Heavily Restricted PVP & Guild Wars

time007

I've done some research on Black Desert and it appears that:

1.  The korean version has no open PVP rewards and heavy penalties for killing more than 1 person while your karma drops from 300k to 100k in one kill.   Once your karma drops you have massive penalties and receive no rewards for killing anyone and the person kill gets no penalties either.
2.  Guild Wars are super expensive to start and maintain and have lots of rules to start them

Do you guys playing the alpha & beta of the U.S. version have experience with things being different or less restrictive?

I was actually excited to play this game as it looks cool and has a cool concept what with resource nodes.  But it appears highly restrictive towards fighting other players for resources and just actively killing other players.  

Anyone played the NA version in testing or alpha or something that can chime in?

stayontarget

First off you need to stop comparing the Korean version to what we will get in NA/EU.  It hasen't been set in stone yet.  The alpha test they had for na/eu was the same rules the RU servers have. To be honest we probably won't see the final version of the rule set for pvp until CB2.

time007

stayontarget said:

First off you need to stop comparing the Korean version to what we will get in NA/EU.  It hasen't been set in stone yet.  The alpha test they had for na/eu was the same rules the RU servers have. To be honest we probably won't see the final version of the rule set for pvp until CB2.

uhhh, the whole point of my thread was to compare the korean version to the NA version and find out if they will have the same features because the Korean versions features are restrictive.  So does the RU version have a different set of pvp rules than the Korean version?

This thread is basically to try to get a read on either by fact, speculation, opinion, testing, playing other regions etc, to compare and find out if they will be the same.  

So thanks for the input that they most likely won't be the same, now we just have to figure out what the rules for the NA server will be.  Yeah I agree, what they have in CBT2 will most likely be what they will have at release.  

Even one step further, does anyone see them saying after CBT1 "ok we used this restrictive pvp ruleset in CBT1 but we are going to change the rule set in CBT2?"  

holdenhamlet

Nope, no indication that either will change.  I believe the expense of guild wars would be more likely to change, out of the two.  Nobody knows for sure, though.

Personally I'm fine with the 1st.  I don't need to play another gank-fest game.  Guild wars shouldn't cost anything though unless they're rewarding.

Miffi89

there are some rewards for the person who kills a pker. I believe its something like a 5% drop rate for ONE of their equipped items.  I could be wrong by I'm 90% sure i read that before. Tbh i don't think there is much of a reward for the pier. I guess the satisfaction of killing someone for no reason? This refers to the other versions though. About the Guild wars, they cost a lot because the rewards are big. Highest guild reward is 100 mill. I think its a 'take it all' kinda concept as the winner takes both guilds cash. 

holdenhamlet

Miffi89 said:

there are some rewards for the person who kills a pker. I believe its something like a 5% drop rate for ONE of their equipped items.  I could be wrong by I'm 90% sure i read that before. Tbh i don't think there is much of a reward for the pier. I guess the satisfaction of killing someone for no reason? This refers to the other versions though. About the Guild wars, they cost a lot because the rewards are big. Highest guild reward is 100 mill. I think its a 'take it all' kinda concept as the winner takes both guilds cash. 

Ah cool, didn't know that.  In that case it seems pretty cool.

nationalcity

The problem with these types of games though is there is always a couple guilds dominating and no one else stands a chance... How are people gonna feel when there are two three huge zerg guilds dominating everything......

Because that's how these games always turn out........ What does Black Desert do different that will put a stop to that? I mean I would like to honestly know because that will probably be the difference between me playing or not... I shouldn't have to join the biggest guild on the server to actually do GVG or PVP

ste2000

Now, that's what I call a good news.
The major worry is the Cash Shop though.
If it is anything like Archeage, I am going to pass on it.

time007

well this sounds like a snooze fest.  lets hope its not.  (snooze fest pvp wise.  I dont like arenas.  i like wvw, rvr, server vs server type stuff).  I guess I will give it a try.  i shied away from archeage because its visuals were too boxy.  and every spot was camped for like 3 months, both in housing and pve.  when i returned like in its 4 or 5th month, everyone i knew had quit so i just stopped playing.  

Yaevindusk

Truthfully, there should be severe penalties for the needless slaughter of other people in a game that has any type of society.  Though with the different areas and cultures displayed, they should only be criminals in one "kingdom" while free in another.

You shouldn't get good karma or reputation if you're a known murderer.  In terms of immersion, you should be banned from all cities and villages, lose access to all benefits being a law abiding citizen gets you, and be a target for bounty hunters with no real rewards other than being known as an infamous PK and people being afraid of you when they see you -- you who gives no sh*ts about laws and restrictions placed on you.

To have a system that rewards behavior without severe restrictions is just pure anarchy and it might as well just be a barren battlefield of faction versus faction at that point.  Which is why some semblance of Faction Vs. Faction or RvR was created in other games to give reasons and specific locations to fight others.  Also while Guild Wars are a thing and the destruction of your enemies not having any serious ramifications since war was officially declared on one another and people know not to get involved or that it's dangerous.

If this was a survival game or a game that has no real society -- maybe like a caveman like game -- then anarchy would be the expected way to go.

Roin

nationalcity said:

The problem with these types of games though is there is always a couple guilds dominating and no one else stands a chance... How are people gonna feel when there are two three huge zerg guilds dominating everything......

Because that's how these games always turn out........ What does Black Desert do different that will put a stop to that? I mean I would like to honestly know because that will probably be the difference between me playing or not... I shouldn't have to join the biggest guild on the server to actually do GVG or PVP

Roll with the clique or get found in a ditch.

time007

Yaevindusk said:

Truthfully, there should be severe penalties for the needless slaughter of other people in a game that has any type of society.  Though with the different areas and cultures displayed, they should only be criminals in one "kingdom" while free in another.

You shouldn't get good karma or reputation if you're a known murderer.  In terms of immersion, you should be banned from all cities and villages, lose access to all benefits being a law abiding citizen gets you, and be a target for bounty hunters with no real rewards other than being known as an infamous PK and people being afraid of you when they see you -- you who gives no sh*ts about laws and restrictions placed on you.

To have a system that rewards behavior without severe restrictions is just pure anarchy and it might as well just be a barren battlefield of faction versus faction at that point.  Which is why some semblance of Faction Vs. Faction or RvR was created in other games to give reasons and specific locations to fight others.  Also while Guild Wars are a thing and the destruction of your enemies not having any serious ramifications since war was officially declared on one another and people know not to get involved or that it's dangerous.

If this was a survival game or a game that has no real society -- maybe like a caveman like game -- then anarchy would be the expected way to go.

well your logic is way off.  You are saying that a game karma system/pvp system should be like real life's society.  so if that is the case, if i kill you in the game, you stay dead and i loot your entire corpse and you have to recreate a brand new character.  i mean, if we are striving for the realism you want.  so you can't have one without the other.  you want real life penalties for a pvp kill, then get a real life penalty for a pvp death.