PVP & Death: Current Thinking Megapost

If the dead player has junk items and no gold in the bank....then what? I know it sounds irrelevant, but what if this person is actually winning a few battles and banking the loot in a house or another account?

As long as we are adding restrictions...may as well throw in a minimum bank balance and a flat fee for losing.

 

So will players only earn PVP experience for killing players? I think ideally a portion of all experience earned in a PVP environment would go toward PVP skill advancement. Outside of PVP instances, experience would only be diverted during combat against other players, or when crafting PVP gear/recipes. That allows players who's focus is on crafting to also advance and contribute to PVP.

 

That brings up other issues. I've heard people suggest things like ransom being tied to how much is in your bank. Well if that were the case I'd store all my gold at home, at the guild.. on another account.. anywhere but in my bank box.

There was another concern someone brought up. What if I loot someone and I get something I DON'T want.. and they won't pay the ransom? Talk about getting ripped off. That's no reward for victory. Yay an iron dagger! Yeah ok sell it to a vendor but still.. big whoop-dee-do. I guess that's always a risk that the person you kill doesn't have anything "good".

 

I like this I think it would work better then the ransom system being proposed.

 

I don't think limiting loot to consumables and resources is a good idea. It will lead to builds that avoid using them. It will also punish resource gatherers more than anyone else.

 

It should be the PvP stat weapon/items that you get, or you check their corpse and tag the 2 items you want.

 

PvP Loot suggestions:

• When viewing the corpse to loot all items should show generic names.
• All consumables, reagents, and resources show ruff quantities. (few, several, lots, etc)
• There is a limited amount of time to loot a corpse. Once the dead player has revived there would be no corpse to loot.
• The location of the item being looted will have impact on the amount of time it takes to look the item(s). (removing equiped armor takes longer than armor in the pack)
• The quantity of an item will increase the looting time.

Example:
Player 1 (P1) is killed by Player 2 (P2)
P2 scrambles to loot the corpse. After examining the corpse P2 finds;

1. 1 full set of studded leather armor (equipped)
2. 1 standard short sword (damaged from death in PvP combat)
3. 1 jeweled dagger
4. Several animal hides
5. Lots of food
6. 3 pairs of leather boots (in pack)

P1 is now a ghost. Does P1 run to the nearest resurrection point. Does P1 get resurrected by someone (P3 maybe)
The looting process is over if P1 resurrects.

P2 must decided between taking the time to loot, stopping someone from resurrecting P1, or dealing with allies of P1 attempting to keep P2 from looting P1.
If all is clear and P2 is able to loot P1 then P2 must choose what is worth the time to loot, time is limited.

1. Equipped studded leather will take a while to loot.
2. Standard short sword, damaged, may or may not be worth looting.
3. Jeweled dagger, may be a good weapon or at least worth holding for ransom.
4. Animal hides, not too many, should be a quick loot.
5. Food, there is a lot, P2 could take it all or a portion depending on how much time P2 wishes to spend looting food.
6. Leather boots (in pack) quick loot, grab and run.

The intent here is to give P2 a real choice in the looting process. The ransom system does not need to be tossed out but it should be in the hands of the victor not the corpse. With less info to go on, P2 will be given the choice to attempt for a quick payout (ransom).

P2 could put the jeweled dagger up for ransom and P1 accepts. P1 could refuse and P2 takes the dagger. Then it's a gamble if the dagger is of value (taken to an NPC for identification or possibly a PvP skill to be used out of combat after looting)
P2 could outright take the dagger and not offer the ransom.

 

We have seen you take many opportunities "NOT" to offer your thoughts on the subject, we have no idea what you would do different or like to see instead. If we can't at least have that little bit of information, then i don't think you should knock others for voicing thiers.

 

I don't know if this was directed at me or someone else.

I want to loot people because in a world where everyone is immortal, this is one of the only ways to lose. I'm a competitive person, and I don't play games just for the sake of playing them. I enjoy roleplaying, and I enjoy meaningful pvp. But without some form of loss, and the spectre of risk that comes with the ability to actually lose, neither roleplaying or pvp is very satisfying. (for reference, see all games made without looting)

 

Sorry, one other thing that I would like to see as a gold sink/death penalty:

Perishables should get damaged or destroyed on death; potions have a chance to break, reagents get corrupted with blood and gore thus becoming unusable, etc.

This would be obviously not be a 100% thing, but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that your black pearls and healing potions could get crushed when you get whacked to death with a club or mace.

Just a thought.

 

The best and most popular PvP games on the planet don't have full loot. Now a handful of people are saying that it is utterly pointless without full loot. Full loot primarily serves as a mean for a group of over-powered griefers to harass new players, drive them away from the game in the early stages and incentivize that griefing behavior. If you're not willing to play the game without full loot, then again there are private UO servers you can turn to with fairly small communities. That game exists for you to play if you so desire.

If you want a game with a rich, vibrant and active player community, you're not likely to find that because most people don't want it.

 

Hmm, I have to say I somewhat find this interesting... If it was a very simple system in game, you can click and choose the thing(s) you want to loot after a kill, it'd make sense. It'd give the looter a feeling of urgency to decide what to take at least.

I think it'd be reasonable to make some items take longer to loot, say armor for example. Actually having such gamble with looting process would be fun, you don't really know what you're picking up just by its looks, until you take a moment to study its quality. Heh, maybe it'd be fun, maybe not.

 

There's a huge specter of loss in the form of equipment damage, possible valuable equipment/gold loss and XP debt.

The debt is my least favorite (almost hated) of the bunch as it can really slow you down if you build up too much. I have nightmares about my characters (I miss you Buzzsaw Bill *sniff*) in City of Heroes going sooooo deep into debt that I would almost want to cry. The threat of that debt will really make me consider whether I want to get into PvP or lay off it for a while so I can get my toon back to a better place.

 

I don't think how popular other games are is of any Importance. Personally, I'm sick to death of popular games.

 

a)There can be more than one item. If the problem is how the item you lose is chosen, then let's focus on that. I vote that the value of the item that you lose on death should scale in accordance to your PvP level. If the item you drop isn't worth enough, then the game drops more of your items or gold until it reaches the equilibrium.

b)If everybody never uses their best gear, then wouldn't it be trivial to simply be the one person that uses good gear and trump everyone else? This isn't an issue with controlling player behavior, because this should never be an issue. If someone fights in rags, they'll die. This should balance itself. In combination with the possibility of dropping this good gear, the crafting system should keep all the "good items" in proper supply, which should do nothing but feed the economy.

c) There has to be a balancing system somewhere, gold is usually inflated by level, and that's how this initial balancing appears to work out. I vote a system where item looting is still risk-based (permanently lose items, but only a certain amount) and based on your PvP level instead of gimme gimme gimme.

 

I don't think he was knocking me. We are friends, and he is disappointed. I am trying to encourage him, saying not all is as dark as he thinks. I didn't get everything I wanted, but there is much here that I did want, and I can work with that.

 

Few questions pls:

-When will guards protect players?Auto Spawn in town ? Auto attack on sight? One shot?

- Will there be any "loot bag / corpse" on ground ? Ether pvp or pve will there be any loot restriction ? Or everyone can access other s kill loot?

Looks like we really need some Karma proces in this game.. PvP is not only about combat system , but any evil interaction u can possibly do.
I mostly spend my time being a Ninja/lootmachin , as i m not a PvP Roxor i focus on being fast . When Red's fight blues , grey's loot.

 

With the instanced map hex that becomes a full PvP zone, It could just turn into any FPS were those in first are camped at the map entry points waiting for players to arrive, a PKer's dream.

 

Well i guess you know what he is all upset about so i guess it is all good. The rest of us is just confused.

 

You make a great point about the multiple layers of risk, but I think they have to work together to really make the death system have the teeth that it needs. I don't want any form of permadeath, but I don't have a problem with people being scared (VERY scared) of death. Characters are immortal, if they don't fear death then they're going to do a lot of really stupid things that ruin immersion and competitive play.

The test will be how much each layer of risk is configured. If it's too heavy handed then the devs will dial it down, if it doesn't have enough weight the devs will bump it up. I think this is absolutely the right way to go here.