The 30% theory

Problem is that if every soccer mum can have a maxed out char in this game (its too easy) time will be the only thing that is valuable in this game. This might discourage people to play later because they can never catch up. So the early move to persistence requires that the games changes a bit to be attractive for players to join at a later stage. Meaning skillful play needs to be rewarded more.

In PVE that takes a lot of time to code and build. In PVP players make the challenge which is very convenient for the devs... I am sure PVP wont be niche. One of their lead designers, Chris, mentioned in the Telethon they want much more PVP content. But for that you need combat to be fun first...

All the PVE content the dev team could create wont last very long with such a small team and funding. Roleplaying Communities and PVP is what will make the community alive. PVPers just need more sand in the box currently. I don't see any big challenging PVE content coming.. and PVE Raids is usually not a sandboxes strongsuit. RP and PVP will make this game great.

 

Views on most forums is really a number of how many times the page was displayed. So if someone opens the thread 10 times it counts as 10 views, these are not unique views.

 

PvP could make any game great, but sadly it is PvPers themselves that are their own demise. Since the majority of them show up for one reason and one reason alone - to kill and harass other players. If they actually looked for valid and substantial PvP ( Wars, Sieges, Capture Flag, . . . . ) that would be one thing. Already here in SotA They have already shown their true colors and the majority are just out for the "thrill" of the kill and want to be able to loot, and lord their prowess over the recipients of their onslaught. And the persistence of player to continually ask for things like full loot also do nothing to validate their reasoning.

PvP will not make this game sorry, and all the catering to a PvP style of play, making it a viable system that players who only PvP can thrive, conquer, and live on will do nothing but drive all other types of players away. In the end the PvPers will have an empty world all to themselves to run around in.

 

I like the thought of full-loot and perma-death. For me it's all about realism and simulation. That's what makes Ultimas special, but that also means all PvP is murder, unless everyone is 'knocked out' until the attacker chooses to perform a 'killing blow'.. Then, when players are killed, (which would always be on purpose), the killers can be hunted down and thrown into jail and justice can be served - etc. It's all about simulation which requires more AI, and a full-fledged simulated and interactive world to play around in, that seems to be living and breathing even without the players in it; and everything players do should affect this world and have consequences within this world's simulation systems. Each feature that is added, whether it is PvP or a story element, should be taking into consideration the interactivity of the world simulation to keep me believing in the world and intrigued in its gameplay aspects.

 

I think referencing polls that have only about 100 votes each as a general rule for the community doesn't make a lot of sense. Let alone that this was posted in the PvP forum means it's going to get more attention from PvP minded people than from other people, so it will have more votes on the PvP side.

 

Weins the mechanics in this game currently are not working. If Sota doesnt start building what they advertised its not going to live long. The current amount of players caring about the game is worrying. Either they cater to more diverse playstyles or they are going down.

 

Did any of the Ultima games have perma-death (I've only played 6-7.2)? I seem to remember there always being someone to "rescue" or "find" the avatar when "death" came creeping up and I don't ever remember losing anything from my inventory. I know UO was quite different in that regard, but unless I am misunderstanding your point I fail to see how full-loot perma-death has anything to do with any of the Ultimas besides UO. Unless there are other Ultimas that I just haven't played yet that had those "features".

 

Well, that's a nail right on the head, isn't it.

It's mystifying really, how so many PvP proponents just don't seem to get it. And I don't mean you @vallo, you seem to be genuinely advocating meaningful PvP and diverse playstyles. Thank you for that. But it's not only the game mechanics that needs fixing; it's the prevailing devil-may-care attitude towards harassment and juvenile anti-RP behavior that irks most PvE players enough to never even consider flagging themselves permanently. Until that is fixed in one way or other, there is no hope for PvP to ever be popular in this game. Also if this particular issue was actually fixed, one way or other, PvP could easily become popular. Classic case of "necessary and sufficient condition". I personally believe it really is that simple. The required adjustment could in principle be doable with just changes in the game mechanics, but the PvP advocates do not exactly come out in droves in support of such mechanisms. Therefore it's quite correct to say that PvPers themselves are their own demise.

 

This is a big catch 22. Combat unfinished/polished can kill PvP but not enabling PvP will kill it just the same.

PvP is always the easiest content to include but the hardest to perfect. So many ways PvP can go wrong but I think Port's approach will work out in the long run.

But as you said, combat must be fun first.

 

Albion Online is the spiritual successor to Ultima Online. SotA is reminiscent of the Ultima SP games of the past.

Or at least that's how it's shaping up. SotA will be a PvE game with a sprinkling of glorified dueling.

Every time I listen to Sandbox Interactive, I'm more and more convinced they "get" UO better than Richard and Co. do. They "get" how PvE and PvP need to work together. They "get" how casual and hardcore players both are important to bring longevity to a game and I totally believe they will make it happen. They "get" how story needs to be the fabric on which the players build the rest of the world. Robin Henkys "gets" old school MMOs. I'm really looking forward to the new world design and the PvE enhancements going in for beta. the game gets better and better every update. BTW, the PvP is fun as hell.

I'll still play SotA because I love the world and what Portalarium is building in the way of story, but UO2 is coming and it's called Albion Online. Great lore (just finished reading Landfall).

Here's their May Q&A if you're interested:

 

My point is that Ultima is not about whether a game has perma-death or not, but that the feel of the game is immersive because it is a simulated world that you interact with. So as long as the decisions made for this game are with that theme in mind, then the game can diverge from specific things other Ultimas have done, and still feel like an Ultima. Richard basically said, 'I want the player to be able to come back to life, but I need it to be explained in the world, so it makes sense, and doesn't just happen for no reason..' So in Ultimas Lord British says he has the power to resurrect you, and will do so if you are ever to perish. When you are resurrected, you hear him casting the spell, see a flash of light, and then you appear in front of LB in his castle, and it feels very real and in the world immersive. The manuals you read about the game were even written 'in the world' so you felt you were your character learning about the world, not the player learning about the game from the company. It's not about whether past Ultimas decided to do specific individual things or not.. it's about the overall feel of the game that I'm talking about here. And perma-death supports that feel. If we 'resurrect', it should have a very good in-game reason. And I don't see LB resurrecting every avatar all the time, when there are thousands of them running around doing who knows what, but I'm sure a suitable explanation will be thought up if that is what is desired.

 

I have an idea for PvP looting and zones.. I do not want a separate zone for pvp I myself would stop playing.. I still want to be able to interact with the none pvp players when I go into a town. I myself do like to raid dungeon and kill elite monsters and I would like to be able to find these groups in town. I think it should all be one instance but like it is now how your flagged for pvp but you should have to be flagged to attack another pvp player. Not just coming out from none pvp and attacking a pvp player.. Here is my idea I just thought of and I think it could work. They could have a loot ruleset in place where you yourself can wager how many items you would risk loosing at death. Everyone would have a separate window for setting wager info. If you wanted you could risk up to your max in your backpack (This would mean your a full lootable player. Maybe have a number in pink next to his name of how "lootable" he is.) Now I know there has to be some sort of rules in place if for example say you get ganked by two people one has 10 lootable items and the other has 2 lootable and you yourself has 12 lootable items set. You will then in turn only still loose 2 items if you die you loose the least amount of items of who ever attacked you this makes it so you cant have one guy set with 100 lootable items and everyone else having 1 in a group.. this would not be fair. So in turn making people with higher lootables trying to 1v1 these other higher lootable players instead of ganking.. I for sure would be saying in teamspeak "this is my kill I want all his lootables dont you dare touch him lol". Let me know what other suggestions you have or examples on why this wouldn't work Thank you

 

Um, isn't that the exact same post you have in another thread ??
Covering all your bases, eh.....

 

Ultima VIII had permadeath. When you fell into a puddle of water.

Ultima II and III also had permadeath. Ultima Underworld had permadeath unless you planted the Silver Sapling, which allowed you to resurrect wherever you planted it. Ultima IX had permadeath.

Something that was true about all of the Ultima games though was that even though you would be resurrected, I tried to avoid death at all costs -- and also avoid the deaths of my party members. You would get a huge XP point loss if you died, and you would also be pulled completely across the world, and it would be a pain to get back to where you were. And, if your party member died, and you didn't have a Resurrect handy yourself, you'd have to pick up their body, and all their belongings, which was a pain since you relied on your party members as mules, and then carry them and all their belongings all the way back to Lord British. If you did have Resurrect, it required reagents, like all spells.

So even with resurrects, compared to SotA, death was much more painful. I'm not an advocate for permadeath, but I am an advocate for pain in death, so players avoid it.

In Ultima I and IV, btw, you would lose items and gold when you died. In Ultima I, you'd also lose hitpoints.

 

Ah yes, but those games also had saves

 

Yea, and not having saves is another good reason why SotA shouldn't have permadeath...

...but even with saves, it wasn't really about saving and reloading all the time the way it plays out sometimes in modern games. You had limited save slots. Up until Ultima VII it was just one save slot, and I remember in Ultima V having to quit the game to save it. So, most of the time, you didn't have a convenient save to reload to; you'd have to reverse progress.

 

1 save? only if you had one save disk lol...

 

I played on my hard drive! It was possible to make a copy of the save folder, though...

 

I like the ransom system because you're always in a situation where you're making a profit through PvP. 2 items or equivalent gold. Also you can't delete gold, and deleting other important items before you die in PvP becomes less of a factor.

I'm also for semi-full loot environments (items that are worth dropping like armor, weapons, reagents, resources, etc) but I'd prefer to see this show up in guild wars (rules of engagement), PvP POTs, etc. Basically the player knows what they're getting involved in.

I'd like to see towns with their own laws, and be able to right click on a town and see some of the basic laws of the town on the overland map. This would be similar to seeing a posted sign at the town limits in old western movies.

 

Heh...this game. This game strives to have its cake and eat it too, but achieves little in the process. You either have meaningful existence in online gaming, which boils down to meaningful PvP and strife in some form, or you have nothing. This game should have stayed a single player game.

Glorified chat room with the only ones playing Ultima purists and people who planked down thousands of dollars to be a virtual lord.



I mean whats the point? Its not even that hard to make a little world using the Unity engine and you can call yourself emperor...for almost free. You could buy $100 of content from the unity store and become lord of the universe.