To Those That Do Not Favor Non-Consensual Player Combat

That is much sounder plan.

However, one runs into the same issue of where the Killer arrives on a hex map first, and sorts into the populous instance, and later the Victim comes along and cannot join because the Killer is there already.

The only way to make the approach work is if the Killer is kicked from the instance and dropped to SPO when the Victim joins.

However that may cause other issues, where the Killer can drop out of combat by moving a puppet "Victim" account onto the instance, and bouncing his other character out of the OPO mode.

 

I'm not 100% sure here but the impression of the hex system I got is that you will never be thrown out once you are in. It would be rather strange if I meat someone in the forest start talking and suddenly he disappear dont you think? It's rather so that if an instance are full you can't enter even if that instance are your best match, you will then go to the next best matching instance.

Thing here is that if PvP/PK are one group in the matching system they would be prioritized to the same instance. I actually think that would work! Then the PK and PKK would be prioritized in to same instance and that would both camps. Yes you might be unlucky and end up a PK/PKK instance but the chance of that happening are not that great and if you do you know there is probably PKK in the area to.

 

Yes, it would be odd. Hence why that would never actually occur in this game, making the approach untenable.

This is a theoretical thought experiment thread after all, there is no such thing as non-consensual PvP in this game.

----

Take the following example :

1. All users are in OPO mode.
2. A single instance is available currently containing 10 users.
3. Killer enters this hex. They will be sorted into the single available instance, since there is no reason to create a new one.
4. Victim now enters this hex, to join the other 10 friends currently playing there.

Two things can occur:

1. They are sorted into the same instance as the Killer they currently have banned. This breaks the "Ban" rule, making the system ineffective.
2. They are sorted into a new instance for that hex map. They are now being penalized for banning Killer, as they cannot play with their friends.

Both results affect a "Blame the Victim" mentality.

 

Oh the only thing that related to you was the part about bots. I was just consolidating all the post into one giant post. Hence the double space in between.

 

Yeah, I gotta say I agree with @PrimeRib on this one. I really don't care what "consequences" you put on the game, if I walk out of town, smish a mob, and as I'm gazing at the pretty scenery from up here I get jumped from behind by a five man team and instantly turned into goo, the game is wrong.

 

If you were being put in that situation involuntary, that would be wrong. If you had previously consented to entering that environment, then the game would be functioning as designed.

 

Poorly designed, to be clear.

 

Why poorly designed if all involved consented to the environment? Poorly played, yes, but hardly poorly designed, as any successful ambush ever conducted will attest.

 

If that was in reference to me, no, WRONG. As in not right, incorrect, at fault. I think the DESIGN could be quite good, if that's what was intended. It would still suck, and I would still lose interest in a game that tried to force me to endure that. If I want to tango in PvP, I can do that, but if I'm just settling down for the evening and want something simple to do and some other person's desire to gank me overrules that, that's wrong.

 

Entering a hex and that being considered tacit approval to be pk'ed without you actually giving consent is poor design.

Its just another way of saying that pvp hexes only should be allowed which is not acceptable to me.

 

If that is wrong then having PvP in SotA is wrong.

Is that what you mean?

No one can avoid being ganked in PvP now and then and to avoid it developers need to remove PvP entirely from the game.

 

Are only PvE hexes ok for you?

Hexes where no PvP whatsoever can take place?

 

Nope not OK either. We all paid for this game and no one should be unable to explore parts of it due to pvp or pve.

Pvp and pve should not be hex tied. Both can go into any hex and do what they want (pvp or not pvp) but only if they give consent. It should not be decided for them just by entering a hex.

 

The argument that entry into an environment where it is possible to engage in PvP is the same thing as consent to PvP is false, a fictional argument rife with construed logic.

Consent to PvP differs from entering an environment where PvP is possible.

You could be killed by a meteor by being under the sky. That is not the same thing as desiring to be killed by a meteor falling from the sky.

Similarly you could be killed in an automobile accident, but driving to the grocery store is not an invitation to collision.

Someone stepping into a PvP zone does not provide permission to murder them. I like PvP as much as the next guy, but bad rhetoric masquerading as logic is still an imposter and should be hanged by the neck until dead dead dead.

 

No, I don't advocate PvP zones. If you select PVP, the world is a PvP zone. If you don't, I will never see you.

 

We have reached agreement. *parties*

 

this would need more information, it sounds realisticly,
if for instance other players could raid said jail to free friends.

if pvp is perma+100% loot, then this would justify.

But just because you do not like PvP doesnt mean it needs to suffer, i agree on UO it was insane.
BUT killing it with 10yrs jailtime wouldnt be too unreasonable, since it will not justify the risk you get, especially if said victim of pvp just respawns with 1-2 hours wasted compared to 10 years of jailtime.

(fyi english is not my first language and im still in the proces of learning )

 

Not to worry: I expect you speak my language vastly better than I speak yours. You are doing quite well!

 

Ouch..you just lost a huge following announcing no PKing...good luck SoTa! Wish I could retract my KS fund oh well..I helped fund it for you trammies


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Rumor, and rumor of rumors. You might want to wait for official word, but if you want to take off, that's your business.