PVP defaults and other questions answered ? (Dev) Replied

That's good news!

 

Exactly!

 

@Richard Garriot - so just again to clarify (lots of different people interpreting things differently in these conversations) - If I were to switch to Friends of Friends mode, would the underworld path be unavailable (or switch me to PvP mode, either way) or would I be able to to do the underworld path or even a lesser version of the underworld path (same path, lower rewards)?

 

I am glad to hear this game is being created with PVP in mind. I do think safe zones are required and people need SOME sort of safety net, especially new players. This will allow them to learn the game and get a better handling without a PK squad rolling up 5 minutes after they start the game and taking all of their possessions.

There definitely seems to be a great amount of deliberation with the development team regarding PVP. I am happy to see that you guys realize this is an issue of paramount importance. My take on it is that players will have incentive to stay from the "safe" passage, even while completing the main story elements of the game.

Guilds will still be able to wage war and attack members of the enemy guild on sight. Also, there will be areas with unrestricted combat throughout the game world. Are there any intentions to create some dungeons with PVP?

 

@Ultima Aficionado - look up The example I asked him that he confirmed included an underworld dungeon that was PvP

 

So effectively the idea is basically pre-trammel UO PvP, only the guard zones just happen to extend along the roads but that is it?

I'm not sure how that is any friendlier to anyone.

 

The impact of the "slider" on the PVP is not yet known. You are bringing up the right issues through!

 

@Richard Garriott - I try Having spent time as both a ******** and as a hardcore PvPer... I know a lot of both

Do you feel that the way you populate instances will help to limit/govern the rate of PvP so instead of every square being PvP, only some of them will be? If so, if it is shown not to be a successful rate limiter in the alpha/beta, is it the kind of thing you think could be adjusted? I think some folks' objection to PvP is more in its frequency.

Also do see the Virtues/Karma system helping provide sufficient negative feedback for "bad" PvP?

 

Nothing to discuss, It's perfect! Fine like frog hair.

 

Player on player interaction is what keeps the game interesting beyond the 40-100 hours. But fact is:

1) Way more people play Farmville than any MMO, ever. So it doesn't have to be competitive at all.
2) More people play LoL (League of Legends) than any MMO. Competitive PvPers want balanced environments where they know the rules and there aren't gaps due to gear / grind.

My interest here is seeing if we can get these player bases playing SotA. I think they would enrich it tremendously. Many of them played MMOs and left because they don't like the way the PvP rules are written.

 

LoL players are the last kind of people you want playing an MMO. They have a bad reputation for a reason.

If 95% of the gameplay content is in PvP zones, then it is effectively an open PvP game with all the same kinds of problems as UO. All you are doing for newbies is postponing their PK experiences until the first time they veer off the road.

As I've already pledged, I'll try the game, but if this is the plan I'll just play single player and when I get bored, go play something else.

 

Since we do not know all the skills that are available I?ll use Treasure Hunting and Animal Taming as an example. -Will ?Carebears? be ?Forced to accept PvP? when they go on a high level Treasure Hunt? Will an Animal Tamer be ?Forced to accept PvP? if he/she wants to tame the more unusual or better animals?

Could we please get some more information about the PvE Friends only side of the game.
After reading the pvp forums they almost have me believing that the only in-game areas where you wont have to deal with pk?ers are the Newbie starting towns and Personal story.

 

<i>
What follows is a fictitious example of how I think it could play out. Imagine that newbies and Role Players have safe havens around the world. For PVP?ers this is so far no worse than UO which was VERY open PVP. Now give RP?ers some methods of ?safe passage? around the world, that let them RP, but not necessarily have the easiest or most valuable ?paths?? Imagine ?safe paths? from safety area to safety area. But occasionally these tunnels are discovered and thus unavailable, or that real value is ?just off the safe path?, beckoning to you to step out of the comfort zones.</i>

The "paths" in quotes seems to be the key here!

If its taken literally as roadways, and non-pvpers are only allowed to move from city to city with little to no opportunity to explore the wilderness, the non-pvpers aren't going to play online. With most of the world inaccessible to them, there really isn't a point to be online. Remember its not just RPers who don't like PvPers (and some RPers love PvP!). The PvE guys, explorers, and other crowds also have a large "anti pvp" base.

Incentive to get into PvP is a must...but the incentive needs to be more creative than "if you want to see 90% of the online game you need to PvP"

 

@Xandra7

My guess is they just don't know any of that. Make your opinions known, someone will hear them.

Imagine you can tame dragons. I can imagine that there's a red dragon and a black dragon. The black dragon forces you into PvP. But the red one doesn't. The stats are the same. If you really, must have the black dragon, you'll have to PvP for it. (At least that's how every other game works.)

 

hm, after reading Lord Britishs post, I'm a bit concerned. I understand, that more difficult path must be rewarded. But why has the difficulty to be in PvP? I'd like to opt it out as much as I can and don't like being treated as a second level citizen (or ********/ or player to stupid to use skills)

 

This seems to reward one play style way more then the other.

If I am reading this correctly if I want to play online, in any way shape or form I am only safe on the roads and cities from being attacked by a player character. I understand this give excitement to some, but it sounds at the expense of others.

With this thread, I get the feeling, and I stress it is my feeling not based on facts etc that the focus has shifted in another direction then the one I think Richard Garriott was famous for.

Humans are monsters if you give them the tools to mess with people they will.

Please remember you made the wonderful ultima games before you made Ultima Online. Some of us are here for this.

 

@rune_74
I think where your afraid is when the PvP goes from "im a bandit holding you up and only kill if you dont give me what I want" to "Hey there is someone, lets kill him". Its a line that crosses from RPing PvP and being a part of the experience to just being a serial killer. One is destructive to the RP experience while the other is simply another method of RP.

 

@AndiZ275 - Felucca hardcore PvP players got abandoned by their game by the new developers when RG sold the game. Their playstyle were abandoned and they had one option, play a game they hated or leave the game.
I and tens of thousand of my brothers choosed to leave the game and we deserve some respect since we were the ones that more or less founded Ultima Online the first 5-6 years.
The ones choosing PvP as their playstyle should not be considered a sidequest as some of the themepark supporters suggest.
I think the hard earned rewards should be rewarded the ones that take risks. That is a natural selection as i see it. Why reward the ones that take no risks? Make no sense whatsoever.

 

@ara You say you deserve some respect but then you go into insult those that don't have the same feelings you have by calling them theme park supporters and continue to say they take no risks blah blah blah. Sorry if I have a hard time finding some respect for the way you displayed yourself there.

 

Stay cool everyone ! We all looking for a good game, no more....