Robbor's page

Robbor wrote:

I want a sandbox mmo where communities matter, where interaction is meaningful and where you CAN attack anyone, anywhere for whatever reason you see fit. But I also want the reprecussions for targeting targets that don't want to be targeted SEVERE.

What do you want these repercussions to be?

This is probably going to be one of the most debated topics when crowdforging starts.

I think goblinworks has an idea what they want to do so I'll go from what I read in the various blogs. Attacking targets that are not flagged for you to kill without consequences will drop your alignment and reputation and if they drop low enough (through constant murder of such targets) you will not be able to access skills that are necessary to make you viable in PvP.

This can be balanced easily based on how popular said behavior is, but my personal sentiment is that it's better to go overboard on this than make it trivial.

That brings us to a point where someone to actively target people would basically have to initiate a war with that community and that means there would be possible player induced repercussions in the means of fighting back since the agressor would be known and their assets/settlements could be destroyed. Which to me is meaningful pvp since both groups likely have an agenda at a higher level than ''lulz''

Thanks for the lesson of common sense in PvP and personal insults! I don't understand what kind of self-assurance you need when you keep trying to compare PvP skill whenever anyone makes a stand towards behaviour that will target every person or consider targeting it (and not doing it because the odds are against him) indiscriminately (since random is a concept you don't want to or can't understand)

I am not scared of my character being killed, actually PvP is why I play mmo's since Ultima Online. Sure I play good characters now since it is recently been more appealing and challenging to me but in UO i played a red character and loved it. I got lots of kicks from other peoples misery, since the group i was with outmatched our victims in both understanding of game mechanics and tactics. People like me then (and you now) were the reason EA made trammel to save their then sinking game. The game I loved was lost forever and I played on free servers alot after that for the same thrill, but now that I got more experience playing MMOs i realised games that are appealing to me are never commercialy successful because behaviour I described goes unchecked.

Eve online is often brought up, but 90% of the people there stay in high sec systems and only sometimes venture into low sec for the thrill it can be. But if Eve online disabled high sec the game would tank in about one month.

I want a sandbox mmo where communities matter, where interaction is meaningful and where you CAN attack anyone, anywhere for whatever reason you see fit. But I also want the reprecussions for targeting targets that don't want to be targeted SEVERE.

Why do you refuse to understand this?

How many times will a Paladin attack a random person to see if he's carrying any juicy loot?

Will crafters issue a S&D against a fellow crafter just to take his materials and make more swords?

Will a merchant leading a caravan use his mules to trample someone returning from a monster camp and take his stuff?

Unique consequences for behavior that is deemed by many players as intrusive and frustrating and not ''content generation''

While the game is in the process of development and alot of the mechanics are speculative at best my ''understanding of pvp'' might be hindered just as much as anyones. But if you mean it generally i'll dismiss that comment as the self-gratitous garbage it was meant to be.

Maybe me describing the actions as ''banditry'' is where our views are different and we're not even talking about the same thing, yours is a romanticized version while mine is the rampant douchebaggery that is making people quit many sandbox mmorpgs out of frustration.

I think chaotic/evil characters being at a disadvantage in combat ability is a brilliant idea. RPK players generally devote most of their time killing anything that moves, learning the most effective PvP builds and techniques making them very good at PvP.

A problem with a community of ''do-gooders'' is that you have a number of people that are genuinely afraid and inexperienced in PvP and sparring among eachother can never bring you to the same level as someone that devotes all his time to murdering people fast and efficiently.

If these good people knew their equally equipped characters are stronger than the outlaws they will be less reluctant to involve themselves in PvP!

It will also force the people that love PvP to bring their skills to use in more meaningful interaction than just running around killing anything that moves. A confident group of would-be bandits would be just as good as a group of sell-swords for the highest bidder or helping a nation block it's rivals supply chain!

Following this game to see how it evolves, considering buying EE pass!

My online community is http://duchyofwessex.org that is currently active in Mortal Online.

Hopefuly I can convince them to join Pathfinder Online when it launches, as I think we'd fit right in!

I've been following Pathfinder Online very closely since someone told me that in a nutshell it's gonna be ''high fantasy Eve Online'', once I found out they're gonna tackle the issue of a toxic community I was sold.

The OP's idea would create a breeding ground of anti-social behavior that is present in ALL of the sandboxes out there. I don't want to go into wilderness and automatically assume everyone I see will attempt to kill me without a word every time. That's not a virtual society that's sociopathy at it's best. I would prefer banditry to be a rare occasion, heavily penalized, but not impossible to happen.