Why Open PvP with full Loot worked in UO.

I remember the good ol' days of Icky Tower....When Pk vs Pk battles lasted for an hour or more.....Hopping servers to negate casting so you could drink a heal pot...Walking around naked with a sword killing sheep for wool, just so you could have some bandages....As a baby character, finding a secluded place to work skills....Getting revenge on the PK who Pk'd you....Lovely Memories!

"Oh where have the days of Hardcore gone?"

 

In a nutshell, most current players in the MMO genre seem to dislike that play style. This means that a game that aims at that kind of hardcore gameplay immediately becomes a niche game with a much smaller player base than it could otherwise attract.

The closest thing to that among the large MMOs of today is EVE, where over half the player base has never, ever, set foot in any place where they can be attacked without heavy repercussions for the attacker, and something between 3/4 and 4/5 of the player base stay in those same "safe" parts of the game almost all the time. In other words, up to 80% of the players play EVE as a game with little to no PvP, where any attacker is dealt with lethal force a few seconds after starting the attack.

 

The thing about "hardcore" is, it's got multiple meanings.

You can be a hardcore gamer without being thrust into the world of PVP. Many people, likely most of the 80s/90s Ultima fans could be considered hardcore RPers. Their idea of hardcore gaming in an RPG is radically different than a PVPer's idea of it.

Given that this isn't setting out to be UO 2.0, and that it's inspired by 20 years worth of story driven role playing, it would be senseless to put an emphasis on catering to PVP.

 

Story driven Roleplay is what they are after. As well as a "realism" effect they keep talking about. Guess what the fantasy reality is..once you leave a "guarded" zone you are no longer protected..and freely attachable any other way is dumb..hence why they are creating different options to select as almost an "opt out button" for the people who have no intention of ever wanting to fight other people..which is what makes this game so great so far! I don't want to fight useless unattended macroers, or newbies..I want a challenge something strategic in battle not just oh well your naked? YOU DIE!

 

Right but what about the people who want to enjoy the story driven gameplay with people they haven't met yet, but will soon meet while playing?


The "fantasy reality" is skewed in games due to resurrection. When you're playing D&D, it's not like you're immediately surrounded by gank -squads every 30 seconds while you're riding on horseback from one town to the next...

If you are, the DM probably hates you.

 

Agreed...but perma is too strict and even a stat loss or timer till resurrection..the majority or MMORPG players want "quick and easy" no 2 hour quests..run to the guy go kill 5 scorpions bring back 5 spider silk..quest over!

I'm liking the ideas that are being thrown around here with the no quest log, getting back to note taking, and selective pvp

Now you can still of into game and meet people at the bank or smith or tailor shops..but if you don't want to die to another player just don't leave your safe guards zone..there should be "safe lands" to mine chop wood harvest plants or heck even live..but once you wander into the wilderness to try and attain higher quality materials where there is no guards..why not be freely attackable

 

Those people shouldn't be playing SoTA, if you ask me.

I'd like to see something like Ultima Underworld where you have the map thing and note-taking all built in. You still have to take the notes, but it's all on screen

 

I agree they shouldn't I want to play a game that's immersive and doesn't tell me exactly what to do..that's why I played/play UO there is no line of sight..I could go slay dragons, or craft clothes, or even sit at the bank and talk..other games it's like ok well your level 1 go kill this..ok level 3 etc etc until you hit the cap! Then you have an arena! Yay!

And if pvp isn't loot able to an "extent" its just silly zero risk to reward..atleast resources,bandages,potions need to be minimum..I'm even ok with not losing armor when you die to a person , but there has to be something in place to fulfill the hardcore players too..what about all armor isn't "loot able" during the day cycle but is at night..or even non repairable durability on armor so eventually you'll lose it regardless..to keep crafting for folks a viable option..or an in game purchase to get an option to not lose a specific piece of armor for 4 real time weeks for .99 or something

 

From everything we've heard about crafting and repairing, repairs will become progressively more expensive each time they're done, which will eventually lead to gear being to expensive to maintain. At the same time, players will gain affinity with gear as they use them, providing bonuses to gear that is used regularly. So, it's not quite a no-repair system, but you will eventually have to replace your gear, and doing so will be a difficult decision. I love it. Hopefully repairs will be handled by player crafters and possibly require raw materials to keep the economy humming, but I don't think anything has been said about that.

But please, no spending real money to protect your stuff. Do with with in game currency if anything. It will make for an excellent gold sink.

 

A lot of things will be real money I assume..I was just giving an example, I don't think it's the right turn for things I'd "MUCH" rather it be player done trust me there..but if its anything like a modern MMO with epic gear that you never drop..it's just stupid, and will fade extremely fast

 

I wouldn't worry about that. About the only consensus I've seen on these forums is that nobody wants a gear progression grind.

 

I actually dislike this system. I will merely apply what I know about control theory and theoricrafting, determine the point where I have the best bang for the buck between affinity bonuses and repair costs, and more or less blindly apply that. Unless someone does that first and publishes the result.

But then, as long as the gear is readily replaceable, no big problem. I'll just mathematically solve that system and henceforth ignore it.

Which is why I will have enough characters to cover every crafting profession, even if I have to purchase extra copies of the game to have that (I already have two pledges)

 

I don't think it will be that easy. If affinity adds, say, 2 damage to each swing that can't be replicated by anything but gaining affinity with another weapon, that 2 damage is basically priceless. By starting up a new weapon, no matter how you slice it you will be gimping yourself for a time. What do you do if you're about to engage in a difficult fight where you want every edge you can muster, but your good weapon is about to break and will cost you some huge amount to repair? You either have to take the financial hit or the powergaming hit. And what if that weapon has a maker's mark from a friend of yours who quit the game so it has sentimental value as well? You can't plug that into a spreadsheet.

I don't doubt that theorycrafters will come up with some theoretical optimal replacement point, but I do seriously doubt that they'll actually reach a consensus about where it lies. It's not as simple as adding up the dps. It seems to me it would make for an interesting challenge for the spreadsheet crowd. And of course they'll have nothing to say about any potential sentimental value a piece of gear might have.

 

I don't think that affinity should be the only modifier. Over time, degradation of the weapon should occur that offsets the affinity bonus. When weapon degradation exceeds affinity to the point that you have a break even point with respect to a new weapon, get a new weapon.

 

For me, at least, in-game items that can be lost have absolutely no sentimental value. I don't handle that kind of permanent loss in games well, so I choose instead to never attach any value to virtual things I can lose. They become, in my eyes, merely disposable bunches of bytes.

Which is why I dislike gear breakage. For me, at least, not only it forces me to replace the gear from time to time, creating boring busywork I could do without; it also completely removes any hint of attachment I could have with the gear, sometimes even removing part of the immersion I could have.

It's similar to how I treat permadeath characters compared with characters that can't be lost. For me permadeath characters are just a disposable identification with no attachment whatsoever, no matter how much I play it, while a character that can't be lost has the chance to become cherished.

At least gear that is always lost after a time, but easily replaceable with identical pieces, is for me a better system than WoW-like gear inflation. In WoW gear does not break, but it becomes completely useless from time to time as the devs add new content tiers, which is even worse.

As for the trade-off in power: I simply won't care. The intent does not seem to be making gear with affinity much more powerful, and (despite typically doing quite a bit of reverse engineering and theoricrafting in any game I play) I don't typically powergame, so I will just work out when I should dispose of the old gear in order to minimize my regearing and repairing costs, perhaps add a bit of time to make up for the easier time grinding in gear with affinity, and settle at that. I prefer PvE content to be more challenging anyway.

 

Minding my own business chopping trees, red appears, run like crazy, almost die several times, get away to safety by the skin of my teeth after running half a map (check blood pressure). OR queue with other cattle, join instance, kill die repeat - spend generic tokens for gear - repeat.

I know which I prefer, although I gained nothing material wise from the first scenario. The adrenaline rush alone was worth it and worth a thousand 'epic items'. Happy days UO.

SotA hopefully follows scenario one (which happened to me).

 

Why do the pro-PK people insist on dehumanizing and spitting on everyone who doesn't share their gaming preferences? Do you honestly think that liking early UO makes you a superior person?

The fact that almost every person who wants full loot acts this way is one of the main reasons I don't want full loot in SOTA. Online games have enough elitist jerks without putting out a beacon for them, which is what full loot is.

 

I don't see his remark as pertaining to PvP so much, but rather objecting to the gear grind associated with raids, since he mentions spending tokens on gear, which is very much a Lord of the Rings Online activity (Probably common to many others as well, but I have recent experience with LoTRO). If you never been on a big LoTRO raid, they are very much cattle calls, but they have nothing at all to do with PvP, and nothing at all to do with full loot.

So, what he is saying, in UO, he had more fun lumberjacking and running from PKs than he had in a gear-grind raid game like LoTRO and I presume, WoW.

@Seneth Somed, I think you owe Diminio an apology.

 

My problem is that he refers to people who don't prefer to game his way as cattle. Why should I apologize for that? What, your lot is allowed to say whatever nasty things they like, but I don't have the right to be bothered by it? I'm sure not going to apologize on your orders, Air Marshall.

 

No, that is not what he was saying at all. He was saying that jamming into an raid instance was like being pushed into a cattle car, an accurate description, I think. It didn't have anything to do with you at all. It didn't have anything to do with how you play, and it didn't have anything to do with PvP or full loot. You took offense where none was intended. Sometimes, it's not about you.

I still think you should apologize, but that's just me.