What PvP Players can look forward to

bad analogy. spit balls are banned for that very reason.

 

Well a guy "writing poetry" probably wont find himself surrounded by player killers and attacking a poet sounds extremely boring anyways
.

 

A counter example to that statement is easily shown in WoW. Starting a character where PvP is open people will go to the starting areas and kill NPCs and fresh players, and even do it repeatedly. Now think about it if you just started a multiplayer game and 5 mins in, you were constantly killed, and worse off forced to wait several minutes because of the actions of others. How much 'free' time are you going to spend sitting there trying to play that game?

 

I don't believe you should tie people's hands, however I do believe there should be a law and a strict upholding of the law. ... perhaps if you kill enough innocents you are flagged a murder and your character inherits significantly harsher death penalties even as far as perma-death

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

I doubt any developer would go as far as forcing a character to be deleted because of gameplay allowed by the game, although that *might* be the end result that could curtail griefing behaviors.

But I don't believe there are any other penalties that would affect it and by the time they do, the negative actions will have already chased away too many players.

 

Hi,

my first ever post on these forums

Would just like to say I agree with digitallyjinxed here.

I think player killing should not be stopped. But serious criminals within the game should then be appropriately branded as such and become pray to any who wish to hunt them down to claim the bounty. This way the game polices itself, with perhaps a suspension for players who consistently and severely break the law to the detriment of others.

 

perhaps when a murderer is seen by an NPC flags go up to all players on that hex of the direction they are. .. kinda like word spreading of them being here. ... and great rewards for killing the PK

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

Welcome to the world of New Britannia, very glad you have joined us, mrrockitt!

I know that was the idea with Ultima Online's open-world PvP; the 'good' guys with swords would rise up against the 'bad' guys with swords and a balance would be established - but it never happened. There were entirely too many people who chose to be 'bad' for whatever reasons, whether it was roleplaying an evil character, for the loot or for the lulz, it didn't matter to the people who would be killed and ganked repeatedly.

I wish I could believe that in the past 15 years that 'gamers' as a subset of 'people who play games' have grown up enough to understand that if everyone doesn't have fun playing a game, than they will stop and then no one gets to play it, but I don't. I think there has to be a consent wall of some sort between PvP and PvE players and I think the ways in which Portalarium are trying to thread the needle between risk and safety are good ones.

 

truth be told the penalties for being a "bad guy" in UO were nearly non existent. ... Also reputations didn't follow every character in the account the way it does in SotA. so a red could just switch to their Blue to do shopping and in town work and crafting and gathering and pve'ing but if every character on the account were flagged as a criminal it would greatly increase its effectiveness.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

True, I think it would increase the effectiveness over what UO had (nothing) but it doesn't address multiple accounts. And what is the downsides to being flagged a criminal? Not welcome in town / no access to shopping? Depending on loot rules, they may not NEED to go shopping or [erhaps a player run town won't care about doing business with criminals. Everyone gets told 'there's a PK, go kill him!'? That only works if there are MORE people that are interested in hunting down criminals than being criminals and I'm not sure that would be the case.

Also, none of that really address the fact that while those dynamics are shaking out, people who do NOT want to PvP or be killed by another player have to just suck it up, which they won't do. They'll leave the game, which I believe both sides of the PvP divide do not want to happen.

 

Hi,

you are all right of course!

See I am also signed up to the Elite Dangerous Premium Beta being from the UK as I am
One of the careers you can choose in Elite, as with other games of the type, is to be a 'bounty-hunter'.
Why not something similar in SotA? If the rewards for being a bounty-hunter are good enough would that not encourage players to become one and balance out the bad guys a bit?

 

truthfully the people who are griefing are not pvpers and often times they are bad at pvp so they prey on the weak. I for one would be more than happy to put them in check. .. They give us a bad name when we pvpers are not interested in griefing noobs... Your enemy is the bully not the pvper

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

Criminal kills an innocent. = content
Bounty hunter kills a criminal to collect a bounty = content
Innocent getting killed = situation, could be content but it could be harassment.

Mix things up here and have the system track what was taken from the innocent. If it's just a life and time the bounty hunter returned the favor. If the Criminal looted the innocent dry the system tracks this and when the bounty hunter kills the criminal for the bounty (not a random kill, must be for the bounty) restitution is paid to the innocent.

 

Or just retreat to single player, either online or offline, where they can experience all the PvE content without ever meeting another player. Which means that they will never be subject to PvP.

The cost to the game is having one less player that others could meet. And, if the player retreats to offline play, having one player that will be nearly impossible to ever attract to online play, including PvP, at a later date, as it would require starting anew.

I already believe SotA will face an uphill battle getting players to choose to play online, and that is with optional PvP and the limited looting system currently proposed; about every research I've seen points to players preferring to play solo and offline if given the option. Those that started playing Diablo 3 at launch and paid attention to the patch notes likely noticed how Blizzard had to make group play quite easier than solo play, and fairly more rewarding, to get more than a handful of players to opt into group runs instead of going solo all the time; it's a common issue in the industry.

 

What PvP Players can look forward to...


What is PvP Alex!

 

Sort of like ruining a player wedding or a role playing event of some sort... that never happened, right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

How many new players has he driven off by that time? In games, as in real life, harsh penalties do little for the victims.

 

The knowledge of the penalty is in place to drive people away from these acts in the first place. ... Do you really think taking away pks is going to stop people from getting griefed trolled and scammed?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

The death penalty deters murder... People are still murdered... The criminal may suffer the penalty, or may not... the victim is still dead either way.

The post to which I replied stated nothing about trolling or scamming, and I don't see how any conclusion about my views on trolling or scamming can be inferred from my reply to a post that had no mention of either item.

 

Do you think the players can stop that stuff? Or should the devs NOT design a game element that supports it. The ability to remove harassment play is in the hands of the devs.