PVP Solution?

yep! It is a good segway into the more hardcore lifestyle. It is fair, balanced, and not punishing to the new pvp person that might not ever try pvp elsewise.

 

I would love to find a medium where anything found or gained in PVP doesnt effect PVE in anyway. I do support both styles but would prefer to be more in PVP (superficial rewards would neither hurt nor effect PVE) we then come to the thought process of wants and not needs! I want to be a millionaire, but i dont need to be one!

 

Known risk == win!

I might participate then, not sure, I'm pretty far behind so would just be fodder. But seeing the actual damage before it happens would take a big psychological negative away.

But no way I'm doing the "break my stack of ore into 10 stacks and carry a bunch of junk" thing, ever.

Also, as soon as we have balanced battlegrounds style pvp, I'm in. Like the next second.

 

Honestly.

Lootable equip at all or No lootable equip at all.
Ransom, Insurance or whatever feels like an artifical construct.

Lootable equip is too hard, because gear is too hard to craft/buy and there is and will allways be gear what isnt lootable (pledge, store).

They should get rid of loot in PvP.
Grant the PK some Faction Points and titles and wearables to show off how awesome they are and give some KoV playertypes the same when killing a PK.

Balance further to not have these FOTM Skills Master of Everything Chars and create incentives to explore, fight, collect in PvP Scenes.

Simple as that.

 

Reason why pvp will never be in good in SotA is because we all have different visions of what fun pvp is and port tries to listen to everyone and ends up changing as little as possible.
My vision isn't close to anything written here.

My advice is just wait and see but dont hold ur breath.. this part of the game I have lost hope

and as usual writing in a pvp thread is like writing a letter then putting it in the trash instead of a mailbox..

 

I found guild vs guild PvP in UO and Shadowbane much more rewarding than battlegrounds in WoW. The battlegrounds were fun but there was nothing really at stake. In UO there was a lot of loot based incentive because even if you had item insurance there was still full inventory looting. In Shadowbane there was inventory looting and also your guild or nation could take control of a mine, or take control of an entire castle. Taking control of a mine allowed your guild to produce resources at a faster rate. Taking control of a castle gave your guild/nation faster access to certain adventure zones and rare drops only found in those zones.

I wouldn't mind seeing non-loot PvP environments in SOTA but I see them as the preparation/introductory phase of player conflict. Folks could learn about PvP in these environments and move on to more dangerous/risk based pvp as they become more experienced.

 

IF you want to use your best gear currently you simply keep to pay ransoms.

Example on a alternative without gold.

Flagging for PvP at the oracle costs 160 gold
When you is killed the victor gets half of the remaining gold (of the initial 160)
Would mean if you is repeat killed they gain less each time

80, 40, 20, 10 ...

IF killed to much i guess flag would come off or something like that.
'

 

Good ideas, but unfortunately I don't see them backing out of a few decisions they are pushing hard for, that do nothing but negatively impact the game, from my perspective.

 

While the ransom system gives PvPers a little something to fight for, it excludes a lot of folks who are on the fence -who MIGHT participate if doing so wouldn't result in having to go grind cash to cover the loss.
I know ransoms aren't very high, but the game attacks your wallet from every possible angle, and once again the grindy/sinkiness is acting as a barrier to participate in content.
If there wasn't a ransom situation and/or I didn't have to fiddle about separating stacks of reagents into little piles and making a mess out of my inventory, I'd be a lot more likely to participate. At the moment, its just a big hassle.

 

problem is there are probably as many people that would drop completely if punishment was even less than this.

all friends I brought to the game have left due to this, 10 or 11 of them but they are probably not coming back even if changes was made so best route for the game imo is to go the less punishing way.
Few like myself will probably quit but will be the best for the game in the long run is what i think

for me the grind is only a grind because i never get exited in sota. no chilling spine when u see reds. dont care whatsoever if i die...

 

Yeah its a bit of a conundrum really.
If you make it more punishing for the loser, and profitable for the victor, this will make some people happy. Probably the people who PvP a lot, who grind a lot, who invest a lot of playtime and/or are just better at it.
If you make it less punishing for the loser, and less profitable for the victory, this will make different people happy, and also more likely to participate.

The number one complaint I have seen again and again is that not enough people participate in PvP / want to PvP which makes things terribly dull for those who do.
To try and make PvErs PvP, a PVE experience penalty was added if you choose not to flag. So now the same number of people want to PvP, except PvPers can now victimize disinterested parties who are only trying to go about their business at higher efficiency but really have no interest whatsoever in PvP and if forced to engage in it, it is a hassle. Granted, its a hassle they chose to accept by flagging up, but a hassle nonetheless.

To improve PvP, you need to get people to want to PvP, not add PvE bonuses to make people feel forced to. A good first step toward this would be removing punishment for doing so - why put up an obstacle to an activity you're trying to get more people to engage in, it doesn't make sense. An insurance option as per the suggestion would at least let you choose your level of risk - though some would probably still choose not to pay it and flag because why pay for something you don't have to/aren't interested in?

Bottom line is, PvP needs to be made more interesting. I get no satisfaction whatsoever killing random flagged people who've done nothing to upset me. I get no satisfaction whatsoever killing lower levelled, less equipped players who are just trying to go about their business. People who do get satisfaction from these activities well, I'll withold my opinion, but I don't think the game system should be designed around this.

If PvP was more interesting or rewarding in its own right (IE NOT PVE rewards), more people would probably do it.

If it was less costly, more people would probably do it.

When its both expensive, (in a game with so many cash sinks most folks can barely stay afloat as is unless they can solo boss farm or buy gold for real cash),
and not rewarding (no benefit for doing so, no pvp progression, no pvp titles, no pvp gear, no pvp rankings, no pvp factions, no guild wars, no alliances, etc. etc. etc.)
...why do it?

Some will, because they like PvP for its own sake.
Clearly there's not a lot of those types in Sota, judging by the amount of threads saying the shardfalls are empty, Bloodbay is empty, The Fall is empty.... so clearly PvP for its own sake isn't enough.

 

well by now many intrested in pvp have left already and most of them probably never logged on to forums.

I am a casual player at 2-4hrs a week at AL 80
each time im online about 30% of my play time is blood bay, I have seen 1 player..
if im not going through blood to ulfheim im probably grinding in rhun ruins. 1 day it was actually a fun day in rhun with some pvp with @Thwip ^^ overall all secenes except for a couple are dead. Still think going for zones instead of open world was the worst idea possible but that is for another thread.

less costly would probably bring in more PvE oriented people but would be the final nail for others. PvE exp bonus for flagging is plain stupid and probably irritates both sides.

lower lvl players getting ganked isnt always the "oh poor fella" story tho. I LOVE being oblitirated by people stronger than me, if there was no chance of this I wouldnt play. @Vallo Frostbane has showed me whos boss a couple of times and it felt "great" being humiliated like that but even if i turn back to die a couple of times its hardly a set back and when death has no meaning then neither does life.... what am i doing in this game!?:O obviously not for me

 

on a personal level i like pvp when i can take what i want off a victim. To me thats the reward, where i can pick and choose what i want from the body. I dont want regs and i dont want bs stuff on the corpse i want what i think i can use! Most bodies ive looted in other games had pretty much everything they had when they were killed except for that special armor or weapon that i took for either looks or stats. I pvp'd to get revenge, on those that killed friends of mine or low level people (i especiialy loved killing the red that would hunt down newbies! That body i would completely loot and either sell or give to the low level guy/girl that was pkd. So there you have it! why i love PVP. I know what it was like to be a newbie and ganked over and over, i got better and then i hunted down those that did it! so back to the solution, PVP is not for everyone, not all like it, so why even try to get anyone involved? I can get people involved in PVP by just showing them the ropes and what not and what to take with them in PVP. So the solution is stop trying to get everyone involved in it on a design level. (bonus's etc....)

 

Sounds like a great idea. Here are some qualifiers for me though:

• The insurance would have to cost a lot more than the price of the oracle
• Insurance needs to be completely optional (I take it this is what you intended)
• There should be hardcore PvP zone (like the fall, or possibly shardfalls) where insurance is void
• Insurance should not work on theives ( but you get a refund if your insured item is stolen)

Here are some other thoughts.

• The price of the oracle is really inexpensive for crafted gear. i payed < 500 gp to retrieve a +10 white iron augmented platemail chest of theurgy.
• Good gear is essential in PvP. The strategy of going around in lowbie unlootable gear is rather absurd. All you are doing is risking the loss of your consumables (which are not worth the price of the oracle).
• Low level (50 - 90) PvP: Stay where you belong. Don't go to high level dungeons and expect to survive unless you are with a big group with at least on high level leader
• High level (90 +) PvP: you can afford the ransom. If you made it to this level, you have found a way to earn gold. You likely have 50k + gp on your character, so you can pay for dozens of PvP deaths.
• If Insurance is less expensive or even comparable to the price of the oracle, No one would ever gain loot from PvP because everyone would have insurance. I have seen this when they introduced the same system on UO. PvP battles, die a dozen times, run out of gold, farm gold/buy gold on website, return to pvp battles; rinse, repeat. like pumping quarters into a arcade machine no thanks.

 

I agree with all this except, it is good advice but.. - (Low level (50 - 90) PvP: Stay where you belong. Don't go to high level dungeons and expect to survive unless you are with a big group with at least one high level player)
instead divide the PVP up like this
30 - 40 level pvp areas ( no one but people at this level can be here)
41 - 60 level pvp areas (no one but people at this level can be here)
61 - ?? level pvp areas ( no one but people at this level can be here)

this would adjust the pvp battle to be more balanced between players. This would also give people that are new at pvp a chance to check it out without the worry of being totally slaughtered there! The typical non-pvp type that wants to experience pvp can form a group of their friends at their level and go check it out. On their discretion

 

This is kind of what i meant. You can flag PvP as level 40 and if you stay in 3/4 skulls it is very rare to run into a high level PvP in these areas. Generally the return on some high level griever exploiting brave lowbies in a 3-4 skull scene is null, but it happens and is a slight risk that should exist to counterbalance the benefit of the XP bonus.

 

With regards to Damian statement that insurance would allow peeps to die over and over at little cost, I tried to cover that by stipulating that insurance losses go to a pool that benefits all PVP flagged through organized awards, loot, and etc. The more deaths, the bigger the pool. On another note, insurance is not paid up front in this scenario. It is paid upon death. Going in, you mark the gear you want to insure. You know up front what the cost will be when you die. Upon death your account will be decreased by the amount of insurance on all items you had insured and were on you at the time of death. If you do not have enough funds to cover, then items are up for ransom as they are now. If you do not die, then you never lose money even if all your items are insured. I realize that looting a corpse is an important part for many and that a shared pool isn't the same, but it seems to me that essentially that is what we have now. At least the pool will pay out something for the kills eventually.

 

OP: The incentive to PvP is already squashed and you wish to push PvP oriented players even farther away by implementing another system that hinders incentive to PvP.

 

I'll join in if we get some interesting game types. CTF, Rush, capture the castle, with some form of level based grouping so it's fun and not just a slaughter.

 

@Vladamir Begemot: We can do these things. Although many are not directly implemented, a bit of creativity can get the job done and prove to be amazingly fun. If I am not mistaken, @Violation Clauth has hosted events pertaining to all the above.