Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Newsletter, Issue 11: Off the Boards
Stradden
Managing EditorMember CommonPosts: 6,696
This week, Off the Boards posed a challenge to our newsletter readers. Can you come up with a PvP system for a game that will make most of the hardcore PvP players happy, while at the same time, keeping the interest of the so-called Carebears? Let us know!
Cheers,
Jon Wood
Managing Editor
MMORPG.com
Comments
To come up with an adequate system, it may be important to determine what persons in each "camp" desire.
I would guess most PvPers are after the challenge of facing a real, non-AI opponent. Some have expressed an interest in playing "on one's toes", having to beware of danger around ever corner. Some players may choose open PvP if there is a reward for killing other players, i.e. taking some or all of their items/money. A few PvPers may kill for RP reasons. Sometimes, people may be tempted to kill another player out of spite, revenge or annoyance. And there is likely a segment of the population that just likes to make things difficult for others, the "griefers" who would use an open system to disrupt PvE battles, "gank noobs", etc. To be fair, waiting for a player to become weak after fighting a mob is probably a legitimate tactic, especially if there is a reward to be had by killing the player, or if the mob is an especially rare one.
The majority of "carebears" probably do not want to deal with the "griefers". There is a perception that the "carebear" player is not competent against "live" opponents, which may or may not be true. Some players may also not like the idea of constantly feeling like a potential victim, especially if there is a lack of vindication by "law enforcement" of some kind. If the game in question has room for those who don't care for direct combat (people who only craft, for example), they may not want to be involved with combat, especially when attackers are not easily distinguishable.
A thought, after all that: trying to please everyone leaves a system with at least a few upset.
For seven years I played Ultima Online religiously lol. Both on OSI and Private servers. I definately had my share of unconsented 100% totally free form PVP. I found it enjoyable. I just liked the rush of walking out of town and watching another player attempt to kill me. I've also played games that are strictly PvE and found them fun up to a certain level then they got boring. There is just something about the competition between another live player.
AI gets predictable, a player will always try to come up with a new way to gain the upper hand on you and you have to develop a counter attack to put things back in your favor. I, however, do realize that PvP isn't for everyone and the (this is the first time I've heard this expression) "care bears" do deserve the ability to play a game without the fear of getting PK as soon as they step outside of a town.
Now playing on the Private UO servers and other games that allow unconsented PvP, I've seen many systems in order to let the PvPers and the PvEers still have whatever fun they desire to have. I've seen tag systems where players are given a [Non-PK] tag at the end of the name. But that just made them a target to the PKers that like to break rules (I will admit, I was one of them.) I've seen places with special PVP-only zones, but it would always end up a PvE player would accidently walk into the PK zone and he was dead in 45 seconds.
The only thing I have honestly seen that works is segratation. Weither its separate Facets in the world, like Trammel and Felicuca (or however you spell it) Or completely different servers. World of Warcraft has it done that way and the original Everquest was done that way. I don't slightly understand why alot of the MMO companies do it that way. Honestly, While it would cost more in server maintainence, they would make up in subscriptions.
---------------------------------------------
Don't click here...no2
It's unlikely they'll ever be able to come up with a system and coexist on the same server unless the server itself has sections and toggles perhaps. Look at the way civilization of mankid itself functions. We have many different types of people with lots of different viewpoints. Some people are all for war and domination others are completly opposed to it and everywhere in between.
I think the best solution would be if you could have a network of different servers for different gaming catagories for pve, pvp, roleplaying, casual, hardcore, class based, skill based, and anywhere in between. For example options could include pvp hardcore (IE full-loot) skill based or regular pvp (no loot) class based roleplaying. They could then have a central server or servers where all the major towns and such are for crafting, trading, buying, selling, training, ect takes place which branches off into different sections leading to which ever area you feel like going to. Say it works like a compass north=pvp,northeast=pvp hardcore,northwest=pvp roleplaying,south=pve, southeast=pve roleplaying,southwest=pve hardcore pve, and south=pve. However they feel like setting it up basically and each with either the option of skill or class based how they'd setup a toggle for skill and class based sytem I haven't thought out yet, but I'm sure with some creativity it could be done. Perhaps you would have to level a specific class first and that would earn the right to add it to your options for your characters skill toggle which would probably have a limit/cap of some form. It would offer lots of options and everyone could be happy. They could add additional servers for each as nessary and ones to certain locations and such.
MMO's have come up with lots of different ideas. Some work, some don't, and some work partially. Guild Wars for example has the option of switching between servers quite easily which is nice, but the game is all instanced and is one of the things holding it back in the minds of some. UO for example had/has great hardcore pvp, it also was skill based which alot of players enjoy. Daoc has great seidge warfare and RvR combat. EQ has great pve content questing and raiding. WoW has a nice mix of most everything, but doesn't meet the demands of everyone. I'm sure there are many other games I've left out that have great aspects they've contributed as well, but I don't have time to cover everyone especially ones I've never played personally. My point is there are good things from most any decent mmo that a smart company such as blizzard could improve upon to create hopefully a even more dynamic and intresting mmo. My concept I feel would be one step closer to achieving what we all want a game that's fun for everyone.
The crafter's life
The crafter keeps his lot in a town, most likely, commissioning materials from mining companies, woodcutters, other individuals or anybody else that may provide them. The town will need weapons crafted regularly to maintain stock for their guards, and many will seek fresh weapons of high quality.
The healer's life
Once you have taken an honest beating (perhaps "gone dead" in game terms) you will need a willing healer to treat your extremely severe wounds, or they will pain you for the rest of your life. The worst cases require both quite some time and some rare herbs that cost a fair sum of money. And as the healer needs to live too, his services seldom come cheap. However, his services are not easily dismissed once they are needed.
And there we randomly invented our death system.
Since life outside of towns will be dangerous, healers might want to be located within protected areas. A criminal that has committed a crime within a protected area, or is otherwise unwelcome might find himself assaulted by the guards - while at his most extremely vulnerable.
Damage and recovery
Exact damage will not be shown. Damage 1% - 25% appears as slight injuries.
<25%,80%] incurs penalties and is considered "wounded"
<80%,100%> is mortally wounded, strenous activity is now outright dangerous
100%: As bad as it gets.
The invisibility and self made choice of when/where to go visible is due to the fact that you'll be at 85%, which is heavily penalized and might cause damage if you try to run, because you are currently suffering temporary stat damage, and because your killers might want to off you again.
The non-combat players will be important to the combat players, and a healer that you've offended might think it best NOT to heal you. So PvP'ers will have to stick with fighting those who are in it for a fight.
Furthermore, make it difficult to master two trades, although possible to handle two reasonably well. Penalize the use of healing skill on oneself if it is allowed at all. Make it reasonably easy to convert, allowing some loss of skill while focusing on another profession.
Make it so that players can govern cities and command NPC guards to target specific persons, and treat certain actions as crimes.
Sample setup:
A player would be in charge of these settings, perhaps with the ability to open some settings to "subordinates". Such as letting a faction member add to the Kill on Sight list when receiving the report of a vicious murder of their citizen somewhere.
The life of a soldier
The lone PvP'er
I would not let gear or advancement make the playing field too uneven. And you should be able to advance skills through training without actually harming somebody, be it healing or combat training. Thus, newcomers may choose to stay in town and practice rather than going out there to get the actual dangerous real combat experience.
But while the amount of practice that could be undergone in a day would be limited, the combat experience would only be limited by the level cap.
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
I would do something like:
One login server with a bunch of play servers.
Take WoW for example, you character will not be locked to one server, you just login to wichever aint full and/or have the ruleset you want there and then.
A couple of different rulesets, like:
PvE only, no PvP at all.
PvE like the PvE servers are now, duels and flagging.
PvP like the PvP servers are now, open PvP almost everywere.
Allout PvP, PvP exactly everywere, body loot and whatever.
This would solve a lot, mostly the bloody whining from both camps, allthough people would still complain of course but it would be a whole lot easier to brush them of and/or ignore them.
If all options are open at all times the only one to blame is yourself for the choice you make, even more so if you can change that choice at any time.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Jerek_
I wonder if you honestly even believe what you type, or if you live in a made up world of facts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The only thing I have honestly seen that works is segratation. Weither its separate Facets in the world, like Trammel and Felicuca (or however you spell it) Or completely different servers."
The problem with seprate servers is the time constraints involved in order to play both. If your a player who enjoys both pve and pvp and play with friends who enjoy different things that makes it difficult. Leveling a character on seprate servers is too time consuming and too much effort for most.
Now the problem with Facets like trammal and felicucia in UO is say you have a server that holds 3000 players total per facet. If 2000 people are in trammel it's probably fine and dandy there but then there are only 1000 players in felicucia and under populated essentially. Now underpopulated servers are boring to alot of players because afterall who wants to walk around in a empty game world? Some might, but for alot that's a big hell no especially for pvpers want some quick action. If they offered tri or quad facets it might work better tho. With quad facets for example you could have your basic pvp and pvp server facets then have cross server pve and pvp facets as well offering great flexibility to all. They could have even more than that if wanted to offer even greater flexibility such as low, medium, and high population facets essentially servers since that's all facets are anyways, but I think you get my point. It's funny just how innovative UO's game design was. Even now new concepts are stemming off of things they came out with several years back. That's pretty amazing if you stop to think about it.
"I would do something like:
One login server with a bunch of play servers.
Take WoW for example, you character will not be locked to one server, you just login to wichever aint full and/or have the ruleset you want there and then.
A couple of different rulesets, like:
PvE only, no PvP at all.
PvE like the PvE servers are now, duels and flagging.
PvP like the PvP servers are now, open PvP almost everywere.
Allout PvP, PvP exactly everywere, body loot and whatever.
This would solve a lot, mostly the bloody whining from both camps, allthough people would still complain of course but it would be a whole lot easier to brush them of and/or ignore them.
If all options are open at all times the only one to blame is yourself for the choice you make, even more so if you can change that choice at any time."
Similar to what I had written, but a little more simplified.
I would also like a form of skill/class toggle option presented as well tho. Perhaps similar to what Guild Wars did where you can unlock class functions and once unlocked they're perminent, but offer servers that are purely class specific you could choose to play a certain role at login and ones which are dynamic in which your character could start off as a certain class with everything you've unlocked so far for the class allready. Then additionally over time unlock things from other classes up to a certain point. Basically I'd like a server option for class specific gameplay and more of a hybrid class server.
The problem with seprate servers is the time constraints involved in order to play both. If your a player who enjoys both pve and pvp and play with friends who enjoy different things that makes it difficult. Leveling a character on seprate servers is too time consuming and too much effort for most.
________________________________________________________________________
Not sure on how difficult it would be, but why couldn't a company make "mirror worlds"? Your character would be duplicated on both worlds he would level and have the same items.
You could log into the "carbear" world and socialize with other people and quest w/o fear of being ganked, and then if you wanted to, you could log out and log into the "pk" world and join friend to either defend others or go on a gank raid. OR you could just log into the "pk" version and quest and take your chances on being attacked.
GrindServ and PvPserv.
Not necessarily any worse than GrindZone and PvPzone and whatnot.
But not my cup of tea whatsoever.
No, I want a single game that can take advantage of different gamers, just as this world is taking advantage of different people.
Not everybody is a policeman, not everybody is a general, not everybody is a surgeon, and though we don't really want them there to make our lives exciting: Not everybody is a criminal.
I think that a good game will benefit from having all sorts of players at the same server. And allowing players to change profession without losing everything. (However, players must be dependent on other players for this to work, so a single player shouldn't be permitted to master everything)
The future: Adellion
Common flaw in MMORPGs: The ability to die casually
Advantages of Adellion: Dynamic world (affected by its inhabitants)
Player-driven world (beasts won't be an endless supply of mighty swords, gold will come from mines, not dragonly dens)
Player-driven world (Leadership is the privilege of a player, not an npc)
ITS SIMPLE 2-4 "mini-servers" per server, each time you log in choose wether you want to be on the pvp server or the pve so you can pve when you want and pvp when you want without having seperate chacters and you can still play with friends on that server. so if you server was everfrost you might have everfrost-pve only, everfrost-minor pvp, everfrost-open pvp and possibly even an hardcore,full lootect server if thats ur thing.
who agrees?
EQ2 player
Ex - EVE Online addict
played -
SWG, EQ2, Vanguard, Planetside, Second Life, EVE-O and a few randoms
The only way for "mirror worlds" to work effectively is the way felucia and trammal was setup in uo but then you have population load balancing issues to take into consideration where one facet may be underpopulated while other is perhaps overpopulated. So unless they offer facets with cross-server options as well it doesn't solve much. As for duplicating characters for both worlds you can't really do that becaus well duping would take place and then you'd have nothing to lose nor anything to gain for pvp. So unless the characters were interlinked the way they are with UO's felucia and trammal setup it wouldn't work and that setup with out some refinements has problems of it's own. In uo most everyone played in the pve facet so the pvp facet was more or less empty and that's alot of the reason why most of the hardcore pvp crowd left the game shortly after it had been introduced.
So basically the best option is one static character with facets like in uo but either 2 cross server facets so you don't have the population problem or the combination of 2 cross server facets and 2 static server facets.
/agree
Was gonna post the exact same comment
I like the idea of being able to migrate characters between PvE and PvP servers. Being as I'm more interested in how these games work "under the hood", I'm thinking that the player account/character data would exsist on a database just dedicated to that and you would just load the appropriate character into a spawn point of whatever server they wanted to play on. Since each server would have the same world map, you could just spawn them at the wold coordinates they were at when they logged off last, in whatever server they're playing today. No duping involved.
As for populations... PvPers know that their style is unpopular in MMORPGs. You also need to realize that PvP will become an "end game" activity for PvE players while everyone waits for the next game update. So the population on the PvP servers will rise and fall according to how much PvE content their is. Yes, there will be very few people that play on the PvP servers all the time. But you knew that was the deal when you decided to be a full time PvP player in that game.
Maybe you could have a scaleable worldmap for the PvP servers that expanded and shrank according to the population average in a month.....
-In memory of Laura "Taera" Genender. Passed away on Aug/13/08-
|
RISING DRAGOON ~AION US ONLINE LEGION for Elyos
as a carebear...
I think it'd just be cool to be able to buy a non-pk buff or trinket of some kind. I don't care if I gotta buy it every time I go out to hunt, or if it's timed, as long as I can afford to always have it on. I also don't want to lose stuff in pvp. I think if you're running around "griefing", "ganking noobs" or afk players, then there should be panalties. In real life, you can do those things too, but there are penalties to be paid. You go to jail, lose all yer stuff, and don't get to "play in the real world" anymore. There are games designed to be pvp... Go play them if you want to be antisocial.
Things I don't like about pk/pvp as a carebear:
*When ppl at the highest levels are allowed to kill low level players with no penalty
*when pkers are allowed to kill stores
*the high number of pkers allowed at one time, can prohibit free game play for lower level players
*when pkers can block entrances to towns or other methods where they gather and kill anyone who comes near.
I just want to choose not to be killed while I'm doing something else... leveling my character, on my way to help someone, running around buffing people...
I'd like to be able to level my character without 10 people in my area, way above my level, chasing me off or killing me. In some of these games, it's so bad, that you get to hunt 25% or less of the time. The rest is usually involved in running from pkers, or dying from pkers, or running back to where you were trying to hunt before the above mentioned events.
It's just wrong to be in a store and have someone kill you. This should not be allowed. You should be in a protected mode when in a store, and not subject to being killed by griefers (luring mobs to town and using them to kill ppl, or killing them outright)
There should also be a system in the game where if someone griefs me, I can pay a bounty for him to be killed. I should be able to go to a bounty master, and place his name on a list, with what I'm willing to pay for his death (with a game minimum, and based on the number of times a bounty has been set for a particular player). Then, those ppl who have reached end game status can choose to be bounty hunters. It already happens, but it takes knowing the right friends and new players don't have that benefit. It should be made easy to hire someone to get back at the griefers. There should also be a way to buy my way out of a bounty, based on how many times a bounty has been put on my head.
If enough penalties are assigned, and choice is allowed, most of us carebears are pretty happy. It just means the "gankers" will have to run a little further to find someone who hasn't bought non pvp mode to kill. They won't be so willing to do it just for entertainment if the penalties are big enough. They won't be able to kill the defensless afk players. Maybe even a level limit between players to further limit the problems we carebears see in the pk systems. Maks or capes or other signals that a player is in pk mode helps a lot, when pk is only allowed with that signal. No safe zones for players in pk mode. Time limits.. if you put it on, it stays on till yer ded or the timer ends. There are duels in the game, which should be enlarged to "party duel" also, so guilds or alliances could pvp against each other. (choice in this too)
It just needs some refinement, so a game could encompass all of us, carebears and griefers alike. Seperate servers for each kind of play limits the diversity of the world, but allowing choices makes for a more well rounded world, with alliance battles and all that fun.
ok, that's my two cents
There's enough MMOs out that the hardcore PvPers and carebears shouldn't have to like the same game. I want open PvP and full looting. There's no way to get a carebear to like a game with that. Even with guards everywhere, you'll still get killed.
We shouldn't have to like the same games anymore. It's sort of like when you try to do two classes at once. You can be a good fighter, you can be a good healer or you can suck at both.
A** Still Raw From Your Last SWG Subscription? Come join us at RLMMO.com
Well there are always the suggestions of different servers, areas, maps, zones, or modes. You can always warn them with labels or check boxes when they are getting in a dangerous area and sure it will work to a degree. The problem is this is a quick fix. Most of the time the game is designed one way and the other options are tacked on there to try and please a few more people. You need to plan it all from the beginning.
Now there has been good mention of law enforcement. Let players shape their world and form communities. I am talking about something more far-reaching than guilds. Let player build towns and run them and they can decide who belongs to that town and who doesn't. It is as simple as that. They can have guards/players etc. attack anyone who doesn't belong. Anyone that takes aggressive action against anyone that belongs will surely get on their bad list. You can even set it so that everyone is on your bad list if they don't belong. A sort of closed society as it were. Of course you can't be totally closed cuz you want some outside trade, etc. So let crafters and merchants and whatever you need join in. You can join multiple communities and have a vast network.
Now bear in mind the whole world is OPEN PvP but the communities that form for certain reasons begin to exert an influence on the world. Soon whole areas could be connected by civilized and allied towns and any PKer on the road will find that most anyone he attacks will put him on the criminal list of MANY different places. It's just like real life. Society says who the criminal is by agreeing on what law is and how it is broken. Now the PKer has (by his own actions and decisions) forfeited a certain right in that area. He can no longer do business, go to these towns, get healed there, etc. We have simply made consequences for actions. This doesn't mean there is anything wrong with attacking players, you just have to pick your battles and use tactics and watch out and most importantly, Base your decision on the consequences. Current games have none so anyone you can attack is well worth it.
In such a game players of like mind will form communities that uphold the type of gameplay they are after. Within that community you are relatively safe. A crafter can stay within the towns and areas that are set up and feel quite safe. Even PKers can form their own lawless towns and still have what they need but these will necessarily have to be far removed from the other areas where law is in place and so a natural segregation occurs but it is dynamic enough to change every now and then. There can be war and political upheaval. Arguments that lead to secessions, etc.
There is no harm attacking an enemy community because you will still have your community that doesn't see this as a criminal action, however you probably won't do this randomly or in the heart of enemy territory but it will be on the borders and in the war zones, the disputed areas, etc.
Wow, now we are getting toward a game with MANY facets of interesting game play. Heck we could even throw out grinding and huge level gaps and just let players interact and build up community and play roles therein based on what is needed and what resources are available, both in game valuables and human resources (skills). Take the focus off all this fighting monsters and let player interact. Those that want to will engage in those activities. Others will do their own thing in the areas that they have established. You might even want to have items and spells(and this could work in any game) that are not for combat. Let 'care bears' learn invisibility spells, magic walls that block PKers from approaching and ruining their fun. Let them have teleport spells to escape. In this way they are still part of the pvp interaction but can focus on ways to avoid the actual confrontation. I mean, when you are invisible you are invisible. You can go around as safe as you wish. Don't let them attack while invisible of course, just have the means for people to accomplish peaceable actions without always being hindered. At least this way you aren't just throwing up segregated counter-measures but you make the players use the tools available to advantage their preferred method of play.
Well don't expect developers to use any of this. They only design games to last so long as their graphics and content is new. Oh well. Maybe they will hire someone who has a somewhat more unfettered imagination.
IronOre - Forging the Future
I think WoW's PvP server system (particularly pre-battleground where people were actually out in the world PvPing) is/was the best (and if you want a very toned down version, there's PvE servers where you can still PvP...but that's more for the "carebear" side)
I haven't YET seen a reason as to what is wrong with WoW's system.
1. In the lower level areas (below 20) you are safe as a low-lvl in the Alliance/Horde Controlled areas. But anyone who comes into those areas from the other side is fair game. (You can attack them, which turns on your PvP flag and makes you fair game)
2. Above level 20 (ie. in the Contested areas) everyone is fair game. All the time...
So...PvPers (and griefers need not respond) what is wrong with this system???
(I'm not taking into account looting, etc, because strictly it's NOT part of this debate. But if it were it could QUITE EASILY be added to a server that has the above rules and I don't think it would be a problem. Not full looting, but even losing one rare item, if you have one, would be enough penalty/reward IMHO)
And I'm considered a carebear in most discussions. Mainly cause I oppose the FFA PvP people, who rabidly support FULL everything with no consideration for anyone elses opinion and the game-related problems that FFAFL PvP brings.
PS. On the full loot argument, there's also the problem...while game servers remain centred in the US...for those of us in Australia (and Europe to some extent), and vice versa (though I don't know any MMOGs housed in Australian servers) that LAG can be a number one killer! Last night I got Lag-Killed twice...now if I was able to lose ALL MY STUFF from that...I'd probably never play again (considering it happens once a night on average...and if it's not laggin I basically never die...so I'm not crap by any means).
EDIT: Sorry if I'm pushing WoW here...but I just restarted it after a LONG lay off and after trying nearly every other "current" game on the market. And WoW outshines them all...BY A MASSIVE MARGIN. Pure opinion and pure experience...sorry if you disagree with me.
Oh, I wouldn't disagree that WoW outshines them all, I mean, when all the silver is black, the piece that is only slightly tarnished will appear absolutely radiant.
What is needed is a new game design that takes a new approach and if it applies full pvp or full looting then it will be based on an etirely different mechanic than bashing monsters, grinding levels and getting uber loot. When these elements are removed it isn't all about loosing your stuff or getting killed even very often. It would be about how you could organize resources and community to enact goals which would be beyond the reach of what happened to participating characters as they worked together towards these goals. But that is a whole different story. I perceive this thread is about quick fixes for the current game model, and not a real solution for a game designed with the whole scope of the issue in mind.
IronOre - Forging the Future
I think a game where one player could capture another player and imprison them would be cool.
Permanent death and executions would make the game more realistic.
I kind of skimmed through these, but Dark Ages of Camelot has seemed to of kinda figured this out.
They have many servers, most of them Regular servers, one being a PvP server and the third being a PvE or Co-op server. On the regular server, (actually on all servers) you have zones. Each different zone was an expansion. In the PvE parts, or where you quest and level, there is no PvP unless you duel someone. When you venture out into New Frontiers, or the other PvP designated areas, this is where you run the risk of another player killing you. Now granted you can't kill someone of your own Realm, unless you Duel, but you have two other Realms to fight against. So on the regular server, you can have your hard core PvE'ers and your PvP'ers.
Now the two other servers help with both extremes. The Co-op server, or the Carebear server, allows people from all three realms to wander about in the PvE zones as well as New Frontiers, with no worries about being attacked by other Realms. All three Realms can play together, there is no enemy besides the NPC type. All can be happy and free. The PvP server has the same type of you can go to all three realms, but you can be killed in the PvE zones. It's ever man for themselves.
Eve-Online has a nice PvP system imo also. Everyone can kill anyone. But if you kill in higher space, you run the risk of the police blowing you up, in which case you loose your ship, all the stuff in it and on it, and your security rating goes down. So the newbies have a safer place to start their missions, or mine if they want to do that, til they get bigger or get in Corps that might protect them more, when they can venture into less secure space.
Both these games are not for everyone, but I like there PvP systems, and maybe something can be learned from how they do what they do.
~Sage
Being that I am sort of a hybrid carebear/PvPer I don't like the idea of seperate PvP servers. What I mean by hybrid is that sometimes I want to PvP, and sometimes I just wanna hop on and accomplish something before I log off. In these times I don't like forced PvP systems. However I like the idea of PvP going on around me even if I'm not involved. Gives the game more immersivness.So my idea would go something like this:
Player A (PvPer) enters City Z and starts talking crap to Player B (PvP or CB, doesn't matter)
Player B says "Ok, lets do this" and starts a PvP mode.
In PvP mode a dialog opens up to everyone in the zone. They can choose to partake or not, and which side they want to be on. In games with built in factions this might not be needed. But the dialog will only allow even teams. Faction D can't have 25 players while faction E only has 5. Maybe have an override in case Faction E wants to be macho and see if they can take them.
Anyone entering the zone then gets hit with the same dialog asking if they want to enter PvP, again, only allowing them the PvP tag when teams are even or overrided by the underdog.
Teams then play till dead, or even a point system would be better, allowing multiple lives in one PvP battle. I think the bounty should work like a poker pot. Everybody throws something in to an item section of the PvP dialog, like a big prize. The team that wins gets the pot randomly divided amongs them. Just like a bandit raid or something, only the losers only lose things they are prepared to lose. All items having a value or rank of some sort to make sure one team's pot is of equal value or rank to the other team's pot. Like placing a bet..."I bet my team can take your team and I'm willing to put up this uber helmet that says we can. What have you got?" Could work just like a trade dialog, all members agree to the deal before the fight starts.
I know it's a bit of a system, but it's pretty much grief proof. Griefing is no good for anyone, it stifles new members to a game that you are hoping to expand. I've seen and been part of too much in the evil days of SWG when Griefing was practically a profession.
Just a quick brainstorm, go ahead and take your shots at it. Maybe with everybody's input we can get a really great system that somebody will steal.
The Millenium Lee
