What PvP Players can look forward to

I hope we can look forward to the ability to trade cards from the "card combat" system with other players, and prefect your decks.
Think of the social interaction this will add greatly to the game and possibly have added economic benefits as well.

One possible aspect of "full loot" PvP would be to be able to loot your opponent's combat-cards, as in get a random card from the deck of your fallen opponent to add to your own, or trade or sell.

Risk vs Reward, that's what PvP is all about.

 

The thing is these cards are your skills. That you learned.

 

I don't like the argument that PvPers should not be entitled to something extra.

Why?

Well, because I believe that every different character/player type gets different advantages! Hardcore PvE people get the enjoy that side of game to the fullest and the loot that brings, crafters/merchants can get rich/live 'risk free' of death and reap the benefits of having other players 'depend' on what they create. Etc etc. Obviously with so much unknown we can't tell exactly what these advantages will be as yet so a lot of it is just guessing!

If PvP/PKing is a feature of the game (and I don't mean gank-fest, n00b-bashing, grief-based PK but PvP as it appears we will have it) then why should these players not get something out of the game? If PvP is a part of SotA but someone does not want to participate in that part why should they get rewarded like someone who does? The same goes for all aspects of the game. EG. people who don't want to craft have to pay for all their goods, and pay whatever the crafters decide.

What would PvPers get for participating in Pvp? Well, if it is items then I doubt that it will be any more powerful than what PvE hunters can get? It is completely counter-intuitive of the devs to include PvP but then overpower it.... Or underpower it!

My point is with so many options and playstyles, most players will have to forego some aspects of SotA. I don't see how you can begrudge others from benefiting from a part of the game you don't want to be part of. The same goes for everyone not just PvPers v Non-PvPers.

 

One of the things that I'm most interested in PvP in SotA (heck. Colour me excited about the concept of it being in the game, even tho I may never get to take part it in it) is the ability for a Guild (or hopefully other coalitions) to gain control of areas, be it a town/castle, or a resource area like a mine or some such. The battles for, and ownership of, these is a perk for PvP over the PvE or crafter gameplay. And I'd love to see them get benefits for exactly this, such as exclusive control over the mines, or if they could charge an admission fee or tax of the resources gathered there. A small additional charge that goes to the Guild bank when a non member buys items or services in towns or keeps they control.

And of course, other PvP groups could vie for control and have them change hands based on the outcome of battles and sieges. I'd like any non-affilitated parties either locked up for the duration, having to leave the hex, or throw in and join one side or the other during the battle.

They're real potential gameplay elements for the PvP players that other sides of gameplay are unlikely to see, being part of the force that holds a vital keep in an area in their hands? I'd think being able to take part in that would be reward enough, and extra gameplay that is exclusive to their play type. Sure the rewards may be shared between the three groups, but taking part of the siege or clearing out the defenders of the mine?

However that doesn't really help or give anything to the solo, or smaller group PvPer unless they could hire on with Guilds as an affilitated group.

 

The PVE players have a safe environment to mine and gather resources! With no worries of being PKd! We PVP will not have that luxury! So it is fair to have some special stuff in PVP environment I dont see why thats a problem!!!!

 

Let me try to explain it this way, though you may not understand if you haven't played ultima online.

In UO, there are certain rare items that came from events or are just really hard to get such as a lieutenant sash. The value of this item is worth more than me chopping down trees for 2 years even if I quit my job.

OK, let's take that to SOTA now. If a pvp reward happens to become the equivalent to a lieutenant sash, in other words highly sought after and ridiculously expensive, the balance of gamestyles is thrown off in favor of one over the other. In other words me as a humble woodsman would now have to sell 3million logs or chairs to buy a sash that you got in 1 hour play.

It risks saying to everyone that its not worth doing anything other than pvp, cuz there you get the best rewards.

Now, not everyone will buy into this, I recognize that some won't be lured by rewards or won't care, but I'm willing to bet that the vast majority will. And you know why I think that? Because in UO, even today, look in general chat for an hour. It will be filled with people all trying to buy and sell the exact same high end items over and over again. Not to mention that everyone's characters for the most part all wear exactly the same armor and special items despite the fact that there are a gazillion items in UO to choose from.

Getting a little off topic here, but the above also demonstrates why great care needs to be taken by the devs when even considering adding a magic +70 sword to the game that is ultra rare. It can kill game economies and diversity very quickly. Giving it only to pvpers would only compound the problems.

 

[quote="Lady Innessa, post: 134197, member: 4300]It risks saying to everyone that its not worth doing anything other than pvp, cuz there you get the best rewards.[/quote]

If everyone buys into what you're saying, PvPs constantly, and then gets the same rewards, doesn't the value drop? Isn't the rarity lost?

UO had easy-to-get PvE items as well, you know -- the rare item spawns. Totally pointless aside from decoration and an indicator of nothing except rarity, many sold for hundreds of thousands of gold, and, some, upwards of the million mark.

In other words, PvP rewards seem fine to me. It's especially so if kills don't net a PvPer any loot the same way, say, a mob would (in PvE).

Sent from my EVA Unit-01 using Tapatalk

 

Doublepost, sorry.

 

I think the more specialized the rewards are the more robust the economy will be. A blacksmith shouldn't necessarily be able to make cloth armor or wooden staffs. To give players every thing they want will hinder supply and demand. If I only want to be a craftsman and nothing else, I should not be able to make everything that PvE players get by hunting mobs (that would be selfish).

 

If everyone buys into what you're saying, PvPs constantly, and then gets the same rewards, doesn't the value drop? Isn't the rarity lost?

UO had easy-to-get PvE items as well, you know -- the rare item spawns. Totally pointless aside from decoration and an indicator of nothing except rarity, many sold for hundreds of thousands of gold, and, some, upwards of the million mark.

In other words, PvP rewards seem fine to me. It's especially so if kills don't net a PvPer any loot the same way, say, a mob would (in PvE).

Sent from my EVA Unit-01 using Tapatalk[/quote]


You missed my point completely. I am not advocating for special PvE loot either. Neither side should get special loot.

BTW this discussion already happened 3 days ago, you might have missed it, but I'm not interested in rehashing it again.

 

You made the quoted comment at 8:18 this morning.

People had been steadily posting, prior.

So even if the discussion is three weeks old, it seems like it's ongoing (with your post).

Either way:

you think that there should be no special items? That's bizarre... No gold sinks??

Sent from my EVA Unit-01 using Tapatalk

 

The Idea that Guilds can war [PVP] is fine. But in set areas or times. Other wise soon the whole world and every Guild would be at war ,and full PVP. That isn't fair to the PVE and RPs players.
As for special items for either PVP or NPVP shouldn't be rewarded. Its a play stile, Not a reward for how you chose to play.
IMO, If they do it right neither side is going to be 100% happy . That's balance .

 

/whisper Actually in Shroud of d Avatar you will have that luxury with your adjustable slider thingie...

 

Thats correct. The hundreds of us posting about this very topic for days now (not in this thread, in others) mostly agreed that special unique items/gear/etc would probably be a bad thing for the game as a whole. Even worse if it was only accessible to PVP'ers or PVE'ers or girls, or elves, or people who wear hats, or redheads or etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

Not everyone agreed of course, thats impossible with this many people, but that was the general gist of it.

 

I do think the extra risk of PvP areas should have some extra reward.

Instead of complaining that one camp is being treated better than another, consider this from a different approach. Instead of forcing PvP on people who don't want it with non-consent/full-loot PvP, the better system is to have consent with incentive. If there is zero incentive for PvP, then very few will ever engage in it, and we're not making the game enjoyable for those that want to partake in it.

Risk should be offset with incentive.

 

The incentive is that you enjoy PvP. Artificial incentives are unnecessary, potentially game imbalancing, and lead down a slippery road to who has the most crap, who is the richest, and general and increasing dissatisfaction.

The above btw is what happened in UO, so its based on historical facts, not opinion.

 

All PvP locked 'rewards' should be either PvP specific in benefit or only for vanity/ego purposes.

 

And a random "cardgame" based on luck, you forgot that. The outcome of a 1 vs 1 isnt about who is the most skilled player but who have the most luck getting that good card.

Without a combat system worth the name everything you wrote is completely meaningless to players like me.

 

It's convenient to lump every play style as being PvE and then alienating PvP. What about a role playing craftsman/merchant that intends on buying all the materials should she be able to make every single item in the game? What about a Pacifist Cleric? The obvious answer would be to trade service for items. The amount of quests it would take to satisfy everyone's need for every item in the game would be impossible. Diversity is the best answer, players should have to depend on each other.

 

which conveniently ignores the fact that this could severely unbalance the game towards one specific gameplay style, exactly why you DONT want to do this.

Lunchtime. See you guys for more fun in a couple hours lol