PVP here, there, or everywhere? discussion

Since The Crypt thread is getting derailed again I am offering up a thread where everything else can be discussed.

I vote we add two new modes to the game. Player Versus Player Online, and Player Killer Online.

That will give us SPo, SPO, FO, MPO, PVPO, and PKO.
MPO will still have the ability to duel, but no PVP only zones and no benefits to the areas - rather they will reflect whatever SP offline uses those areas for.
PVP Online mode will be what we have now - consensual PVP and PVP areas with benefits for those areas.
PKO will be all out PVP, everywhere forced at all times on every player in the instance.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

Opposite of what @Weins201 's thread is:
This is about:
Resources in PvP Areas
Player Mode in PvP Areas
Or anything other than the simple principle of . . . .not having players run through a PVP zone to an SPO zone.

 

TY, good luck keeping the rins on this . . .

You run inot problems out of the gate with benefits for PvP area as long as those benefits are PvP related sure GtG but once oyu make the rewards for things like CotO and such then you cannot do it, as it is the same a sheep to the cattle :-(

And this is just like PvP Shards just reworded so as not to call them shards so I doubt you will get nay Dev traction on them at all :-(

 

I personally like it the way it is. I don't feel that PvP areas need to become multiplayer only.

 

The four original modes are thankfully enshrined in the original Kickstarter, which will only be fulfilled at launch:

Any hint of not being able to consume the main quest line entirely separately and distinctly in each of the four modes ( Single-Player-Offline, Single-Player-Online, Friends-Only-Online, Multiplayer-Online) will mean not fulfilling those original Kickstarter goals. That likely wouldn't sit well with those that backed the game precisely because of those public goals.

That means every zone involved in the main quest line has to be playable entirely separately and distinctly in each of the four modes ( Single-Player-Offline, Single-Player-Online, Friends-Only-Online, Multiplayer-Online)

So, as long as the Shardfalls aren't part of the main quest line, they can DLMB their way to forced PvP MPO-only glory, I guess?

 

I think I should clarify my original idea a bit.

PVPO is jsut MPO but when you go into a PVP area it is a different instance than the one a player in MPO would enter. In SPo, SPO, FO, and MPO PVP areas will be exactly what they are in SPoffline - nothing to do with PVP and not offering anything extra-ordinary that would be offered in a PVP area.

PKO is to PVPO like FO is to MPO. You see PKO "flagged" players only. If you go PKO you cannot return to MPO without visting an Oracle and if you log your avatar will be kept in game as afk for 15 minutes. That way players can't disconnect because they see a group coming. The stakes are higher so the rewards should be better as well.

 

Doesnt "send" you anywhere. All items will be available outside of PvP areas.

By that logic, seeing as i dont like to leave multiplayer modes, its unfair to have most of the ore nodes in singleplayer and friend-only mines and dungeons.

 

I agree with this for SOTA where PVP seems focused on personal combat and guild wars without factions.

Nothing wrong with a PVP server. Just think full open PVP servers are better in games with clear factions. Then there is some meaning to the broader fray other than PKing just to PK.

 

Too many modes, too confusing, just have some zones that are PvE only and there is no PvP allowed and some that are PvP only and no PvE (modes other than MPO) allowed. Afterall those PvE only solo zones exist ie storyline instances that you
cant even play with your friends, and paty only instances, so we have forced single player and forced friends zones so why not forced multiplayer zones. Its pretty simple, if you dont like PvP then either go there with people to protect you, or go there
with items you can afford to lose / pay the ransom, or if it has noo interest to you then just go to another zone, theyre nothing special from a PvEers perspective so your not missing anything, and you can always visit these zones in single player offline mode anyhow.

Also a PK only mode kinda defeats the point, PKs (bandits) like to hunt for the kills and the loot, the notoriety, controlling an area etc, wolves need sheep to kill, they just need to not kill too many too often or they have none left to eat

Having different rulesets for the zones themselves could also work, but again I think many people would find confusing, ie Single player and friends modes there no increased rare drop rate, and a lower respawn of mobs and lower respawn of resources.
Might not be a bad idea anyway to lower node gather chances in SPO/FO mode anyway but thats another discussion.

Much simpler is to just have zones that are 1 thing or another as they are atm, but we need to have map markers to display info about them on a popup or something, ie letting you know how many players / parties a zone supports, or if its single player.
Most annoying waiting for a friend the first time to arrive at the necropolis ( he was about 30miuns behind on his quest to me) to go in together only to find its solo only.

 

Aye, forced solo only is kind of rotten in my opinion.

 

Aye, forced solo only is kind of rotten in my opinion.

 

Not a single pvp player cares about the crypt.
I am pretty sure most of us even agree with you that the entrance should be changed.
All this fuzz again Oo

 

Agree+1

 

Discussed by Chris in the last postmortem. He said if the population grows enough to support it, they may introduce instancing where PVP-flagged players could be put into instances with other PvP-Flagged players, in addition to the many instances that are already PvP like the shardfalls.

 

Agree... I dig the system the way it is today.

IF I suggested anything at all... it would only be HOW you handle flipping the PVP flag. The oracle thing... meh. I'd suggest a skill... 24 hour cooldown (so you can't flip it on and off quickly)... fire the skill... *MAGIC* The Oracle's protection hath been removed - Go abour your PVP life OR.... at sometime > 24 hours later.... fire the skill... *MAGIC* The Oracle hath protected you once again.

 

First PvP experience in a long time. I got stunned and killed. Although it is nice to know that jumping can unstun us... however I showed up here because of looting.

Personally I think the ransom ought to be a little bit harsher, and I'm not sure if it is already or not but based upon the rarity of the item. I lost a basic epic cloth chest piece, and it only cost me 300 and some gold to reclaim that, and I wish I didn't click it off too fast because I thought I saw some extreemly long time to reclaim the item... like 300 days or something.

I was thinking this was too small of a ransom price, but actually if I had died 10 times and got looted 10 times I probably would have to quit pvp for a week to get the resources to make more or whatever.

However I still think the time limit for the item was a bit long. For an entry level epic cloth chest there really shouldn't be much more than an hour or two to ransom that. It is some what easily replaced and the looter deserves a better spoils for that item. A more expensive item (fully enhanced and the most awesomest of all) that could be about a month to reclaim, and at higher price too.

Seems to me if we only have an hour to redeme an entry level item, then the return for the looter (and all pvpers) is better. Since the timelimit requires the player to immediately fork over the cash or lose the item. It might result in more items gained for the looter... and an entry level epic cloth might be worth 4000 especially if it only had two or three points of durabilty loss on it when mine was looted. If the looter has a chance to get that in an hour they could sell it for more than the ransom. Also if lower quality items have a short window to be redemed, that might encourage players to use better gear so as to have more time to redeme it??? maybe??? not sure about that. Just my thoughts at the time, and my genuine feeling (not expert gaming development advice just my personal feel at this moment) perhapse that would change had I died and looted 10 times, but figured I'd share.

One thing is certain it wasn't too harsh of a penalty. I did work hard to make that gear, but I feel losing that piece wasn't the end of my life, nor did it make me want to quit PvP.

 

I don't think splitting up the community into playstyles has done this game any good so far...

UO said: Are you with us?

Sota says: Are you with them, us or are you alone?... And yes in retrospect it is as stupid as it sounds. And people don't like it.

Selective MP shouldn't change the rules of the world we all virtually live in.. it should determine who we play with under the same rule set (Same World).
Having the same world means, I would make MP only zones and SP only zones etc. Though fixing a lot of exploit issues that are currently in game.

The overall ruleset for all modes should be an advancement of what UO had, because we all know things went wrong there... but still a lot of ppl are here because of that game and the idea behind it.

Talking all MP here ofc...

 

I have the need to point out that this discussion is in my opinion more or less pointless.
The pvp Crowd, even the medicore part of them, got scared away by the more vocal pvp enemys some time ago already.
I have a pvp Guild and lost members about pretty much every pvp discussion during the last few month.
They didn't just leave the guild. Most of them left SotA untill there is a final decision about pvp.

 

Question is how to get them back as we clearly see the game needs players that like to compete with others and thus breathe some live into the virtual world. All RP events are nice, and personally got my full support... but they are not floating the boat at all.

 

Every attempt that I've seen, on these forums, over the past two years, to innovate player conflict mechanics has been met with silence or "no" by the developers AND players.
Just take one solution as an example. Temporary scene banishment at death, for the defeated combatant.
That one thing would make PvP a painless experience for the defeated combatant, yet, just the idea of it and most "hardcore" pvp players say "no".
Why? Because it's new and different. At some point, a developer is going to take the leap and implement player conflict that isn't just reducing your target to zero hit points, and they're going to drown in money.

 

Who are these people and why aren't they speaking for themselves? I'm a "people" and I have no dislike for a system not yet implemented. Rather, I'm eager to see how well it works.