Why Isnt PvP Mode Seperate?

I was reading this post, and was really confused as it doesn't sound like the LB spirit of Ultima at all(open and free worlds). Basically it sounds like PvP will be optional and anyone participating in open PvP will be exposed to players not opted in PvP and competing for the same resources(monsters, herb gathering, or otherwise) with out the additional risk that the PvP'er is exposed to.

I'm really confused why you are forcing PvP'ers to play with non-PvP'ers? Cant you just make the two modes completely separate and non-transferable (to prevent exploiting resource gathering in the safe non-PvP mode).

Why is the dev team forcing PvP'ers to play with others that are not PvPing and can grief PvP'ers by safely stealing resources with out that additional risk the PvP'er has? Just seems hypocritical to say that PvP allows griefing of PvE'ers, then give PvE'ers a safe method to grief PvP'ers. I am confused, why be sanctimonious toward PvP'ers? SotA shouldnt have any kind of sectarianism over PvP. We are all gamers after all.

So, I would like to suggest that instead, you simply have a separate non-transferable mode for the open PvP'ers. Now everyone is happy. Thank you.

 

There is a choice. Make everything PvP, make two separate servers, give the players a choice, or make everything PvE.

They choose give the players a choice. It fits their model better.

There will be places PvPers can go to get better access to rare resources and creature and not have PvEer "stealing" them without the risk of PvP.

 

Well, theoretically, if the Open PvP flag is set, then you should only see other PvPers in your hex instance. Of course, this is a big IF and we won't know until after the match-making algorithm is publicly made available for us.

I do agree with your assertion regarding resource contention. I personally would hate to be unable to kill the player who is trying to grief me simply because they are not flagged for PvP

 

While the current system doesn't sound ideal, I wouldn't be 'happy' with your system, this is coming from a PvP fan. When the worlds are separate they become Trammel/Felucca, a total disaster. Players remember Trammel was a disaster but seem to forget that the segregated Felucca was also a total and complete disaster, all house plots in Felucca went from ultra-valuable to dirt-cheap post-2000-expansion, Felucca was a barren wasteland, apparently that's what you want in SOTA? The PvP fans in the barren wasteland Felucca fought over kills like buzzards because there were so few.

 

You have a weird and limited view of PvP. A military doesn't go to war just for the sake of the military. The civilian population is part of the driver, part of the effort, and part of the outcome.

 

That would be great if that is true that if PvP is on then you only see PvP... but you have the Trammel/Felucca problem still because players can transfer between mode. "Not ready for anyone role playing a murderer... switching to non-PvP mode."

It just doesnt work. It was the problem with Trammel/Felucca. Anyone that wanted to abuse the system, could, the system allowed it, it even encuraged it. Open PvP'er but dont want to risk exposure to other Open PvP'ers while gathering resources? Switch to Tram. Most of your time is gathering materials in the game so people abused poping out of tram to get stuff in fel and only going to tram when they were 'ready'. it was to the point no one was running into anyone and it all just snowballed from there.

Trammel/Felucca was a disaster because you could slid between worlds. There was no need to stay in a unsafe world if you were a PvP'er. An Open PvP'er was not benifited by staying in a Open PvP world; he was actually at a disadvantage as his counterpart opt-in/opt-out PvP'ers would opt out to gather resources, then jump in only to experience Open PvP when they were ready. So a if PvP'er abusing this ability to gain advantage over more hardcore 'open world' players was only in the world 1/10th of the time.. the population of the world was only 1/10th of what it would be. But if these PvP'ers had to stay in their PvP world... its now remaining populated.

Maybe you are a PvE'er. Let me give you an example that runs parallel to my point... think of it like this. Let's say you are a PvE'er and had a world where you can PvE a deadly dragon that is located in agro distance to a rare ore that makes super armor. You want this ore to help you fight the dragon, but you dont want to ore it at risk of being attacked.

Now you the game developer comes along and gives you a world with out any mobs. Now you can go to that world and get your resources then go back to the PvE world to fight the dragon. Gathering resources takes maybe 3 hours, and fighting the dragon takes 18 minutes. You only spent 1/10th of your time in the PvE world. In an online RP game... that kills the PvE experience. If you want to play the PvE experience, you shouldnt be able to opt-out just to get a head up on the game. It's distructive and abusive to everyone in the PvE experience.

Its the same way with the PvP expereince. The ability to Opt-out of PvP is distructive to the PvP experience for everyone. The only difference is that the dev team seems to be all PvE'ers from their posts and statements. Even a full single player mode enviroment only, there is no full PvP mode players only. Let's see them make a world that you can opt into that is only other players-non-combative no mobs. They wouldnt do it... cause their experience would be ruined. But it seems no one is willing to take into consideration the Open PvP'ers experience.

How do I have a weird view? What you said makes no sense to me. Please explain.

 

I believe that you will never ... yeah never ... see a PvE player in a location that is "flagged" for PvP play - these are the hexes specifically designed for PvP (high yield resources)

Where you might see PvE and PvP mingling is possible in town

In terms of "grieving" over resources lets just chalk that up to gamers griefing gamers ... Just because someone is utilizing PvE mode to exploit the game does not prove nor imply that they are predominantly a PvE player nor should it matter - at the end of the day we are all looking for a balanced game

 

@webteam

The biggest tenet of SoTA is choice ... they will not create a "captive audience" effect; this will greatly increase the sustainability of this game (from year 1 to 5)

What the future holds once this game picks up steam we don't know but to get off the ground running this way if probably the way to go.

I also don't think that they are dismissing PvP experience but they are faced with a hard task (as a side note - I'm really concerned for the single player experience! and we've gotten less info - and what we gotten is a little concerning - multiplayer has impacted other areas not just PvP)

 

@WebTeam, you ask why you're being forced to play with non-PvP players. Just because someone isn't flagged in a given moment doesn't they never will be.

Segregating players so we don't see each other hurts the world and community.

 

I don't think a PvE can kill a PvP player in the current system. The idea is that if you are PvE only, and you enter a PvP area, you are flagged for PvP while you are in that area - all the PvP rules apply to everyone in the PvP area, there is no PvE-only in these areas.

The idea is that PvP areas will be richer, forcing people to enter these zones in search for resources. no resource will be exclusive for PvP areas, but some will be more common in them. I'm not going to enter in the discussion of what is best or what would be better, but I think there are some parts of the current system you are not fully understanding.

 

I agree completely with "its a hard task." I think my biggest problem is that they provided a method for someone that wants to play Closed PvE to play it with out being affected by other players in any way. BUT to play and Open PvP the other P in that is Players. So they have one extreme for one type of player(Single player only, or play with friends) but they dont have an extreme for Open PvP'ers. For an Open PvP'er, they are kind of stuck in their world of people sliding in and out of PvP mode WHILE being able to take resources from their environment.

The removal of sharding by region was a great idea and attempt on SotA's part, BUT it looks like they are aiming for this Utopia world that everyone in MMO style online mode is forced into. The truth is that they should have not divorced sharding completely but re-examined it in the scope of play style and give Open PvP'ers their play style along with the play styles already afforded to PvE'ers.

I actually dont think it hurts as much as it helps. As I have pointed out a few times in here. All bunching people into one world does, is make a lot of half happy people. If anything "segregating players" as you call it would create multiple game types for various players. Look at the success of games like Garry's Mod. Granted its not a MMO but because its a game that has multiple play styles. This created a game that 3.5 million people enjoy because of it not catering to one play style.

So I agrue vieatmatly against your asertion that it hurts the community to have "segregated" play styles.

but this sounds a lot like Trammel/Feluccia. Which was a complete failure because people wouldnt go into Tram till they were geared up and ready. Gathering resources and gear for that takes a lot more time so most of the time people were not in Tram. When they were ready, they would go in and guess what... too few people to have fun cause everyone was in Fel gathering resources. Ultimately, even Open PvPers like myself couldn't compete against people abusing the ability to travel between worlds and ever we had to do it till we got so board we just uninstalled. It was horrible.

I dont buy that these "rare" resources are going to draw people in. Nor do I think its a better solution than just giving people the game they want via selecting the mode they want to play.

This all brings me back to my point. If they are making a mode that is soley for PvE(single player online and play with friends), why cant there be a mode that is solely PvP on the other end of the spectrum?

 

In theory there is. Stick to OPO mode and do the Oracle quest, and not only you will be permaflagged for PvP, but the matchmaking system will attempt to only group you with other players with the same interests. Thus, OPO is more or less divided into "OPO PvE" and "OPO PvP" modes.

Of course, like every other online mode, players are free to change modes more or less at will, with a few restriction to avoid exploits. AFAIK PvP will only be toggleable at the Oracle, and the multiplayer mode can be changed at will when the player is in a safe location.

 

I think the system they are working on addresses most all the OPs concerns. This appears to be another long winded, roundabout rant about open PVP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk