PVP here, there, or everywhere? discussion

I read back through this thread and I'm not sure where you and Mugly Wumple differ in opinion. Seems like he wants to wait and see how Selective Multiplayer works, and others are ready to remove it? From a PVP standpoint, I agree it's problematic to have the ability to ignore the risk of PVP by simply switching over to a single player game mode. Just imagine playing multiplayer anything in single player mode, it doesn't make sense.

I'm told that Elite Dangerous actually has this same problem. They have a way in multiplayer for players to create blockades that attempt to stop other players from getting supplies to a planet, and even though their strategies are very sound and they have active participation the blockades don't work because people literally have the ability to switch over to a single player mode that allows them to ignore the other players and slip right past the blockades. That's all a moot point now however as Elite Dangerous has completely removed single player mode as a game feature.

 

If people want to remove game modes why not start with open online mode? Why should open online mode have a higher priority than all of the other modes? Should they not be equal? So if someone wants to remove friends only or SPO modes, I demand the removal of open online mode. See how illogical this is? This would lead to a huge conflict between gamers.

 

I vote no more work for PvP, until there is more than 12 of them that do it regularly.

 

Who says it's my zone? Only those who want the fast loot wants to take the risk. It's a risk for the reward. If you aren't willin to take that risk because you do not think the reward is worth it, then how is that different than say buying a car or going on luxurious vaction. If the reward isn't worth the cost of the trip (0h and say there's a risk because there is a high crime rate there)??? See there's some nice cruises that go down the Western Coast from the US to Mexico. I went on one but some friends of mine said I was taking a huge risk because there have been threats against American citizens traveling to mexico due to the drug wars at the time... exaggerated or not we have to count the cost of all things.

So basically it comes down to is it worth it to you? If not then don't go there.

 

(side note) it doesn't have to be Your personal zone, I meant that as a figure of speech meaning your type of zone (aka) PVP area

I agree a 100%
Its risk vs reward so how big does the reward have to be to get us non PVPers to cross over, well that's a different amount for every one, we all got our own price tag, me personally I'm a cheap date, haha all I want is a reasonable means of survival.
but others are more expensive. and that's the exact point I wanted to make, keeping in mind every thing we talked about "Just how big of a resource Node are we going to put there" in order to lure me in.
That's why I don't like the specific PVP zone template, and think the hole game should be PVP except some NPC areas I allready discussed, if you choses to flag then it is game on, if you chose not to, you have nothing to worry about.

I am on the side of the PVP for this game I think it makes the game fun, but its no fun to just go into the slaughter every time, I am all about the PVP events, the town sieges, the pvp control points, but there needs to be meaning full rewards to those that participate both winners and losers,
I would love to see some thing such as sides, like the old Factions systems (from that other game for example), were even as a crafter you were important. every one could get involved with different skill sets during town sieges crafters could be making blocks to do repairs on building or something along those lines but this is a different topic, I don't want to get to far off here.

 

YEah i guess I see your point. Perhaps the best way to entice players into PvP is to give them a skill bonus of some kind for gathering. Even PvPers might end up avoiding these shard fall zones unless they are grouped up. That really isn't very enticing for a player who has never PvPed before. Seems like giving some sort of meticulous gathering gain or whatever might be a better solution in the long run to get people at least freed up to try PvP. They are much less likely to get attacked by a group of people teamed up that way. It is one toe in the watter, and later they might get bold and try more.

 

Elite Dangerous dropped the KS-promised single player offline mode. They still have Solo Play (SPO), Private Group (FPO), and Open Play (OPO).

 

so I flag PvP then go into single player? or friends only? Sorry not to well thought out, and when you try and think about it you end up creating way more work than it is worth.

PvPs reward is fighting an intelligent Combatant, when you start dangling carrots you end up with exactly what UO did.

Champs spawn (garbage), double resources . . . and all it did was drive more players away. And PvPers don't want to even waste time gathering and non PvPers wont waste time gathering there as its not worth the hassle.

This debate / argument has been going on since day 2 of Sota and it is not going to change but , mark my words, if they implement double resources in PvP areas they are going to, in essence, kill this game There are a lot of non PvP types who want nothing to do with that mentality.

And if they stick with the original idea that these special rewards only work in PvP situations they lose PvPers since they don't want to gather anything, and there will be no sheep to slaughter.

Sadley no real win either way.

 

"PVP here, there, or everywhere?" ....I guess nowhere....

 

If they build it, people will come... ...back

 

I do honestly hope to see PVP that is fun, worthwhile, and meaningful come along but at this point I see no reason to engage in it in SotA. I really enjoyed it in SWG.

 

PVP INITIATED FROM OVERLAND MAP:

Now one thing that would make PvP better in this game is to be able to attack another pvp player from the overland map. If a guy has a red name I should be able to initiate an attack on that person while passing. If we aren't already flagged PvP we should be able to gain that flag once we attack.

Then it could put both characters into a random encounter scene, minus all the extra resources (exploitable). Just put us both smack dab in the middle of the scene about 10 paces apart so nobody can just run out the back door. We are passing each other so it makes sense that we would be close to each other if one person attacks, not on opposite ends of a scene.

Also once the encounter starts there should be flags indicating that we are there and others should be able to click on those flags (not just party members) to enter into our scene, thus flagging them PvP if they aren't already PvP. Extra people joining the scene could appear near one of the entrances/exits, instead of in the middle of the scene since they are approaching from a distance.

*****************************
ROBBERS ATTACK:

This might be the best way to see players flagged for PvP actually fight. Who's going to really attack people in the middle of a town with all these witnesses? They might get a bad name from the crowd. However ambushing a player walking along a path is something we definitely need in this game, and we definitely need the ability for more than one player to join that instance because bandits don't always work alone. This will make it interesting. Then entire parties of PvPers will get involved, and maybe players will create their own control points in some of the narrow pathways that nobody expected. Just waiting for PvP flagged players to pass by.

This makes me think that Stealth might need to be considered as being a usable skill in the overland map. So criminals can stealth out in the trees, and wait for a red name to pass by and BANG jumped. Then PvPers will have to think twice about which direction they travel through the map. Maybe there is a safer but longer route to get where they need to go, or maybe they can travel with a team of their own assassins who are also moving stealthily behind them in the bushes waiting for their pal to be attacked so they can jump in and even the odds and take the jawbones of the bandits committing highway robbery. We need PKs and bounty hunters/defenders.

**************************
NOT ALL PVPERS HAVE TO BE COLD BLOODED MURDERERS (Is it virtuous??? I'm not the judge)

The Oracle can protect people, but PvPers might reject the oracle's protection because their belief system says we ought to fend for ourselves and not have some care taker controlling our lives. So plenty of virtuous players could unflag invoking their right to freedom and they might just view the oracle as an oppressor.

So there can be people flagged for PvP who just want to have the yolk of the oppressor off their backs, and then there are those who truly wish to rob people.

*********************************

BLESSING OF THE ORACLE REVOKED:

However the blessing of the oracle should not be so easily be returned to a player who has a record of initiating combat with other players and killing them. Sure a player can initate combat on accident, but it should be fairly easy for the server to tell the difference between a player who keeps getting flagged because their AOE spell hit someone. If a player attacks somebody walking in the overland map, there is nothing more deliberate than that.

Just like UO had its murder counts, SotA ought to have something that tracks deliberate robery and bloodlust. Such a player who has a record of doing this ought to not just get the blessing back the next time he or she walks into the Confirmatory. There should be a time limit and an act of contrition, a sizable offering (gold or items). Perhaps this should only count for acts such as higway robbery (not counting the murders in the PvP zones).

I see the little one eyed mechanical spiders and stuff spying out the shardfalls, and they are doomed to get destroyed from accidental fire and deliberate attack. Just like players those droids should enter a PvP zone at their own peril. Let the Oracle judge them, but perhapse show mercy towards those who enter the shardfal for the sake that perhaps the powers there might be viewed as effecting the minds of the players making them more aggressive.

However initiating an attack and murdering someone outside the PvP zones, should result in not getting the blessing back (for the sake of having blues acting as robbers so that nobody can enact vengeance upon them when the pass by). Perhaps even Perma Red status (perminant PvP resulting of crossing the point of no return and never getting the protection of the Oracle again should be used in the case of a player that murders, gets forgiveness, murders again, gets forgiveness, and then goes back out and murders again)

**********************************
However the PvP flagged player, who does not have a habit of initiating combat like this should be able to get the blessing back. I'm not sure how virtue is tracked for PvP, but even if it is barbaric if the player is just following a belief that they ought not have the guardian's protection, but gets attacked they shouldn't be asked to donate a lot of money to get their blessing back.

However I wonder how many players are just all buddies? Flagged for PvP right now might mean nothing because the community is nice to everybody. That's totally fine with me, but players who want PvP are definitely looking for more than just some fake tournament. Tournaments are not PvP. There will be nobody saying 3 2 1 go.. No people will already be ready for combat inside zones, and if you aren't too bad. Get ready next time. If you win your tournament trophey maybe you'll be the first to go down when you try to enter a gem mine because the bad guys don't play nice.

 

I agree that there needs to be a personal advantage or else no one would revoke protection, even lore wise. I would like the overworld map to be more active. But that's clearly not coming any time soon. My idea would be small Shardfall areas that are just there for a short time, creating a zone to fight for a treasure or rare boss etc. But I think it's better to fix the open PVP in general, as this would be a major driver to get people back into the game.

 

Not to be nitpicky but why is overland PvP not going to happen any time soon? Seems that outside of towns on the roadways is the most logical place to be attacked. Not in a town or in some crowded place. Just sayin.

 

They shouldnt, for balance purposes. Multiplayer has to be built around obstacles that do not exist for a single player game, and a single player game can more easily offer more freedom than a multiplayer game can. I dont think anyone wants to remove single player mode, just the part of it that allows you to affect the multiplayer world without actually being there. If you want the multiplayer world to come into your single player experience, thats fine, but multiplayer folks arent wanting thier competitive or cooperative ventures to be belittled by ghosts who are feeding objects into a game world.they arent even in.

 

There's no need to enter a PvP area for the materials since they can be gathered elsewhere. There are a whole lot of people who would brave PvP areas for the rewards they offer. And alot of PvPers will take advantage of improved resources. Having certain resources increased in shardfalls does not force anyone to go there, it only rewards the ones who do.

if you dont like it, Don't do it. Its not a requirement to "be competitive" or any other such nonsense.

Its the same logic behind having more resources in dangerous mines or dungeons. Bosses give rare resource drops, etc

 

Enjoy your fantasy, but know that's all it is. PVP is and always will be fully consensual in SotA. Good luck finding sheep who consent to being eaten by wolves. I'm afraid you'll have to attempt to survive fighting other wolves.

 

Not entirely correct. They have removed single player offline mode. As far as I'm aware they did not remove single player online mode.

 

Ah, maybe that's why they're still having problems then.

I'm told by friends that play that game, it's a pvp mess.

 

Need to keep in mind that not all "sheep" are PvEers or whatever that dispise confrontation.

When they say sheep, they mean anyone who isnt afraid of the risk of PvP tog et at the reward offered for the endagerment. and there are plenty of those types.

If your someone who cannot be drawn by more, but not exclusive, reward to a deangerous place, then you arent the "sheep" in this instance.