PVP & Death: Current Thinking Megapost

Really? A game that concentrates on story line and an interactive world isn't like ANY ULTIMA? Really? Since when was the Ultima series about PvP and loot. As far as my hazy memory goes, there was only a single entry in the entire, very numerous series where PvP even came into play at all.

Ultima I - Single player. No PvP
Ultima II - Single player. No PvP
Ultima III - Single player. No PvP
Ultima IV - Single player. No PvP
Ultima V - Single player. No PvP
Ultima VI - Single player. No PvP
Ultima VII part 1 - Single player. No PvP
Ultima VII part 2 - Single player. No PvP
Ultima VIII - Single player. No PvP
Ultima IX- Single player. No PvP
Ultima Underworld - Single player. No PvP
Ultima Underworld II - Single player. No PvP
Ultima Online - Full and Open PvP for a short portion of it's history; split away from this design due to driving away the player base.

Oh. No. Silly me. You were right.

 

A big problem with this topic is that a lot of us are making big assumptions about gold scarcity, gear value, combat speed, and randomized factors like the battle system and looting.
Sure, you can have some sense of how these things will be like by comparing them to other MMOs, but we won't really know until we're actually in-game.

Guaranteed insurance doesn't necessarily mean that looting won't happen, but it's enough of a window of opportunity for the defeated player to save something valuable if they feel the need to do so, and the killer will be rewarded either way. This whole mechanic is there to protect players from experiencing debilitating losses that might constitute as casual griefing. Considering how PvP is by consent only, its an elegant solution to maintain the safety of the player while still allowing for a change in 'value' as a result of battle. In that sense you might be able to argue that it 'waters down' PvP, but its a pretty weak argument IMO.

We should be glad we're getting some sort of player looting at all, since it would have been easy enough for the devs to just say no to corpse looting and to keep PvP in instanced situations only.
Open PvP sounds much more fun.

 

I totally agree with those that say that taking away victor choice from loot is a very bad and unfair idea.

 

I guess the ransom system doesn't bother me because I have never been particularly loot oriented. I would take gear to disarm a person, but I was never much interested in loot as loot. When I was fighting in a party, I would generally let someone else strip the body, because my attention was usually elsewhere.

I think this attitude was more common among Anti-PKs than it was among PKs. PKs were out for personal gain. Anti-PKs were not. The devs have assured us that full loot is not required to take a person out of the fight upon death, but that res sickness will take care of that. We will have a chance to put that theory to the test when we get a PvP build to try out.

I think I am seeing more greed than I am the desire for a solid game design.

 

Would an RPer feel half they were getting half a story instead of a full one?

As a PVPer I won't be glad of getting half a system or what I call a broken system........il just PvP in other games instead. The PvP community should not be ignored on this one.....this is "their" topic and "their" expertise, PvP is consensual so technically it will never effect those who are not interested. The PvP community needs to take a stand to ensure that they get something that is as fun and as interesting as the RPers get in their story.

 

Considering pvp didnt exist back the as we know it you cant really use an impossibility as supportive data. And just because they focus on the doesnt mean it will be like any ultima

 

PKing was actually a profession, so yes it's about loot and it's about reward. Ant-PKs were just out to try and stop them.

 

I think greed IS a worthy game design element. I love being greedy. Why would they be considering gambling on PvP if not for greed? I can see the Full Loot !!1! Screamers losing everything they own when that day comes.

 

Good point. I was tinkering with the idea of having Open PvP with some instanced PvP options. The benefit to instanced PvP is it can be more controlled and balanced. Also, access to instanced PvP (getting right into the heat of the action) can be very favorable for those short on time to play.

SWTOR has instanced war zones , 8 v 8 etc, with goals and rewards. They did have an open world setup on one planet (Ilum), but they failed at it miserably. Which is a shame because for PvP you had 2 options depending on how much time you had to play.

Have an hour? Get in about 4 war zones. Have 2-3 hours? Go open world, take time organizing groups/hunting parties and have at it. Their open world just didn't have enough objectives or reason to try it.

The only trick is, how do you make the instanced PvP relate to the game, impact the world and make sense.

I guess you could look at it as dueling 1v1. That's basically an instanced fight, but you can RP into it. Creating a scene or bar fight to then have 2 people challenge each other.

Speaking to a lot of PvE only people, they would go for some instanced PvP if it was enjoyable without loss of property etc. Should we add a few instanced games just to allow people that are weary of Open PvP but would like to at least try fighting someone other than a troll or AI ?

 

I can use it as supporting data against your erroneous claim that PvP and loot related mechanics are what define Ultima. Had you said it defined UO, I would have continued to ignore you, but when you make obviously false claims about the Ultima series in general, you can expect Ultima fans to show you the light, whether you close your eyes and ignore that light or not.

 

One example of an instanced option that would make sense:

RG talked about towns coming under siege. What if when that happened an instanced battle ground opened with players electing to choose either to defend or attack the town.

8 v 8 setup for as many instances as people want to participate.

Within each instance, there could be an objective. Say the attacker try to capture a point inside a structure and defenders, well try to prevent that. (10 min time limit) (if you die you have a 1 min cool down before razzing and trying again)

Each instance win/loss would be counted and the side that has accomplished more of the objectives (overall across all the instances), would be victorious.

If the attackers win, they get some reward (for sacking the town) and vice versa, if the defenders win, the town may reward their heroes.

Rough idea of course.

 

I think there should be a variety. Different rules for different areas...let the PvP games develop personalities of their own. A warrior friendly area might allow more regs to drop ect...mix it up.

Have some that encourage groups, others that are good for the individual and some for larger guild style players.

I know at times I like to get away from the guild and PvP on my own. Especially when they start saying you need this level or this gear or this build.

 

Impossibility? I don't think so. The desire to take the series in a player vs player direction wasn't there until it happened - there were other PvP games prior to 1997.

 

No to instanced PvP zones / Battlefields. PvP should involve world interactions, not people sitting around waiting in queues.

 

The full loot poll certain people keep talking about was basically a fixed poll because it was in the PVP section and not everyone saw it, the majority who did where the ones who wanted that and got their buddies to vote. Still such a minor sampling makes it useless if you ignore the other biases.

 

Every hex in SotA is instantanced. It's a fundamental part of the game design.

 

It seems many arguing against this system don’t even realize how the game world works….for instance…instancing.

 

I don't think that was what he was saying to be fair...... Everyone knows how the 'instanced' world works, he is talking about 'instancing' over and above that which could lead to greater player restrictions in PvP.

 

Yes, and I love it. The game could become a thousand games rolled into one.

 

Then I'm not seeing what he's driving at. If you think you understand, give me an example, please.