Want more funding? Add real PvP.

Yes i thought the words spiritual successor to that old UO game ment something when it comes to SotA PvP.

Seems i was dead wrong though since SotA PvP have just about no similarities with that UO game Richard had a part in.

Problem here is that statements like spiritual successor to UO mean different things to different people.

It is a way to loose statement since UO had so many features and different gamestyles within the same game.

 

That's why we must look at the mega threads, hangouts, and deep dives to see what they mean. Can't look at Ultima series or Ultima Online.

 

how would you know, you're not a PvPer. When I gathered loot in UO, I NEVER resold anything. I horded what I thought was good, and I reduced the rest of the stuff to ingots. I even horded magic items I would never use if they were good enough. Sometimes I would try sell some of the ones I think might have some value.

So it might not work out the way you are thinking. However SotA is a different game.

EDIT: Besides nobody wants to buy a chainmail shirt by itself. People want the whole suit. Also if people are in the market for buying something they don't want something that is busted. It needs to be in top condition.

ALSO BY YOUR LOGIC PVE DUNGEONEERS WILL ALSO BE TOP SELLERS OF EQUIPMENT BECAUSE THE LOOT WILL HAVE PLAYER MADE ITEMS.

 

That would seem to be a missed opportunity. Why would you do that? Was it because the equipment worn by PvP participants, and available to be looted, was of less than stellar quality, and not worthy of resale? Or, were you simply a packrat?

And with full loot, you will be able to collect a whole suit from anyone wearing a whole suit.

It is planned that equipment be repairable. It is likely that item repair will be much easier than item creation. That should return it to 'top condition' if not new, so it may not be able to be returned to top condition as long as a new piece of equipment might, but it could also be sold at a substancial discount over a new piece, and still provide a wide profit margin.

Perhaps, if when a MOB is killed, all of the equipment they were wearing and/or had collected were available... i.e. there were full loot from PvE mobs. To date, I don't recall anyone having made an argument for this, or proposing full loot in PvE as desired or desirable.

 

It should have been alot more information in detail about SotA PvP when SotA was at kickstarter level.

That way just about all misunderstandings would have been avoided.

Poor information about SotA PvP at kickstarter level and loose statements like SotA will be a spiritual successor to UO have created alot of misinterpetrations.

Once you pledged on the belief it was gonna be the next UO PvP game (or close too) then it was to late to go back. A lesson learned.

 

Which is why I didn't pledge until After I had heard and learned enough to be assured that I wasn't pledging to UO2, but something actually worthy of my support.
I would not have pledged a centi-yen to support another cesspool like what Ultima Online became.

 

I don't know about that. They said consensual PvP no full loot with node based PvP (ala Tabula Rasa) Then a stretch goal for guild level PvP wars. With the mega thread they added the ability to flag open PvP.

It's laid out, the finer details are the only parts we are missing.

 

That's the truest thing I have ever read on any forum here. "Spiritual successor" to UO does not mean the same thing to everybody. PK'ing some pansy roleplayers and jacking their stuff is certainly not what comes to my mind, for example, when I say I want to see a spiritual successor to UO, although that is what I remember the most about UO's early period. Not that you are requesting this Ara, but many have, and some expected to be able to do this. Full loot doesn't spring immediately to my mind either, or PvP at all for that matter. That's the problem with these nebulous descriptions such as "spiritual successor:" people read into them what THEY want them to mean.

To hand over a lot of r/l money to support a game without first researching it to find out whether you actually like the systems or not is extremely foolish and irrational behavior, though. People just hand over their money on an assumption and a faith, that because it's Richard Garriot, he will invariably make the game you want to play with all the features you like? I don't understand the people who did that. It was never likely that this would be an open-PvP / full-loot game.

 

its is because of the player driven economy (that it make sense to have a vendor and crafter who can sell stuff, be a buisness man, no loot no sold armors)

for me a vendor was an important part of my house not only the decoration.

 

If RG came out and said he was making a Batman movie. Do we start drafting out what the movie will be like from our knowledge of Batman comic books, movies, and games? Or do we wait and see what the movie is about and enjoy his creative licensing on the subject.

Spiritual successor is not what we want to pick and choose from RG's past work. It's what he brings together as a total package. He can add/remove anything he wants but the final product is what matters.

Clinging to some pre defined mechanic from some other game is setting yourself up for disappointment.

 

1 / 2 wan Hard Core PvP COOOLLLL

 

Consensual PvP was promised from the start.

Full loot, though, was said to not be quite feasible given their plans for how gearing would work. I first heard about it in a hangout, reasonably early (still during KS). And it was never promised by the devs, only being mentioned when answering direct questions to say that it wasn't guaranteed.

Well, since I don't think this qualifies as the kind of info we shouldn't leak...

At the current time, 101 for full loot, 99 against. Full loot is gaining, true, but only barely.

(And I'm impressed that a single pool has attracted 200 Dev+ players )

 

I still think the "full loot" argument exists because they haven't told us any other reason for PvP. If PvP won you a cat or a horse or a pirate ship, people would be a whole lot less interested in someone else's broken pants.

 

How many prisoners in prison want to stay there. How many kids want to eat candy for dinner? How many people want to be married to a super model or a stripper?

Each of these wants have costs. The people that want these things are not always in the position to see the impact of their desires.

Luckily we have a highly experienced dev team to design the game for us and not addicts looking for their next fix.

 

Each of these wants have costs. The people that want these things are not always in the position to see the impact of their desires.​

Luckily we have a highly experienced dev team to design the game for us and not addicts looking for their next fix.​

​

uo fans and sandbox junkees waiting till ultima online for a game which will be like it, with loot and pvp everywhere​

there is only mortal online which is buggy like hell, richard garriot plz make a good game or make this pve only and buy starvault and make mortal a good sandbox game XD​

what are the costs is the question? if it wont be pvp loot friendly

in my opinion old uo players, at least all i know woudnt play much the game , maybe buy it to look at it, because its from the makers of ultima. but it wont keep them for long
it would cause maybe broken economy, botters can mine non stop (noone can kill them)
people wont buy armors or weapons because they wont loose there armor/weapons , so no reason to have a vendor (another great feature would be done)
player vs player roleplaying (good and evil would miss) i coudnt guard my bridge, collect from everyone the tax in my terretory, and kill them if they not pay) or play the good one , making a guild called sota police department to save the noobs from red players. no headhunting guilds
if players with non pvp would mix up with pvp players , they maybe could blueblock
missing thrill for a lot of players, i remember my heart beating when transporting 1000 gold in mortal online i farmed for 3 weeks, and how happy i was when i reached the town XD
pve would be less funny and housing (your house chests will be overfilled if there is no loot) in pve it was always great to find magic weapons to identify and sell them, gave me some gamble feel. if you find one vanq weapons pve become useless ???


pros
what are the pros of no pvp

you can do dungeons in savety (you can do it in friends only mode too)
you wont loose your stuff
causual kids will start play

im not saying there should be loot everywhere at least 1 event like arena fight , or serverdown each day we need , to get the feeling oh at this event i wont loose my stuff and can carry the best from the best i have

so pve people and new players can train there.

we only need an enjoiable combat, if we wont get, pvp is not needed

see
age of conan i really enjoyd the combat and the gore animations , but no loot and to not be able to sell crafted stuff made3 many players leave and it got pay to win.

there was some guys called human mendibles, they had the best gear from the raids and whatever and always owned in the pvp games. when you once got them down with 2-3 man they not even lost there gear causing them to have a huge pvp advantage all the time.

i hated that

 

If you are talking about just the full PvP pool, and using the Dev+ one for reference, it means implementing something that half the PvP forum goers don't want. This could cause a good number of them to just choose to not engage in PvP.

Now, the opposite is true; not having full loot means displeasing the other half. But the already planned gearing system for SotA does not support full loot, which means implementing full loot would require scrapping a good part of the work already done on gearing and starting anew. And it would forcibly bring the issues with throwaway gear that the devs wanted to avoid.

Besides, PvP being consensual was an early promise, and being able to slip into single player online and play the whole PvE part of the game without ever meeting another player was a day one KS promise. How do you reconcile that with full loot PvP? How can you make PvP, and full loot PvP at that, attractive enough, without gimping PvE in the process (which would drive away the PvE-only players, that Portalarium has in the past estimated at roughly half the potential player base, but I actually believe to be larger)?

Simply repeating time and time again that you want full loot PvP, without looking at the issues that would result, is, I believe, ineffectual.

Funny thing, Age of Conan implemented hardcore ("Blood and Glory") PvP servers some time in the past. Harsher rules (including partial loot), no alts, and so on. Seems like PvPers were clamoring for it in the forums.

They were an utter failure. It was far easier to find good PvP on the regular PvP servers than on the Blood and Glory ones.

Why this happened is open to interpretation, of course; I don't think even Funcom knows where they failed. But they did fail; when they opened a harsher PvP server, the community didn't rise to the challenge, and allowed the new ruleset to basically die out. Whatever the reason was, it makes it harder for any dev to attempt the same in the future, given that developing and maintaining different rulesets comes at a development cost overhead.

 

i only played on that open pvp server , that was the reason i played age of conan , but short after pay to win was implemented and it was with no loot or any real panalty if you killed someone.
which made the game uninteresting for crafters

also age of conan was no sandbox no real crafting experimenting housing all what a good mmo needs. had lvled monsters so you coudnt go where you want and was forced in a lvl zone
but pvp was fun thats the reason i played it a while but nothing that could keep you interested after years because of an awesome economy and crafting experiments

 

The economy is not being designed to be centered on <Insert here> : (PvE/PvP). Consumables and item decay happen with or with out <Insert here> : (PvE/PvP)
PvP does have looting, just not full loot. The pain of death is easily scalable, they have options and full control over that.

They have shown no reason to think that the economy will be anything less than great.

 

Why not look at the pvp model of other games? I would like to reference Conquer Online. With their model characters are protected from non consent pvp until level 15. Not to mention an entire zone that is no pvp (biggest city in game/trade capital). I was doing research on this game before committing to being a backer at the $200 level. After seeing what they have planned, I have really been put off. I'm no pvp maniac but I do agree with the sentiment that there has to be more emphasis on pvp. I'm severely disappointed by the direction the devs are going with this.