The Glass is Half Empty - A look inside why people are opposed to Open PvP and Full Loot

Discussion in 'PvP Gameplay' started by antalicus, Aug 28, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CaptainJackSparrow

    CaptainJackSparrow Avatar

    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    1,561
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Oh helllll no, it prevents me from doing nothing. All it would do is delay my revenge which would in some way be 10 fold due to being banned from a hex. I would also begin to forum PK with a mechanic like that. Many tantrums would be thrown. Eventually I would probably have to quit the game.

    Working? Nope :)
     
  2. vjek

    vjek Avatar

    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    1,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    ̣New Britannia
    You understand it temporarily banishes the vanquished pvp target, right?
    Among other things, it prevents the victor, from, in any way, negatively affecting their target after death.
    That's a point of the system.

    Why would you quit the game over this?

    What does such a system remove, for you, Jack, from PvP?
     
  3. Tearin

    Tearin Avatar

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Perhaps I should have read this very comprehensive PvP post before posting my own. My thoughts on a few of the topics covered.

    Should loot drops be different based on how a person is flagged? Yes, if you want to encourage PvP and you have no other creative mechanic to encourage it. Why? Well because while flagged for PvP the risk goes way way up and thus sonshould the reward. Those who cry foul I do not understand..should reward be tied to risk?

    Territorial Control
    True territorial control where one faction could hope to completely overcome all territory? sounds a little like shadowbane. The problem with this idea is when things are this open, in the aggregate one side will win, then what do you reset the server? The game becomes more like a complicated Travian or something. The only option is to give the feel of being able to take over everything, but in the end the NPC's of the loosing side eventually push everyone back restoring balance.

    Hex Banishment
    Not completely sure on this idea. Assuming your stuff comes with you, minus some spoil for the victor, then might not be too bad..need to think on it more.

    Character idenity linked to a player
    Not sure if this has been covered but personally if the game allows multiple characters I would like a way to link said character to a player. If you want to be a crazy griefing fool, then more power to you, but own it and not hide behind the annonmous nature of the internet.

    AoE Effects
    I am in favor of these hitting your enimies, friends, yourself

    RP and PvP
    IMHO there cannot be true RP without the consequence of PvP, not that I expect everyone that enjoys PvP to RP. The best way to encourage the PvE crowd is through events that somehow shape the real world, and in joining into said event you are flagged for PvP
     
  4. vjek

    vjek Avatar

    Messages:
    1,162
    Likes Received:
    1,639
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    ̣New Britannia
    Regarding Banishment, Tearin, you're right, that is a possible implementation. You could leave behind a generic corpse with generic or specific loot, for the victor, if that kind of reward was a design goal. If loot was handled properly, that is, salvagables instead of equippables, seems fine to me.

    Personally, I feel the banishment itself is a reward for the victor, but again, it's all about context. If there's no larger mechanic at play, nor a reason to keep someone out of the hex, then there's no real value in banishment. If the 'defeat' mechanism is used instead, then no corpse is technically required.

    So far, there has been every indication Portalarium is going with one character per account. It's not "engraved in diamond and preserved in vacuum" yet, but that's their indication so far.
     
  5. AuroraWR

    AuroraWR Avatar

    Messages:
    196
    Likes Received:
    193
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Female
    First, sorry Vjek. My reaction to the mechanic is based off of the the idea that it has been stated repeatedly that RG wants to entice or convince non-PvPers into PvP. If that wasn't the case I wouldn't have a problem with your proposed system. My negative response is that the system goes against that stated goal of getting non_PvPers to try PvP in hopes they will enjoy it and stick around.

    Edit.. again... I also agree with the idea of banishment being a reward for the victor.
     
  6. Tetron

    Tetron Avatar

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I wonder how many people here have played Eve Online. I bring up this game because alot of the issues that are being discussed here were actually ironed out in that game. The game started as a full world open pvp with looting. As the game progressed pvp was pushed to the "wilderness" where the most unexploited resources were. Most recently it was added back into the "safe" areas through the use of factional warfare. This would equate to one kingdoms military invading a neighbor and the players getting to merc for one side or the other. This left criminal corporations in charge of the unexplored areas of the world and merchants who occasionally payed for access to those areas. The reason the criminals couldnt go back to the safe areas was that every time they killed a player they lost standing with the military, the more they killed the less of the empire they could visit without being attacked on site by the military.

    The way the saftey net works in eve online is that if you attack someone in what is called empire space the imperial military warps in and destroys you. This means that what ever you used to attack you just lost, you also got a free shot at the guy who killed you. Now in eve you still loose the ship you are in but its structure is different then SOTA so thats ok. For SOTA open pvp could function in a slightly different way. In empire/imperial territory you could theorectically kill someone but the guard response would be instant/near instant and you couldnt loot that persons body, the guards are to close to allow you to get the loot and get away. The further you move from civilization the slower the imperial armys response. But no matter where you are you get tagged with a negative faction hit every time you commit a crime. This would mean that eventually the criminals would be unable to return to the cities because their faction rating would get them attacked on sight. There should be implemented ways to slowly regain this faction so that an exploration of open world pvp doesnt get you banned from the rest of the game, but it shouldnt be quick. The full looting aspect of the pvp would only come in when you went into the unclaimed wilderness. Areas not ruled by any empire directly. There, because of its distance from the cities, would be the richest veins of ore, or rarest herbs, etc. This would make for a reason for PVE'ers to go out there but wouldnt require that they do so as they could just buy from those that did. It would mean that pure pvpers would have their area of the world but wouldnt be able to destroy the pve'ers part.

    To address some of the issues with this lets start with griefers in cities. In this system someone could come up to you while you are standing around and kill you, yes it would suck, you would have to rez or do what ever is required, but because of the fast guard response you wouldnt loose any gear and the guy who did it would get a hit to his rating with the city guard(perhaps just of that city, or just that empire, thats up to devs though). He could do this perhaps a dozen times before the guards start escorting him out of the city, if he kills more people the guards start killing him if he enters. If he becomes a notorious killer then he is hunted even close to the cities, perhaps with player postable bounties for his death. You could even provide for a skillset for PC's or a NPC guild that specifically allows them to hunt down PVPers, this would be best if linked to the looting of players gear in the wilderness.

    As for the looting of gear out in the far reaches or the empires there should be a couple properties linked to that. The first is that you cant delete/sell/destroy or otherwise modify anything that you loot in pvp. Yes this infringes on the reality of the game but its a neccesary evil. Secondly if you delete the character all looted gear returns to its owners, essentially prevent people from taking stuff then destroying it just to be a jerk. Given our semi immortality there is reason to believe that our possessions contain some of our essence this is why they come with us when we teleport places, and why they stick to us so well in general. This means that you can track that connection to get your stuff back, or you can pay someone else to do it.

    The scenario I have in mind for the regaining of your loot from a pvper goes something like this. You go out to mine in the outer reaches a PVPer jumps you kills you and takes a item from you. You come back to life go to the guild N/PC and request a bounty hunter. You pay said individual to find your gear and bring it back to you. The pvper is now marked if he approaches towns depending on how significant his negative standing is and how big the bounty is hunters will spawn to chase him down, or players will be pinged if they have the skill. Also when the pvper logs on a clock starts ticking down as the NPC is tracking him to his location. The player version of this could simply be once he is online he is trackable. The longer he is online the closer the hunters get to him, eventually they will find him. As a known murderer he is fair game for mob justice he can fight back against them of course or try and hide but if players jump someone who has been bountied the guards wont attack them. Bounties make people legal targets anywhere.

    I think this combination of features will allow for open world pvp with partialy open world looting, and allow PVE'ers the ability to mostly ignore it. Yes you can be killed in the empire areas but that is likely to not be very frequent given the penalities chasing people out of cities before to long. You of course could also be killed questing where guard response wasnt fast enough but as long as it was close enough to empire territory the guard response would still be fast enough for you to keep your stuff. Finally if you want to risk it you can go into the unclaimed wilderness where you can have stuff stolen, but there is a remedy. Place a bounty on that persons head and people will hunt him for you.

    There would need to be tweaks to this system of course. For instance something should be done to prevent pvpers from stealing alot of stuff then just not logging that character back in. Thats the kind of thing that can be ironed out in a beta. Hopefully this will help merge the two worlds.

    Tetron Firestorm
     
    MalakBrightpalm likes this.
  7. Tearin

    Tearin Avatar

    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    3
    Aurora you really hit the nail on the head. If the goal is to entice PvE players, then when "they" PvP the consequence for failure needs to be low and probably have some reward just for trying it. Maybe the system, what ever it ends up being in the final product, nees to have a larger reward/less consequence in the beginning. Perhaps some sort of a score system or something??? I could see something where a guy with a high score PvP's a person that is very low gets some kind of negative consequence. This is genre appropriate where in story the big big baddie ignores the wimpy people (won't deal with them directly) getting lower level underlings to kill them.

    I don't want to stop a high level player from killing a low level person, but the consequence should be significantly high.
     
  8. jondavis

    jondavis Avatar

    Messages:
    1,185
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If this system is for a full open pvp then no.
    Number one it sounds like you could not even get back whats left on your body.

    If this is for a easy PVP with no loot type of mode that would be ok with me.
     
  9. Kal Morte

    Kal Morte Avatar

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Signoria
    How many times does it have to be pointed out that this is a selective multiplayer game. If you are a gatherer and you don't want to get killed by PKs, simply move your slider over to the "friends only" option and BAM, no more getting killed. I love the idea of creating more incentive to PvP, but resources are not going to be the deciding factor. I'm really hoping for more objective based gameplay, even if it comes in a future episode. It's already been stated there will be guild keeps and castles, so it would only make sense that there could be sieges in the game someday. PvP is going to become prevalent through exciting gameplay attached to risk and reward, NOT through the resource gathering system, or making complicated rules that detract from the fun.
     
    CaptainJackSparrow likes this.
  10. jondavis

    jondavis Avatar

    Messages:
    1,185
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I will be gathering resources in open pvp mode.
    It would be nice to get something extra.
    It don't have to be resources, but I don't see the problem with some items that only benefit the open pvp players.
    If not resources then some things like booby trapping your ore that you leave on the ground and things like that. That would probably would work the best.
     
  11. Kal Morte

    Kal Morte Avatar

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Signoria
    If you gather in an open PvP mode, then you get the benefit of some potential PvP. The people who hide from PvP will be missing one of the most fun aspects of the game. That's their choice. You should not get rewarded further for doing something you like and would do anyway.
     
    AuroraWR likes this.
  12. jondavis

    jondavis Avatar

    Messages:
    1,185
    Likes Received:
    726
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Was either of the selections I made a reward?
    In the end it don't help me progress further then those in PVE mode.
     
  13. Vallo Frostbane

    Vallo Frostbane Avatar

    Messages:
    1,756
    Likes Received:
    3,572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I cant believe anyone believes this would work. A so called PVP mode would be nothing than deathmatch and fairly stupid. How would you implement trapping and stealing in it? Besides risk vs reward logic would be screwed...
    There will be risk vs reward, it's what makes it an rpg world and not Habbo Hotel 2.0...
     
    Mordecai likes this.
  14. Myth2

    Myth2 Avatar

    Messages:
    1,011
    Likes Received:
    1,456
    Trophy Points:
    125
    I have to agree Vallo. I don't know many non-combat players who look at risk-based PvP as a benefit to gathering. There is a reason all the non-combat characters left Trammel.
     
  15. Kal Morte

    Kal Morte Avatar

    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    142
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Signoria

    I'm not proclaiming there should be a PvP mode. There should be one state of gameplay, and it's effected by the various forms of selective multiplayer. I'm saying everything should be the same in the world, regardless of your multiplayer setting. People who want to PvP will do so in OPO, and everyone else will hide in FPO. Everyone plays the same server so there will be plenty of people to fight. You do not need to make additional mechanics and/or "modes" to accomodate those who want to prey on harvesters.
     
  16. Arkhan

    Arkhan Avatar

    Messages:
    674
    Likes Received:
    517
    Trophy Points:
    105
    they should introduce a "Shame Meter" that increases when you kill someone who poses zero threat to you.

    make this thing influence NPCs reactions towards you right down to things like how much they charge you at the store, etc.

    I think it would be pretty funny, and practical. It would stop people from running around poking noobs eyes out just because.
     
    greaseDonkey and Joviex like this.
  17. MalakBrightpalm

    MalakBrightpalm Avatar

    Messages:
    1,342
    Likes Received:
    1,480
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Sol system.
    I think that both of you kinda missed the point here. PvP can be about a LOT of different things, the impression I'm getting about what vjek is suggesting is a PvP that is centered around access to areas and the resources they contain. IF you are interested in those resources, AND you are flagged for PvP, then this system works. The material iteself states that if the goal of the PvP is not territorial control, the system is pointless. I actually don't think that temp banning someone who was just "trying it out" would be that much of a deterrent to noobs who want a sample PvP experience. They go, they fight, they win, they lose, they die...and now they are hex banned, so they go back to doing PvE stuff. Maybe try again tomorrow. The very essence of "getting their feet wet". I just don't see it convincing them to never ever try.

    But if it IS appropriately used, then a temporary ban is one of the only ways to truly control the territory. In a real world style example of controlling turf, the border between North and South Korea is heavily guarded and watched. Each side is prepared to shoot anyone who even LOOKS like they are trying to cross. There are a lot of people IN North Korea who want to cross, though, and not all because they think they will have a better life. Shooting those people is SO effective as a deterrent that people almost never even try to cross, though, despite the obvious motives for doing so. In the video game version, killing you isn't much of a deterrent if you can just rez. And I'm never going to get you to stop, Jack, regardless. If I apologize, you'll think I'm a sheep, if I don't, you'll think I'm a jerk. If I kill you, you'll plot revenge, if I restrict you from the space, you'll plot even more revenge, but...what happens if I just smear you all over some toast every single time we meet? What if standing and fighting me equals a hex ban, and you know it? How many times can you multiply your intended revenge by 10? Revenge X 10000000000000 is more than revenge X1000000000? How will I tell? I'm pretty sure your revenge will consist of coming after me in a PvP fight. If I beat you regularly in order to INSPIRE the revenge, then what else do you have to throw at me to GET the revenge?
     
    vjek likes this.
  18. Robby

    Robby Avatar

    Messages:
    1,010
    Likes Received:
    1,230
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    Trammel is perfectly fun for me. Im perfectly happy to play the game that way. But if possible, ill definitely volunteer to play on the dangerous side. =P
    I dont know if you can stop it unless the threads on it are deleted regularly and the people who start the threads are booted if they continue to try to discuss it.
     
  19. CalBolc

    CalBolc Avatar

    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    3
    My fondest memory of UO is running to my Brit X Roads tent with several full sets of plate to stock my vendor. Yes I got PKed on occasion, and yes I lost the key and contents to my tent chest, but by god was it a buzz. I got the last laugh, the reds were the ones continuously buying my overpriced AR!

    As long as the consequences for killing other players is right, and the risk vs reward for players trying to avoid them is balanced, in my opinion it would be madness to create a world with unecessary physical restrictions on how players interact with one another.
     
    Skalex, Sir_Tim, Guerrilla and 2 others like this.
  20. Ned888

    Ned888 Avatar

    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    1,152
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    So says almost every MMO on the market.... I'm not prone to making stuff up.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.