "man at war with the world" sort of speak) ;

"The Wagon and How Much Anyone can Carry";
We do have choice, thus all cannot be combatants, yet every war guild then becomes his to do what he does. I do not know if this will become what will come out in the end. Yet I would also like to see a limit to what a multi player PvE chr could transport from town to town without the use of a wagon. I believe that commerce by wagon could fall into the PK's realm of ability to highjack, even if the transporting player were PvE. The PvE wagoner could not be killed, nor he to be able to engage the PK, yet the PK could have the ability to take the wagon from the player in the spirit of the highwayman, "Stand and Deliver"!
It has always been a lingering thought that has yet to meet any deep debate, that the PK is very linked with commerce by way of the Miner and other resource gatherers. Yet if none of these recourse players opt for PvP, then the PK are just SOL in any ability to make any profit from them. But if the wagon is introduced into the game because of weight restrictions, then there become a resource by which they could profit by.
I see nothing for the PK except restrictions of where they can roam, which is totally distasteful to me, to limit anyone within our game in Lord British's spirit of providing options. (I'll be returning to this same intent with a follow up later in the post regarding PvP wars and backing up what Sir wmidgard properly stated).

The Wagon is so important for the freedom of the PK to roam free of area restrictions and become the sought-after criminal that they should have the ability to be! Only then do they become a true criminal that the PvP (Kings Men!) can then have cause to hunt down and capture or kill. otherwise you are limiting them to sitting on valuable recourses, in a limited area, "Like the Dead Goose That Lays the Golden Eggs" for the PvP PK Bounty Hunters, which would become no true challenge at all for them.

PvP Wars, True Leadership and Guild Stones;
The Real World: Could the Irish conscripts have ever joined the Scotts if they had a Loyalty Controlling Guild Stone?...and I answer, "Nope"
Can you ever have fun with spies, or traitors, or revolutions, or rebellions if we are restricted by a Loyalty Controlling Guild Stone?... "not in a real world way"

The Real Life Story of the Officer's Dagger and Pistol in Leadership;
Before the advent of the Pistol, Officers were the only ones to carry the Dagger. Yet after the advent of the Pistol, the same reasons for having them both applied. That reason for the Pistol was to be able to shoot any soldier that would not get up and walk into a hail of bullets, or became disruptive. or rebellious in any way. Thus the Pistol and before it the Dagger's primary reasoning for being was to kill those that did not follow orders.

This, all that I have said, leads me back to my belief, that the Guild master's Leadership ability and not the restrictive nature of the Guild Stone should be the only restrictive quality that compels the Guild Member to have any fidelity or restriction of engagement. Thus adding the ability of the Guild member to be able to rebel and desert their Officers even to the point of being just the same as the Irish were to Longshanks by having joined the (guild of) the Scotts during a very important time in history.

The Quality of rebellion and Wagons for the PK to rob from, should be considered no matter what anyone's pride of nature should object to thus.
Freedom, Choice, Fidelity or Rebellion, and Treachery should not be excluded fun from being had in our game.

What are any real world or fun suggestions or comments on such a freedom.... good...bad... anyone?
It's surly something to think about

Sponsored By, The PK Preservation Society of New Britannia
~Time Lord~