Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
PvP/PvE (Poll)
n3verendR
Member UncommonPosts: 452
This is not a normal PvP vs PvE Post, I saw a post saying and I quote "The fact is most people don't like open pvp"
Im sorry, All my friends live for it, its a much needed adrenaline rush for the 15 bucks I dish out, I don't to dish out 15 bucks just so some punk can KS me and I can't PK them.
Here it goes.
If you don't care, don't post.
This is not a carebear post, this is for people to get their voice out to game devs to what is the more popular gaming style.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Comments
I voted World Wide Chaos.
Its too bad devs havnt the balls to do it though. Theyre afraid of putting power in the players hands. Arbitrary rules keep devs safe and warm.
Personally, I want full, open, lootable PvP. HOWEVER, I want a very strict system of laws and factions. If you harm someone from inside your faction (steal, kill, etc) they pay the price. If you harm someone from another faction, it could lead to war.
I accually am running a fairly harmless PnP RPG right now with about 10+ players and I have enough action ready to keep them and 100s of others satisfied as far as combat goes, I don't see personally how no mmorpg HAS done this yet, Shadowbane was close, but not close enough.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
my question would then be:
do you want an internal system of justice to be constructed by the devs, or by the players themselves?
I think thats a realy important distinction.
Your making the assumption that characters would be differentiated by levels.
I would only have safe zones at the beginning of the game which would dissolve over time.
After that I'd let the players create their own zones, the laws that govern them, and allow them to police them as they see fit.
They could create heaven or hell, I think it would be fun either way.
Lol its an easy solution, have newbie bodyguard npcs that would require a literal high level raid group to take out =p
Then after that have plenty of low level areas, if a high level player kills a newbie have the price on their head go up --- therefore EVEN MORE high level players would want to kill the noob killer. So... I mean I can keep going I've been listening to crap like this for years.
Oh and what she said above me.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
I chose honor code unlimited, but the honor code has to have teeth. It needs to be something gankers truly will want to avoid, and be something that players can't circumvent with alts or regaining faction easily etc.
An option that wasn't listed which is the easiest to manage, is simply a tight lvl limit like 5 lvls or so. So for instance, a lvl 50 can't attack anyone lower than lvl 45, but lower lvl players can choose to attack someone more than 5 lvls higher which would allow the higher lvl to fight back without negative penalties.
Open PvP with controls on ganking is preferable, cause I don't trust players themselves to enforce a suitable internal system of justice.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
Accually, I'd prefer newbies to have something non-valuable to them that is very valuable to high level character that they can ONLY GIVE to people that protect them and serve as guides.
Level limits are stupid, fun is making a character up to 30, having them with a badass spec and killing a level 50.
Think of how badass it would be to be a ranger/sniper class that is hunting the newb killers. Not to mention you could have maybe areas that newbies level up in that are added, and added and added and the high level players will have problems with finding newbies to kill thus making it more fun just to participate in a big war
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
Man, think how fun it would be to be uncertain about someone just because of their level, therefore you are taking a risk with every battle.
Oh and, how awesome would it be for a newbie to get good exp if they even so much as dent their attacker and get killed in the process, then it would'nt be as big a deal to newbies and pkers would lose their flare.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
PvP and PvE should be 2 distincts systems that share nothing in common.
A PvE level 60 should gain no edge in PvP. A PvPers master of doom should get no edge in PvE. Except maybe a tiny ''rest'' edge to encourage peoples to play both aspects.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
If you're max lvl, there is less risk.
I wouldn't tie exp gain or loss with PvP as there are too many ways to exploit that system. A random single lootable item for the winner would be just fine.
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
Take my original idea, add a zero tolerance policy and take the EXP FROM the high level therefore pking low levels is just a waste of time and exp.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Your stupid, I'd gladly kill a pker if there was a good enough reward, the key is not to get a good "keep the high level pkers away from the noobs" system its to get a good enough "kill the pkers for a bigger reward than selling your +3 shoulders of pve at the market" So...
All in all, incorporate a good enough bounty system.
People think it's fun to pretend your a monster. Me I spend my life pretending I'm not. - Dexter Morgan
Your stupid, I'd gladly kill a pker if there was a good enough reward, the key is not to get a good "keep the high level pkers away from the noobs" system its to get a good enough "kill the pkers for a bigger reward than selling your +3 shoulders of pve at the market" So...
All in all, incorporate a good enough bounty system.
How does that help the poor noob that was ganked?
"We feel gold selling and websites that promote it damage games like Vanguard and will do everything possible to combat it."
Brad McQuaid
Chairman & CEO, Sigil Games Online, Inc.
Executive Producer, Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
www.vanguardsoh
I also voted world wide chaos... I want the players to create and control the world, not be restriced and handheld by the developers.
Levels is an antiquated system that is internally flawed... hell a pvp level based game is utter crap... true pvp games need to be skill based just simply for balance.
and on the subject of n00bs... SCREW THEM!.. I made my bones on the mean streets of Ultima Online... there was no protection for us "n00bs" and we learned how to survive while having a grand fun time of it. The problem is we baby players too much and make it too easy on them..
so I say again... screw frickin n00bs... players will kill them AND players will help them.. that is the nature of things. They dont need a safe zone to learn how to survive... how does that make any sense.
_____________________________________________
"Old UO is now but a dream that will live in the hearts of the faithful for eternity."
Think you have what it takes to take the 'Oath of the legion' and become a true soldier of Rome?
Service guarantees citizenship!
my question would then be:
do you want an internal system of justice to be constructed by the devs, or by the players themselves?
I think thats a realy important distinction.
Ideally, the towns themselves would be player run and (I have a whole system figured out for this) the laws and severity of punishment would be decided on by the rulers or a vote (I'd have to explain the whole system...but you get the drift). Depending on the crime, the victim would turn in a crime report to either an NPC or PC guard then, depending on how bad the crime and how bad the past crimes of the criminal, so many bounties would be put out on the person that could be hunted for by players, but NPC guards would also patrol the area for the offender. Of course, the offender could fight off the guards, but until they pay for their crimes, they will be constantly hunted in that city/state and in their allied city/states.
I'm unsure of what "proper conduct" you are refering too.
However, as far as player enforced laws go, they've their own needs to motivate them. For example: to kill I need armor and weapons, and said instruments are supplied by a crafter. I wont get what I need if he is constantly hounded and killed. So we have mutual interdependence, he needs me to protect him, I need him to stay equipped.
Its what civilization was founded on.....well, that and the plow
So right there you have the basics of a vitrual player created civilization.
That not to say that some rascals might work towords anarchy.....but like I said, thats fine too.
Why is it that every other week someone feels compelled to try and prove that their favorite style of gameplay is what everyone else should be playing?
Egocentric nonsense.
Are you reading the same thread I am?
And here I thought we were just discussing PvP.
Please refer to the original poster's original quote:
That is how the entire discussion was footed and framed.
heh, I guess your right.
Thats what it may be to Reizlanser, not to me though.
Perhaps he couldve phrased the topic in a more charitable light.
edited~i mispelled "frazed".....I just thought that was kinda funny