What made UO PvP so great and what is missing in SotA...IMO

The pixels were not worth caring about maybe?

That and people have alternatives now. Games that don’t do PvP the was UO started out.

 

I know of noone that wants to attend a LARP where there is an omnipotent oracle that intercedes in their roleplay, you die, you can get looted.

That is literally NOONE I know, in over 15 years of larping and 5 years organizing various themed LARPS. We even had a poll in one of them because it was getting big and people would have 15-40 player groups so it would make it hard for the lone wolves and new players not to get ganked.

Well they all said they preferred realistic mechanics, yes even the young bard that is anti-violence with not even a costume on because its his first larp, they WANTED the risk, and the thrill. Seen objectively they would take the opportunity to meet new people and find "protectors" so they could roleplay their bard in peace.

Friendship that would have never happened with a trammel LARP.

I said those two words in the same sentence, time to go wash my tongue.

It's also probably the only reason I'm still here, because I know many of our devs like the old school and understand what is fun in it, they told me, at the risk of angering others who seem to have no clue in their own team.

 

Now at least, noone can accuse me of being impatient anymore, after harping the same tune since siege perilous came out, and hanging around here for however long its been without stalking or bothering ANYONE about it.

The return to the source is INEVITABLE.

Folks will get tired of second life super virtual medieval steampunk collector PG-13 sims 2.0, as they did with 1.0.

The total opposite of UO, which still gives me full immersion when I visit EA's servers and some freeshards.

It's a world of differences... and we've still not elucidated why some of our devs are so against the idea... the precious pixel theory is just a theory, and it makes no sense in a niche game where most people are over 30 years old.

 

In PvP the UO method was to wear throw away gear. The best cheap gear that was easily replaced. AKA pixels they didn’t care about.

The part they cared about was tucked away and unreachable by PvP. It’s the same here for those that PvP. The pixels they care about are untouchable.

 

to expand on this would be store bought items and pledge items worn in pvp. Cannot be looted. Broke pvp from the start.

 

PvP looting is part of the cost of PvP. Easily the most costly part in UO (pre-split). In SotA it’s a smaller cost. If you die, something is lootable and you will either lose that something or pay the ransom (losing gold)

Looting is an after action of PvP and not PvP in itself. If they did not have looting of any kind they could still have entertaining PvP.

From the perspective of the loser, is looting in PvP what made UO better than SotA? I will say it’s probably more based on how easy it was to get into said PvP and be competitive.

 

I would say it affects the system in general. If there are invulnerable pieces of loot and only some that you can loot then it will affect every aspect of the game starting with crafting. People that would normally craft items to replace items taken will not have to make those that are not lootable. In pvp this will become the norm just like the later UO with invulnerable gear. Things need to be able to be looted, especially in PvP. Gold is a non factor because people just buy gold now. Well, arties and about everything else. The key to pvp will omit store bought items and pledge items from use in pvp, or if they are used they should be able to be looted.

 

1. If someone wore 100% nonlootable items what would show in the ransom. (I know Chris said gold would still be part of the loot but I don’t know the current implementation). That would be no different than paying the ransom. - ransom breaks things before unlootable with your PvP looting requirments.

2. The way you describe the PvP looting process implies that once looted those items are no longer in the economy thus need to be crafted again. When in fact they likely still are in game and for sale without concerns for crafter efforts to be viable in the economy. - looted gear becomes fast cash if sold, which in turns is slower than the fast cash built into a ransom system.

 

it is just one of the problems. If the rate of decay on items is correct and if they lose durability then your point is null. My point stands intact overall. If people are forced to wear lootable items, then different pieces could be looted. These items should be damaged and stand for significant wear. Loss of wear and hit points. They should be lesser than what a crafter could make and sell. These items would prob be better served for salvage. What ever the ransom you say more items would be included in the equation instead of less.

 

Correct my memory here but did UO instill a durability hit in it’s full looting?

A durability hit or out right mangling of items forcing vendoring or salvage was going to be my follow up to your next comment. So we are following the same thoughts here.

In the end it still turns to gold or base materials.

The bulk of the difference is cost of PvP. UO had cheap gear to enter PvP. SotA, not so much.

Making gear lootable would push most into cheaper gear. Not great for the crafters when everyone can make that cheap gear.

 

not great for top end crafters for sure. But would provide a market for lower level crafters to sell their wares. The high level gear could be used for pve, which in most games is what its for. The high level gear could be used in pvp but those that wear it are very confident and often travel in groups or big guilds, in which they make their own gear.

 

I was probably one of the rare people who loved to be looted, in fact I was always wearing the best gear I could, everywhere. Thats the thing that was wonderful with UO pre AOS, even the most magical item had a cieling value and was usually a drop, while it sure gave you a few extra damage, it wouldn't be that much better than GM crafted gear. I had about 40 vainquishing halberds... could pvp for months and still wouldn't touch my Gm crafted gear, that was off balance sure but nothing that can't be adjusted. In fact some of my GM crafted gear was much more valuable than the artifacts, because some bore the rare mark of very famous crafters, those were precious.

People that didn't want to use this gear were not thinking in RPG terms, but in SIMS terms, they thought why use that weapon when I can sell it for X and still use a GM crafted weapon and still get good results (as intended). It was all about money and not having fun in a GAME.

So often, since when you looted someone it was pretty much a garbled mess instead of an organized list, especially during the time where an item was just "a magic item" before you used identification on it (which I loved) most people didn't even bother with looting your gear, they would instead take my reagent and potion bag, deeds I might have or something really of value. 5 minutes later, I was ready to pvp again, had kits ready in my house to reequip, all organised.

Most PKers I knew were total pack rats as well, the items really left the economy and was piled up ceiling high in stacked chests, forever. Adventurers hated the bandits, but the crafters LOVED them, especially the bludgeon wielding type which damaged armor.

The ransom system is basically UO's insurance, which killed the crafter market, so much so they had to add all kinds of perks to keep it going, which required constant min/maxing (sounds familiar?).

We are repeating the exact same mistakes, and even worse it looks like noone in the dev team ever played a properly setup LARP, which includes these mechanisms for highly powerful artifacts (rules even more restrictive than UO).

I think UO needed serious adjustment back then, now its a lost cause, and I sure hope we don't go down the same path.

 

ehh... in SOTA I didn't even have to buy one thing, every person I meet has so much good crafted gear to give away that they almost paid me to take it.

Cheap gear for a GM crafter should always be better than "cheap gear you can make without a dedicated character". Then I have a choice, spend 10 hours gathering and making a so-so item, or paying 2000 gold (which takes me about an hour, don't laugh at me )... easy choice for me, I will buy.

I think we need to go over the structure before we argue details...

 

I still think its a big error to mix those playstyles... the economy isn't the same at all...

and without looting (I can pay to get my items back)

bah, I won't even finish my idea cause its useless to argue about a game which is item centric in the first place... this is not a RPG.

Did crafters in UO have fun without items being so rare they would cry about losing it ?

Please don't even answer my question...

I'm just going to close this forum and come back when my head stops boiling.

 

Dam... look at me ... I was reading this thread and got pk'd .... 0oO0o0OOOoo0oo

 

What made uo ...
1. Eventually once we got out internet going into DSL and Cable modems we got "stability"
2. Fairness where anyone could kill anyone else
3. Caps provided diversification and once you hit 700 (7x GM) game on (not we got to level into infinity)
4. Proper PvP Rewards and risks for Random PvP, GuildWars, Chaos/Order, thieves

I highly focus on #1. Game, Game Code, needs WAY more polish before pvp will be in cities.

5. Damit ... died again ... OooOOOo000o0oOOOooo