The PVP system needs more.

Same here!

 

I hope they have full loot in Star Citizen.

 

I know what Port offers PvP-wise. I didn't hear a complete counter-proposal (or an augmented one) yet. It is all about "full PvP", "PvP always and everywhere", "full loot PvP", and so on. IMHO, it is not that important. What import is a social aspect.

For example:

1) How does PvP fit in the Ultima universe? I don't accept "UO did it" --- I remember it, and didn't like it: it felt as yet another bolt on. Please note that I am not saying it was not fun, and people didn't enjoy it --- that's not the point.

Example: many people like PvP, and even more people like racing. Everybody knows that real money are in horse racing. Let's forget about everything we have, introduce personal horses, horse husbandry, horse trading, and start racing, and accepting bets online. That's the "ultima" game! (sorry for the pun)

Obviously an experienced SotA player will say to me: "We do have horses in the game, but no riding, or even owning a horse. And nobody wants to see coconut racing. Yet we have dogs. Dog racing is much more realistic to implement, and raise some money from gamblers everywhere!" --- true, but still I don't see how it advances the Ultima values and virtues. Please hurry to Ultima books, and find proper passages to put me in my place.

2) How exactly is it implemented? Who can be a PvP-er? When can I be a PvP-er? From the start? Later? When? How to decide?

Example: A novice comes into Novia, looks in a mirror, and getting repeatedly killed 15-20 times by helpful PvP-ers just to learn a hard life lesson. Arabella tells him/her: "We have a full PvP here, so now you will have fun to be killed by old-timers. Better learn to run like a rabbit, have no more than 20 gp on your person at any given time, and try to be an air mage --- they are seemed to be all the rage now. What? You don't like it? Wanted to RP? RP away! --- that's the life in Middle Ages as we imagine it: killers everywhere with a long grind in-between deaths. Just like real life, but loops forever. Welcome, and have fun now!"

No, really: if a girl starts to go into 4-skull area, is it prudent for her to go to PvP areas at all? I know that now they are mostly empty, and it is relatively safe, but what if in the future we have ~10-20 people per area waiting to kill somebody? Is it still going to be safe/sporty for her? Do you expect that majority of them will be 1-skull people, which she can just brush off? What is expected social dynamics here?

Another example: I am 2-skull player and my motivation to go to PvP areas... What is my motivation? Find a 5-skuller and try to kill her? Get my ass handed to me repeatedly by people I have no idea about? One guy actually suggested that I can "get killed and now you have a reason to revenge, so you grind, and look for that guy to kill him eventually". Really? Anything else?

If you think we should have some restrictions on PvP, what are they? Is opt-in wise or not? --- I saw some very vocal people advocating no restrictions. Are they still in majority among PvP-ers?

 

"Example: many people like PvP, and even more people like racing. Everybody knows that real money are in horse racing. Let's forget about everything we have, introduce personal horses, horse husbandry, horse trading, and start racing, and accepting bets online. That's the "ultima" game! (sorry for the pun) "

You're not that far off the mark where gambling is concerned... some folks are still waiting around thinking full loot is going to be a thing in SotA... It'll never happen... Never. But we are getting horse racing... er, I mean COTO gambling. People will need incentives to gamble - and if anyone thinks Portalarium is going to allow full loot on top of COTO gambling... well, I don't think full loot will ever happen. It would be too devastating for the guys gambling.

A few weeks ago I was trying to get into PVP but just couldn't find a launch point... and now, just a couple weeks later I've been able to fight against some of the game's best fighters. I'm getting whipped but I'm learning a ton about how everything works. I've learned more about buffs and builds this week than I did in a whole year of PVE grinding.

There are a couple of players running around just wanting to gank and take off - and there are ways to mitigate risk for low level players so they don't lose anything. But there are also a ton of players that want to fight and then after a few fights everyone hangs out and shares tips and tricks. Things should continue to pick up momentum and I think there's going to be a lot of fun coming to PVP with Blood Bay so long as people just start playing.

The guys that won't play because there's no full loot - well, they'll just never play. There are plenty of other folks playing and working deck builds for competitive fighting. And maybe things will just naturally progress into something down the road. I was getting frustrated waiting for meaningful PVP mechanics... storyline context for PVP... and after the last telethon I just said to hell with waiting and jumped into PVP head first. And it's fun, it's a lot of fun. Everyday I meet new people now and we put together a party and go out and level and chase gankers and fight with other folks over resources and then we all hang out and get social. It's a fricken blast!

 

Ultima games were about a lot of things. On the one hand they were about virtues.

But they were also about freedom, which is why you could kill any NPC you wanted including the children, rob the bank, bake bread, pick pumpkins, and so on, even though these things might be irrelevant to the story of the game. This is why PvP made it into UO, because it was an extension of the concept of player freedom. Just like you could kill NPCs if you wanted to, you could also kill PCs.

They were also largely about an immersive living world, which created a depth to the freedom and also realistic consequences. So for instance, when you killed an NPC fighter, you would find everything on his body that he was fighting with. This is why full loot made it into UO, because it was an extension of the same concept. Just like you'd find what an NPC was fighting with on his body, you'd also find what a PC was fighting with on his body.

To me, the whole gameplay about virtues was built on top of these more material elements and helped that part of the game have more depth to it. Its like a pyramid.

BUT. I agree with you; I wasn't satisfied how PvP was done in UO. I didn't consider it a good system. In many ways there were not enough consequences, and there were also not enough realistic ways to avoid it. I'm just saying I think including it in UO in some shape or fashion was completely in the spirit of the single-player games.

 

I think everyone knows it's a lost cause. Some of us are taking our PvP elsewhere. I'm not engaging in this sad excuse for PvP in the hopes that it will get better. I'm just not giving SorA any face time at all where PvP is concerned. The money I could be spending here is just going to another game. It's as simple as that.

 

I think the foundation is there to make it a great game.
However development is slow, and I only know one game that recovered from a very bad release. EvE.

But for making it a success they have to give us players more sandbox content to make wars, alliances etc that mean something in the game and aren't just RP fantasy.
With the latest release they took a step in the right direction.
More freedom for the players to impact each other.

The next step must be to make player interactions mean more than just gain gold and claim a trophy.
We must compete either with guilds over resources and territory or fight a conflict good vs. evil or maybe something completely different.
Competition is a driver for most gamers, it is ok if it is optional - but being in the competition must always be rewarding.

That's fundamental basics that need to be adhered to if you want your game to be successful as a sandbox MMO. A lot of dedicated PVP Sandbox MMOs also failed in that regard.
Just because you can fight each other, doesn't mean it is meaningful and generates a dedicated player base.

For what it is worth player count almost stopped its constant dropping on steamcharts for now.
As part of a PVP guild I see people slowly getting interested again and checking in again.

The game still got a lot of hate floating around it. Catering to the radicals on either side of the PVP discussion is always wrong. But filtering the valuable criticism out of it is an art they need to embrace now.

 

Nice to meet you, I'm ahu : radical cosinus tangeant divergeant.

bhaha.

Agree with post, been trying to communicate for years, thank thee.

 

0.o

 

Im a Pvper, and im not inclined to attack every other flagged person i see, I understand that most are flagged to make use of the system to flag and receive the Exp bonus, and i respect that they have taken that risk, however if a person attacks me, then i am going to defend myself

 

This idea is great.

 

The choice to attack on sight is the long term issue.

If everyone attacks on sight simply because the target is flagged then SotA PvP is doomed to a lingering death.

There should be cause to think hard on the prospects of being the one to initiate combat. The risk of doing so should be more than just the possibility of losing that fight.

From there, a fitting reward can be given. For both the attacker and the target.

Give enough pause to the action of attacks on the innocent and the extremes like full open PvP would be accepted.

 

@Ristra would the concern you raise be satisfied if we had a mechanism in game whereby a "virtuous" character would be limited to only initiating PVP against "non virtuous", while the latter could initiate with either?

As the post I quoted above in my previous post mentions, the "non virtuous" would take a negative virtue consequence like "permanent PVP flag or can be attacked by non flagged people".

One of the best parts of adding this to the game would be that it would give purpose to the proceedings and add a moral/ virtue context to what is going on. The avatar may continue to play in any style wished and this system would recognize the behavior on the virtue spectrum and attach a suitable consequence (not game breaking for either side; rather, it would be "game making").

A virtue context would also make room for virtuous character types such as the detective. It could be a rallying point for guilds and player styles, the honorable versus the dishonorable. It could be a deeper and more meaningful call or enticement for PVP to the general population...

I have heard of some kind of virtue context that will be a part of the Blood Bay scene/ instance... this is great but what I am talking about in this post is not that. I am talking about something game wide and game changing.

 

Once i get warned by a Mod and my post deleted because of writing C... bear!

I want pvp always optional and no constraint.
If they change that, they loose all casualgamers.
Because pvp is about min max and not playerskill, it's about grind xp and not about lore or virtues or any meaning but grind xp.

I guess until it's not open and full loot the pk types will always complain.
I guess until it's only about xp Bonus it's weak and lame, but for the min max playertypes the right grinding Bonus.

I won't pvp until my character has a cause and while this maybe can be existent i guess i still dont want because i feel to compete against doped people what ist 300% more effective, have 3x more HP. Do 5 times damage etc...
So I have to grind, grind, grind xp.
And because of that and no things like a league for weak, mid and strong ( what makes no sense in this game) exist it's totally dumb if i flag for pvp because i cannot win until i decide to grind to max out my skills.
But i dont want this and therefore i am out of competition!!!

 

The full loot idea will make even less pvp. Just as world pvp was starting to take off, the economic nerf hit. 3 days after that world pvp ended from people not being able to afford the ransoms. Full loot pvp will just make that worse. Many people play games that are player vs player and there is no reward, just look at counter strike. People still do the tournaments even though you do not get to loot the person. The argument that full loots will make people want to pvp is not founded, those people will probably cry about something else if its them killed and getting looted a few times.

 

There is no full loot idea.
At least not from the Dev side.
There are still a couple of players left that would like to see full loot but its just not going to happen. And i will go as far as to say: it will really, never ever happen. Under no circumstances.

 

I agree, I am just responding to those that keep bringing it up like its some great idea to increase the numbers of people pvping.

 

They can bring it up all they want, it's their right as coustomer to proclaim their wishes.
Though i don't think they are helping the rest of the PvP community who try to find some middleground to get some real PvP going.

 

Although i understand the PvP people want PvP better implemented i guess we have other problems that are more important.
I am not against PvP, but as i said elsewhere this is not about arena matches.

Tired about discussing PvP. I don't care anymore , not my business and maybe never in this game just because of the grind you need to do to be competitive .

PvP is no casualgamers content!