The PvP Thread

@Ultima Aficionado
Oh, I meant for WoW.

SotA very definitely will have a matching system but it will be very different. WoW factions are hard wired into the game. This game will need to be much more dynamic. Also I don't know that people will sit in queues here....it really depends on whether they choose to truly isolate mini-games to be played over and over. e.g. I go to camp, I'm OK with PvP bandits coming, I dont really want to see a queuing mechanism...loading bandits 5/6...

 

@rune_74, when you say things like "I should not be totally forced offline, or the game has failed", which has no basis in any official comment from the dev team, that sounds like hyperventilating to me.

 

@Ara

<blockquote>
@Elvish Dragon ? Yes and PvP oriented players can also work together to reach common goals, that?s what i and my guild does.

My only point was dont put labels on players you dont know, it wont bring this discussion any further.
</blockquote>

Wait... what? When did I ever put a label on you. I have been very careful not to label people here. Disagree with them yes, label them, no. The one label I used in the heat of the moment had nothing to do with you, wasn't in this thread and was something I immediately regretted. So please help me out by pointing out where I labeled you.

 

@Owain I think it is clear you are hearing what you want to hear at things I say.

 

kind of ridiculous, all you need to do is look at your reply history to see the sequence of flip-flopping between getting very agitated about how worried you are about the pvp element of this game, then going to the other extreme and saying no one's said we all have to go into pvp mode. just relax and try not to jump to conclusions

 

@Elvish Dragon - I was reffering to the curved lines you had above your own thext, which was your qoute of rune-74 and it was him i talked about, not you.

I think you write so much you cant remember all your replies. =)

 

@Rune: the problem is, you're stating an opinion, some open/full loot/non consensual PvP advocates don't share. I have much more problems with people here using racist language ("natural selection") or deny other people intelligence ("those stupid players are better kept with WoW") or skill, just to show, that they are better than others. And I highly support a filter, that lets me opt out such people, that I never want to meet in real life, as I want to be opted out by that kind of players. And that's the main reason (besides zerging), I never liked playing PvP in most MMOs. I just couldn't stand that aggressive, arrogant and often insulting behavior, shown by "elitist" players.

 

I think the games grouping system will alleviate most of these problems. Zerging should not be an issue either.

Remember it's "who the game thinks you should see". The team making this game IS elite, so doubting it and pointing out character flaws of the people around you....

I think RG want's us to hold a mirror out in front of ourselves, or so iv'e heard.

 

@Acrylic: I really hope so =) . It's not, that I don't like good PvP, it just happens so rarely in MMOs. So I lay may hope in the team of Portalarium to find a way to create a fun an challenging experience for most of the players (I know, that it's impossible to please everyone, but that doesn't mean, they should stop trying ;-) ).

I just don't stand this often personal attacks against a single member of the community, just because he doesn't share their opinion, but expresses concerns, another part of the community is sharing.

 

@Ara - Indeed, I do seem to be posting a lot lately... as do others, its almost like we all have a lot emotionally and fiscally invested in this project

I do see the reply you are responding to thanks for helping me out on figuring that one out

 

In the worst case, the solution easy to create a PvE server could solve the problem. Easy, a bit stupid but effective

People can go to the darkest corners of the world and not having to fight other players. They may even put AFK in the forest. And all this without losing their equipment.

 

Yes, but if somebody insists on having 100% access content without PvP, they need to make a server. For example, if 10 PvPlayers insisted to kill everyone in every city. What to do?

Solution = a PvE server

 

Does it really help your argument to try and demean another person argument by saying they are freaking out when clearly they have states over and over to you they are not? If it is a way to somehow make my opinion worth less then it is kind of pathetic.


What it all comes down to is how much of the world is going to be PVP? How much freedom will that game mode have?

Like I have said many times, I'm not totally against the play style...I just want to know where the checks and balances are, and just like the rest of you who don't know, I have the right to discuss it....I'm pretty sure if you asked the mods, they will agree I do as well.

Solution = pvp server

 

@Abydos:

I think there is only going to one online world and you are not going to have to select between different servers in a similar way you would do in many other MMORPGS. This server will have areas that are PvP and safe havens throughout the world. When a player leaves one of those safety areas they can be attacked freely. My guess is that this is similar to Ultima Online, except with some added safety mechanisms -- especially for new players.

My understanding is that players will not be able to interfere with your gaming experience if you are playing single player mode.

 

@Ultima Afficionado: are you talking about Solo offline or online? I'll ignore solo offline here, because it's a mode that should be nearly unimportant for most players.

But if you mean solo player online (or FPO, the mode I'm preferring), does your assumption ("players will not be able to interfere with your gaming experience") still count? Because then the distinction in safe areas and PvP areas would be superfluous. And if that's the case, a some PK-fans here would come and tell you, that FPO and SPO players shouldn't have access to areas with rare resources, because they allegedly would take no risk (what in my eyes is nonsense, unless the developers do a sloppy balancing job; and I sincerely don't hope, that will happen).

 

@AndiZ275 - I ment survival of the fittest. English isnt my first language and im doing my best. I apologize if you feel offended.
What i ment was that if you put effort into improving your playing/survival skills and take risks then you should be rewarded by the game.

 

Okay, I'm a bit sensitive, when it comes to such phrases, since they were used for dark matters in darker times here and are still used on other places.

And like I said, I have no problem with rewarding skill and challenges. But I'd like to see a good balance for solo content and other Non PvP content, too (for example: maybe some more agility based challenges like (climbing, diving, jumping, etc.) or some more puzzles (mazes, labyrinths, hidden places in forrests, etc.) or more and different monsters, special solo and PvE events, etc.). In my experience, PvP isn't really much more difficult. It's just a completely different playstyle (you need other rotations (or probably rune combinations), some other tactics, etc.). And because of that non experienced players mostly loose in PvP combat.

 

@Andi:

Many players, especially fans of the entire Ultima series, do not consider the offline, single player experience as "unimportant." As far as OPO mode, players should and will influence how you play. This is a MULTIplayer mode, if you want to have a SINGLE player experience then stick to single player.

You should not have access to those areas without risk IMO. There needs to be competition among players, thus these resources should not be available to single players whatever they may be. I don't think these resources should be game changing and should be things that are not essential, but nice to have (ex. cloths of certain hues, etc.). Also, players will be able to take the incentivized PvP route or the "safe" route to complete quests. I think both routes will be fun and viable, just that the PvP route will offer more reward for higher risk. That said, I think there needs to be safety measures taken to prevent completely new players from getting griefed by PK's.

Regarding the single player content: I am sure there will be an engaging and interested story created by Richard Garriott with the collaboration of Tracy Hickman. Inexperienced players may lose in PvP combat, but they should not be catered to just because they are inexperienced.

 

@AndiZ275 - I understand your point.
I agree that the game need to provide alot more then PvP even though i like that feature alot. I had one of the first GM blacksmiths on Europe server and i enjoyed crafting alot. I later on had GM in tailoring, carpentry and tinkering and provided just about all gear to my guild and i felt needed and that is important since if all is topnotch crafters (Darkfall more or less) you wont get that feeling your needed and have a respectful place in your community.
I also had a fullblown tamer and a treasure hunter. UO treasure hunting was so much fun.
I also did some really hard puzzles on UO freeshards that were highly appreciated by the community so im not just that "elite" PvP guy.=)
I also hope to see such small GM led puzzles here on SotA, they're alot of fun and bring community together.
One of my favorite times in UO was when trinsic was under attack and the town became a lawless area, ok it was lawless but it sure spiced up the game.

 

@Ultima Aficionado: I never said, I want to take no risk! Where does everybody see that? But there must be risk aside of PvP, too and I highly plead for this. What you talk about is keeping content of Non PvP-players, and that will lead to a lot of angry (=&gt; leaving) players. There are many reasons, why players don't like PvP (corpse jumpers, for example, and players that make fun of you after zerging you; that has destroyed the gaming experience for many players I know in several MMOs, because they lost trust in a part of the community; they don't want to be ridiculed the whole time).

I for myself like good PvP, but there are few games, that are good at it. I like Dark Souls as an example. You go for a risk, when you turn human, because then evil PvP ghosts may enter your sphere; but as a support, you may also call friendly players to help you then. It's exciting and fun and there are no advantages in form of equipment, resources, etc =&gt; the balance survives and Non PvP players can join the PvP content whenever they want, without starting with the high disadvantage, I see in many MMOS (not only for PvP content, but there especially for raiding content, too)

P.S. @Ultima: also you exclude a lot of coop players (players that play coop with their brother, sister, husband, best friends, etc.), that don't want to PvP, from content, too

P.P.S. @Ara: and I get your point, too =) . The Open PvP fans want an exciting and challenging PvP experience, and don't want, that Non PvP players get with less risk the same rewards, that thr PvPers have to fight hard for =&gt; destroying the economy of the game. And believe me: I'm the last person, that wants to destroy the PvP experience. I only plead for a good balancing, so every playstyle gets challenging and at the same time rewarding (I still exclude solo offline, since I'm nearly all time online and don't want to exclude myself from the online society willingly; solo offline is for me a niche for modders and sandbox players).

As an example for very bad balancing: Lord of the rings only had once a challenging and rewarding solo player experience, too (no quest arrows, quests with need for exploration and discovery, etc; it was by far not perfect: for example the braindead mobs and the linear trivial questing for leveling up).

But they dumbed that game down so much, that there is no more challenge in the single player content at all (quest arrows everywhere; all is preexplored and discovered, etc.). The last expansion was so easy, that there was no way, you could loose during escort and protection missions, because the guys you had to protect, were stronger than all enemies together.

Also they preferred over a long time the raiders over the single players (and PvPers) in form of equipment =&gt; many raiders were overequipped for the landscape map and at the same time, it was very hard for non raiders, to joins the raiding content =&gt; the raiders did only raid, because the rest was boring and the other players were excluded from the most challenging content. Today the developers want to give non raiders the chance to get the best gear, too (=&gt; a lot of angry elitist raiders), but it just isn't important anymore, because, the standard content is much to easy and such dull and boring for nearly everyone.

That's an example, why I think that a good balancing has to be found between the different playstyles. As soon as one group of players gets preferred, the balancing gets lost =&gt; leaving players and a split community