PVP compromise idea

Historically, didn't everyone end up not carrying anything of worth. They remove any fear of loss in seconds.

How often did/do you lose items you were afraid to lose in UO

 

I started shaking almost every time I got attacked.
Yea it was not that hard to get things back.
But trust me, fear was there.

 

You will be able to put yourself into situations to recreate that illusion in SotA. Trust me, there will be fear, for those that choose to have it.

 

I would be very happy if that is the case.
I've just been losing hope in this lately.

 

I can't think of any other game that allows open pvp and allows people to be protected from it at the same time. I think this game has struck the perfect point of balance needed to cater to both parties. We'll see plenty of pvp action even if we aren't pvp(see - not engage) and that will make some of the non-pvpers think, I could give that a shot. The fear that you wont have enough targets or rich enough risk/reward involved is simply your impression of the system and does not represent what the developers can do to ensure you do in fact have significant risk/reward and plenty of targets for pvp.

This is a game that will have mass appeal. There are games like what the OP is asking for, and they are fringe games, lurking out there with a few thousand players because they aren't what most people are looking for. Big name games with large subscriber bases don't do that for a good reason, it isn't the most popular gameplay style. Arena PVP combat is huge though. People love that stuff. you play an hour or 2 and then get to hit the reset button. There is a reason it isn't popular in games that are persistent, spanning over years. Even arena PVP the biggest risk you have to dieing, is you could lose the match. I don't know of any that let you loot someone after you kill them.

 

It's a different model than pre-Tram UO. I must be different as the world of online games has changed the market. There is no way to retain players when they have options.

This model, so far, is the best effort to give as many styles a chance as possible.

They are taking the effort to recreate as much as they can, even though it will take a different system to be delivered. It's there, just can't get discouraged by compairing systems of the past with this system.

 

Mate, you will never, ever, attack me without my consent. Not in this game, and not in any other game. If others can attack me without my consent, then I simply will choose another game to play, and there is nothing you can say or do to convince or force me otherwise.

Choice has made the balance you pointed meaningless a long time ago. It's not a matter of the wish of PvE players to not be attacked being more important than the wish of PvP players to attack others anymore because, nowadays, players that don't want to be attacked won't be attacked, there are always other games to play. The choice in the hands of developers is just whether they want those players that won't be attacked playing their game (and giving them revenue) or not. This is not 1997 anymore, when anyone that wanted to play a graphical MMO had to put up with non-consensual PvP.

Besides, for SotA this was decided early on, perhaps before the Kickstart even started. I only pledged after making sure that there were promises to allow me to play the whole game without ever having to take part in PvP. If you didn't do due research and pledged for a game where you can't attack everyone else, and this is a game-breaking issue for you, tough luck; there's little to be done, and I won't sacrifice my fun just so you can have yours.

 

So what are you doing in PvP threat? I guess we already have a perfect game for you, LoTRO. No PvP at all. So you don't want to be attacked and I want to attack the one I "want to" and not the one the game allows me to. And you phrase "If others can attack me without my consent, then I simply will choose another game to play" simply shows that players like you will play another "kill100500mobs" game as soon as it will be released. It's like DarkFall Unholy Wars. Follow what PvEers want to = kill the game. I was clear about that opinion and I always will be.

 

You can not attack someone in another instance, not matter how much you want to.
You can not attack someone playing Sims 2, not matter how much you want to.

At what point do you realize you can only attack the people available to you?

Non consensual PvP = game full of people willing to be attacked
Consensual PvP = game full of people willing to be attack + those that are not.

Those that are not willing to be attack are extra, forget that they are there, just as you would if they were playing hello kitty.

 

And it is for this reason that nobody plays LotRO or WoW anymore, correct?

It's worth noting that not every PvEer on this forum is happy with the proposed PvP rules either. The idea that certain crafting ingredients will be more abundant in PvP zones isn't a terribly popular one, nor is the idea that some side quests will open you up as a PvP target.

 

Well, shouldn't that be obvious? You are not going to be able to attack anyone you want.

See, PVE doesn't need you to justify their play style, but you seem to need to be able to attack them to justify yours?

You have full pvp with those that WANT to play that way...if it is so popular you will have a ton of players...what is wrong with that?

Explain to me what is missing from that...be honest.

 

I think you'll find that the market has come to a different conclusion. All the most popular and profitable games have either consensual or no PvP... WoW was originally designed to be Open PvP, but that became Optional prior to launch, and they've 8 million subscribers last I checked. Before you bring up Eve... 80% of the population of Eve never leaves HighSec. While none of the cited Open PvP games are commercial successes. Before you bring up UO, UO was Open PvP for the first 2 years of its life, and the Felluca/Trammel split instigated Consensual PvP and it remains viable, if not wildly successful today, 15 years hince.
What you wish for is a niche market... mass market is PvE with consensual PvP. So, in effect, yes, you're correct... the PvEers have won, but because they represent the majority of the market, and to put forth that creating a game on the premise of consensual PvP alone is an automatic death knell for a game is demonstrably false.

In short. This game will never be what you wish for. This game was never going to be what you wish for.

And a serious question... Why do you want to be able to attack people who are not interested in that style of game play, and therefore likely to neither be a worthy opponent or skilled or equipped to provide any significant challenge?

 

I don't think they will ever answer why they want to attack those who have no interest.

 

So many people want a Wow clone.
Same game, different pixels.

 

So close to WoW I can't even see the difference </sarc>

 

Yes, you found us out....we want wow so bad.

 

Just simple question. Do you play LoTRO or WoW? Or the words you say sound like "If Justin Bieber is so popular it means hes a good singer, and for everyone who wants to be a musician he must be an idol". WoW community consist mostly of 14 years old. And it will always be persons of 14 years old. But strange thing that UO is still popular, but games like Tera, with good gfx and story becoming dead in a couple of months,

I can explain. If I have PvP with those who WANT PvP only but not with those whom I WANT TO ATTACK, why to play this game and not League of Legends or even WoW. Battlegrounds, Arenas, Ranking system. So there wont be anything new and special in THIS game with this mechanics and can you list at least 1 game with mechanics you want to have that been released during past 3-4 years which is still popular... no.. even alive? Secret World was a good idea, but... they removed PvP from the game, open world PvP i mean. Only BGs to fight ones who "WANT" PvP. What is average daily online of SW? 100-200? I'm pretty sure that even less. That is the game with story and good PvE but the players whos main point to play isnt social and economics aspects caused by open PvP, territory control, traiding, and the result of listed before = dramas are easily switch to another PvE game which are many.

 

1. MMO where travel system removes most world player interaction ....check
2. PVP is limited and looting is severly limited or removed .....check
3. PVP weapons and PVE weapons seperation create grindfest in both worlds...... check


Get ready to have a constant stream of quests to kill 22 bunnies for a wooden stick ....

 

It is simple. For example I want to play as a hunter, so I want to stalk on people but whooops I can't. But when you want to play a killahmob you can.

 

I feel you man. I left the forums for about a month after they released the PvP concept. However I still think they can change things, or they might be able to prove me wrong.

I hope they do prove to me that their combat and PvP systems will work. However I think things will change a bit before that happens. I will gladly eat humble pie if they prove to me it works, and then I'll go back to promoting this game again on Google+ and in other forums. For now I'm waiting to be impressed.

Meanwhile we can still give feedback. We've invested so much time already. Although I know how you feel, and if you don't come back I totally understand!!!