Goblin Squad Member
|
Not so, by taking part in building a town, you're joining that faction, you are consenting to a pvp situation. That's consensual pvp. If you want to avoid pvp you can still adventure, still craft, still do all of that, but you can't be PART of the town faction system without being part of pvp. Yes, it would require changes to the system, and I'm not arguing for that, I'm arguing the point that, just because you can do something, if something else can be inflicted on you that you don't like, that can ruin the things you can do for you,
The problem is, if you add consensual PvP to any part of the game, it either has to lock you at a 'low level' where your most advanced play option is to run outside of town and kill rabbits, because anything past that woul dkill you, or it devalues stuff that people are doing at higher levels.
If joining a settlement is part of the PvP consent, then you need the creating of every building to flag it's owner(s) for PvP, because founding a settlement requires clearing a hex, and multiple people will be able to build sub-settlement buildings on a hex.
You also need to eleminate the possibility of non-PvP flagged characters becoming mules, every item worth trading needs to require a transport vehicle, this means that there can't be any epic items, or equipping something higher than 'dented bronze sword of accidental self wounding' flags you for PvP. In which case no-one would play that wanted no-pvp, because they would be worthless.
If non-PvP characters can adventure, they have to be locked to a small area, otherwise every scout will be a non-pvp character, scouting out territory will be a big part of the game, finding building sites and rare ore deposits will be a large part of the game.
There is a domino effect for throwing in consensual PvP anywhere in the game. A lot of people say "Just let us choose when we want to PvP" but I have not seen a single constructive comment that accounts for the fallout.
Not to mention the huge wave of people that would come to the game if you could play without PvP, and GW has no wishes to accommodate those people. The start small and grow option doesn't work when there are a million people that want to get into your game.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If characters that are not a part of a player settlement cannot be ganked, then they won't have any risk bringing their wares and commodities from their NPC home to player-run cities. The system breaks down.
If you are a weapon-smith, you won't ever need to leave a settlement.
I'm sure that some of those that are opposed to PvP are opposed to being killed even once. I get the feeling that some of these people may not be opposed to dying once a month, once a week, or even once a day.
In PFO, I imagine you will be able to stay in town, presumably crafting, and probably never get PKed (maybe clear out if somebody is about to siege your settlement?). You will also probably never get PKed if you adventure only in the hexes near the NPC starting areas, where super-god-mode NPC Marshals will come to kill anybody that so much as attacks you.
I imagine you can severely reduce your chances of getting PKed by settling in a player-run LG settlement surrounded by other LG settlements, far from CE characters, who will likely be killed (or find targets) long before they reach you. You can choose to adventure only in areas near your settlement, where the settlement guards may come to your aid (unconfirmed).
Although I don't think there is one yet, I think if somebody wanted to start a "PvE focused" Chartered Company/Settlement, they could declare total neutrality. I imagine that some player organizations will recognize the neutrality and agree to go to war with anybody that declares on them. That, or they could bribe their LG neighbors and pay tribute to their CE neighbors in exchange for neutrality ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm sure that some of those that are opposed to PvP are opposed to being killed even once. I get the feeling that some of these people may not be opposed to dying once a month, once a week, or even once a month.
This is the ENTIRE point I'm making.
Yes, changing the rules of pvp would drastically change the mechanics of the game. But as I keep saying, I'm not arguing about the mechanics. I'm arguing perspective. It doesn't MATTER what the proposed alternative is or does. It is irrelevant. The point is they object to the pvp bring forced on them. It doesn't matter what other features there are.
I'm NOT PROPOSING an alternative system. I agree, there are all kinds of other problems that would need to be overcome. Yes. Agreed. We all agree on that point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you're missing the point. We aren't arguing about mechanics. We are arguing about a perspective. I'm not trying to propose an alternate system. Although I can see how some could potentially work.
If non consensual pvp is the deal breaker, saying "but you can be a weapon smith and make money" is utterly irrelevant.
I can just as easily say "but YOU can kill opposing factions on a pvp server in rift, why do you need it here?" It utterly misses the point. As for "if you remove non consensual pvp, settlements are indestructible" utter nonsense.
Who do you think will be attacking and destroying settlements, random gankers in associated with a settlement, or rival alignments and settlements?
If the former, what is the POINT of there being factions or alignments?
If the latter, why do you need to allow ganking at all?
I AGREE with you that GW's vision is the most open and flexible while minimizing pointless killing. But it doesn't ELIMINATE it, and THAT is the deal breaker for the people you're saying "but you can do this or that anyway" no. They can't. That has been ruined from their perspective.
You are missing my point as well. I know there are people who are upset about the fact they will lose gear in PvP. But somehow none of you guys seem to have a problem losing gear when you are in PvE. You are all afraid of being ganked and that that is the issue for all of you guys. There are several people here on the forums, including me, saying yes, it is there, yes it will happen but there are ways of getting even, or that are going to be defended and thus not a target that will be focused on.
What I am trying to get across, but apparently isn't a valid point is, yes, you will be killed. More if you are just running around solo, but if you work together with a charter, friends and are generally careful you will minimize that. Also, if you are smart you will have items equiped you can afford to lose and replace without breaking a sweat.
My main concern I see all the time is the fact people are saying they are going to be running around solo, alone and not align themselves with a charter. Yes, it's a validthing to do, but a player that is going to play alone won't survive long in a sandbox game due to the fact that it is so broad, it is so complex and bigger then you can imagine
(I am not sure if you have any sandbox mmo experience Jameow or not)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You are missing my point as well. I know there are people who are upset about the fact they will lose gear in PvP. But somehow none of you guys seem to have a problem losing gear when you are in PvE. You are all afraid of being ganked and that that is the issue for all of you guys. There are several people here on the forums, including me, saying yes, it is there, yes it will happen but there are ways of getting even, or that are going to be defended and thus not a target that will be focused on.
What I am trying to get across, but apparently isn't a valid point is, yes, you will be killed. More if you are just running around solo, but if you work together with a charter, friends and are generally careful you will minimize that. Also, if you are smart you will have items equiped you can afford to lose and replace without breaking a sweat.
My main concern I see all...
There is a qualitative difference between dying in game to a PVE mechanical system, and dying in game because some other person did it. This reflects our lived, social understanding. For some people, that qualitative difference is very meaningful. How often it happens is not relevant, because it is the quality of the interaction that matters to them, not the quantity.
You're argument isn't relevant, because you keep substituting your values for theirs.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There is a qualitative difference between dying in game to a PVE mechanical system, and dying in game because some other person did it. This reflects our lived, social understanding. For some people, that qualitative difference is very meaningful. How often it happens is not relevant, because it is the quality of the interaction that matters to them, not the quantity.
You're argument isn't relevant, because you keep substituting your values for theirs.
How is dying to a PvE monster and losing your gear different then dying to a PvP'er and then losing your gear
Either way you have lost your gear, you have to run back. It doesn't matter how you twist and turn, gear is lost.
If it is a monster people will most likely gather friends, kill monster and then try to get back your gear. Why not do the same in PvP?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think you're missing the point. We aren't arguing about mechanics. We are arguing about a perspective. I'm not trying to propose an alternate system. Although I can see how some could potentially work.
If non consensual pvp is the deal breaker, saying "but you can be a weapon smith and make money" is utterly irrelevant.
I can just as easily say "but YOU can kill opposing factions on a pvp server in rift, why do you need it here?" It utterly misses the point. As for "if you remove non consensual pvp, settlements are indestructible" utter nonsense.
Who do you think will be attacking and destroying settlements, random gankers in associated with a settlement, or rival alignments and settlements?
If the former, what is the POINT of there being factions or alignments?
If the latter, why do you need to allow ganking at all?
I AGREE with you that GW's vision is the most open and flexible while minimizing pointless killing. But it doesn't ELIMINATE it, and THAT is the deal breaker for the people you're saying "but you can do this or that anyway" no. They can't. That has been ruined from their perspective.
You are missing my point as well. I know there are people who are upset about the fact they will lose gear in PvP. But somehow none of you guys seem to have a problem losing gear when you are in PvE. You are all afraid of being ganked and that that is the issue for all of you guys. There are several people here on the forums, including me, saying yes, it is there, yes it will happen but there are ways of getting even, or that are going to be defended and thus not a target that will be focused on.
What I am trying to get across, but apparently isn't a valid point is, yes, you will be killed. More if you are just running around solo, but if you work together with a charter, friends and are generally careful you will minimize that. Also, if you are smart you will have items equiped you can afford to lose and replace without breaking a sweat.
My main concern I see all...
I played uo since 98. I played darkfall, so yes, I have experience in sandboxes. I have also played minecraft and Salem and swg all of these are sandboxes. Only 3 of those have strong pvp, one of them even has permadeath.
The point you are trying to get across is irrelevant. "Yes you will be killed by players" there is no acceptable "but" after that. Or yes they can loot you. No "buts" will change that that is the thing that is unacceptable,
Most of them have listed reasons why it's different when a player does It too
You can have a sandbox with absolutely no pvp, you can have one with consensual pvp only. You can't say that because someone doesn't want pvp or some specific aspect that they want to play a theme park.
TERA is a theme park with open world pvp. Because you want open world pvp does not mean YOU want to play a theme park either.
I'm saying you can't persuade someone that some other feature will make up for a feature if they refuse to take part in that feature AT ALL.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm saying you can't persuade someone that some other feature will make up for a feature if they refuse to take part in that feature AT ALL.
Isn't this what all of you guys that are against the pvp trying to do all the time while GW stated from the beginning there was going to be Open World PvP?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'm saying you can't persuade someone that some other feature will make up for a feature if they refuse to take part in that feature AT ALL.Isn't this what all of you guys that are against the pvp trying to do all the time while GW stated from the beginning there was going to be Open World PvP?
As I have said repeatedly, I am fine with the current system. Others are not and they are making arguments why they think it won't work and is a bad move, or why it kills their interest in the game.
No amount of "but..." Will change it if they really hate the system that much.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
And it will be their lose, this game will cater to everyone.
they don't believe that, and if they're that strongly opposed, it won't cater to them.
I can see potential problems with the system too, but I think the kinks will probably get ironed out sufficiently that the advantages of the system outweigh the disadvantages.
As many have pointed out, no one has successfully pulled off what they are trying to achieve before.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a little naive. PvPers will know about those contracts because the LG spy in the town will tell them over Vent/Skype. The gankers with daggers and armor won't attack you fresh on your way from the dungeon, they'll wait til you're mid-combat with all your refreshes spent and jump you then. That's the core problem with people worried about PvP when they want to PvE. PvPers don't play fair. You don't ambush people in a fair fight, you ambush them with overwhelming force.
It's a little naive to think that spy will know who got the contract and when they're on their way to fulfill it. It's a little naive that arguments are being made about guards not wanting to contract to watch the mouth of a dungeon, but gankers will sit there and wait for the adventurers. It's a little naive to think the gankers will have screen access to know when those refreshes etc. are used up. It's a little naive to think trained adventurers won't notice being followed by poorly, if at all, trained CE gankers. It's naive to think the gankers will be able to plan a random fight for them to interrupt and hopefully kill the adventurers. It's naive to think the gankers will be able to plan an ambush for an unscripted set of adventurers who may not be going where they hope.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's a little naive to think that spy will know who got the contract and when they're on their way to fulfill it. It's a little naive that arguments are being made about guards not wanting to contract to watch the mouth of a dungeon, but gankers will sit there and wait for the adventurers. It's a little naive to think the gankers will have screen access to know when those refreshes etc. are used up. It's a little naive to think trained adventurers won't notice being followed by poorly, if at all, trained CE gankers. It's naive to think the gankers will be able to plan a random fight for them to interrupt and hopefully kill the adventurers. It's naive to think the gankers will be able to plan an ambush for an unscripted set of adventurers who may not be going where they hope.This is a little naive. PvPers will know about those contracts because the LG spy in the town will tell them over Vent/Skype. The gankers with daggers and armor won't attack you fresh on your way from the dungeon, they'll wait til you're mid-combat with all your refreshes spent and jump you then. That's the core problem with people worried about PvP when they want to PvE. PvPers don't play fair. You don't ambush people in a fair fight, you ambush them with overwhelming force.
Hideouts, hiding, passing by without stopping and coming back, appearing to be a safe group or occupied with something else, having a single person in sight watching, with others a few mins away.
There are plenty of ways they could make it work, none of which are insurmountable with in game mechanics in place, that is absolutely true.
But also consider this: if I just want to go kill orcs for an hour, I don't want to have to get a group of twelve together every time just so I don't get ganked. If I want to go on an epic adventure, a group is awesome, but sometimes it's also not. It depends. Sometimes it takes all the fun out of it because you get 2 hits and your target is dead. Then it's just boring.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But also consider this: if I just want to go kill orcs for an hour, I don't want to have to get a group of twelve together every time just so I don't get ganked. If I want to go on an epic adventure, a group is awesome, but sometimes it's also not. It depends. Sometimes it takes all the fun out of it because you get 2 hits and your target is dead. Then it's...
Consider this: the world will randomly populate and de-populate NPC baddies depending on location. There isn't only "orc hidey-hole #1" that sits right off the junction of gank streetand griefer ave. It's dangerous to go alone (take this), but that doesn't mean you can't and still manage to avoid any bandits along the way. It's going to be a big place.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
When I think of any Pathfinder game I've ever played (or for that matter any RPG I've played PVP has never once entered into the game. Do you kill humanoids? Sure. Do you kill other players characters at the table over and over with no real consequence?
Have you ever played a TT game where you're up against other 'characters'? That is, not humanoids, but an evil Necromancer, or a Warlord or a Cleric of the bigbad?
Sure, they're NPCs in the strictest terms and played by the DM, but this is how I see PvP in PFO. Other players (sometimes) will just be an obstacle to get around somehow. Half the fun is figuring out how.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Consider this: the world will randomly populate and de-populate NPC baddies depending on location. There isn't only "orc hidey-hole #1" that sits right off the junction of gank streetand griefer ave. It's dangerous to go alone (take this), but that doesn't mean you can't and still manage to avoid any bandits along the way. It's going to be a big place.
But also consider this: if I just want to go kill orcs for an hour, I don't want to have to get a group of twelve together every time just so I don't get ganked. If I want to go on an epic adventure, a group is awesome, but sometimes it's also not. It depends. Sometimes it takes all the fun out of it because you get 2 hits and your target is dead. Then it's...
Initially it's an hour from top to bottom, not huge, but big enough.
But it's not just bandits, rival towns, rival alignments, you'll come across them too, which is fine, but it does mean that sometimes when you just want some solo time, it's a lot harder.
I am aware of the non static spawns, that just means more people will be roaming around looking for them and other things, so in some ways it means you're more likely to come across roaming bands, not only will they not have target areas, that also means the defenders of the territory won't either. So it's a double edged blade. Sometimes that isn't fun.
But mostly I reckon there will be enough pve to do. I'll go out guard miners and stuff. Plenty of fun! For me anyway.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am slowly putting out the info about PFO to other friendly guilds that I know and see if they are interested. I might actually see if I know someone who is willing to post it on the eve forums and have the rabid dogs being released to this...
j/k about the eve forums :P
Why j/k?
That is the target audience for this game.
If the kickstarter is to succeed those are the people the devs should be advertising to.
Not pathfinder pnp players.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am slowly putting out the info about PFO to other friendly guilds that I know and see if they are interested. I might actually see if I know someone who is willing to post it on the eve forums and have the rabid dogs being released to this...
j/k about the eve forums :P
Why j/k?
That is the target audience for this game.
If the kickstarter is to succeed those are the people the devs should be advertising to.
Not pathfinder pnp players.
I don't like EVE. I want to play the crap out of PFO.
Your negative opinion of this game doesn't determine its target audience.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
How is dying to a PvE monster and losing your gear different then dying to a PvP'er and then losing your gearThe monster wasn't trying to grief me.
The player was.
Thats the difference.
Which is social. You can do many many social things back to the 'griefer' to get revenge or make sure they don't do it again. A mob is just some programmed sprites that respawn and attack you again regardless.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Which is social. You can do many many social things back to the 'griefer' to get revenge or make sure they don't do it again. A mob is just some programmed sprites that respawn and attack you again regardless.How is dying to a PvE monster and losing your gear different then dying to a PvP'er and then losing your gearThe monster wasn't trying to grief me.
The player was.
Thats the difference.
They don't want to do something back, they don't get enjoyment from revenge, they don't want it to happen.
This is the single most important point that causes this exasperation, and the increasing irritation, this is the part that you have to understand. They don't like fighting people because they don't enjoy it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am slowly putting out the info about PFO to other friendly guilds that I know and see if they are interested. I might actually see if I know someone who is willing to post it on the eve forums and have the rabid dogs being released to this...
j/k about the eve forums :P
Why j/k?
That is the target audience for this game.
If the kickstarter is to succeed those are the people the devs should be advertising to.
Not pathfinder pnp players.
My thought is that the majority of EvE players would hate PFO. In EvE, the devs, players, player organizations, and game mechanics all encourage Random Player Killing and griefing. PFO an its design team has nothing in common with that.
The PvP in PFO is less free than I would prefer, but I think the other aspects of the game, as well as the wider audience it will appeal to, makes up for this.
All the talk on these forums about EvE makes me think I would love EvE. I think I might play it until Early Enrollment...
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Which is social. You can do many many social things back to the 'griefer' to get revenge or make sure they don't do it again. A mob is just some programmed sprites that respawn and attack you again regardless.How is dying to a PvE monster and losing your gear different then dying to a PvP'er and then losing your gearThe monster wasn't trying to grief me.
The player was.
Thats the difference.
They don't want to do something back, they don't get enjoyment from revenge, they don't want it to happen.
This is the single most important point that causes this exasperation, and the increasing irritation, this is the part that you have to understand. They don't like fighting people because they don't enjoy it.
Oh, I understand that point.
Devil's Advocacy: "Every time I try to get in the dungeon, the monsters kill me! They're griefers!"
I was more trying to draw this picture.
The only difference between mobs and player characters is that mobs only do what their programming tells them to - they're getting smarter day by day (until cyberdyne perfects them) but they're still contrained by AI. PC's are not held back by this constraint and thus imho, are much more 'fun' content.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Devil's Advocacy: "Every time I try to get in the dungeon, the monsters kill me! They're griefers!"
Hey now !
Thats not fair.
They were just hangin out, by the entrance grabbin a quick smoke and WHAM, some bloodthirsty human with a hot elf arm candy and a drunk dwarf come bustin in to harsh there mellow.
If you ask me, you deserved it !
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monsters won't remember you and kill you whenever they sill you, they won't come back with friends, they won't target your group for special attention, they won't come after you in unexpected places (usually), they won't move around in fast moving, well organised squads specifically looking for easy prey.
Shall we flip it again? Why do you need pvp at all if there's pve? Since apparently there's no difference?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monsters won't remember you and kill you whenever they sill you, they won't come back with friends, they won't target your group for special attention, they won't come after you in unexpected places (usually), they won't move around in fast moving, well organised squads specifically looking for easy prey.
Shall we flip it again? Why do you need pvp at all if there's pve? Since apparently there's no difference?
Neither will players in PFO (unless they are in a declared war with you). Targeting "your group for special attention" is griefing by most definitions, and those players would be banned if they continue this.
This is the metagame solution, while any group that does that (disrupting your settlements adventuring and economic activity) would undoubtedly catch the attention of those that would enjoy depriving them of their gear (and who will not suffer consequences for killing them like the RPKers will for killing you).
If your settlement gets into too many wars or cannot adequately defend you, either:
a. Stop going to the same dang area they are patrolling!!!
b. Find a settlement that can provide the security you desire. It is out there.
EDIT:
In PvE you don't have to worry (too much) about patrolling monsters. When PvP is an option, you do. It requires a very simple change of strategy/expectations. There have been many posts about the necessary change of mindset.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
"If you don't like it, go somewhere else, stop doing what you want"
This is the difference in philosophy we're talking about.
Go somewhere else is precisely what I would do, I would grab some support and go back to clear them pout, chase them back to their base or settlement and try to raid it in revenge,but for someone who just wants to go on an adventure with a few friends, to have it disrupted by other players is just no fun.
A better analogy would be if you were playing tt game and another group of players pull out some higher level characters and interrupt your game for their own amusement.
You'd see it as more players for your game, they'd see it as disruption to their game by unwanted visitors.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Jameow, that post betrays your assumption that level gaps in PFO will be the same as the yare in other games. It won't be. Will a low skilled character beable to take on a guy who;s hit his capstone? Probably not, but they won't get one-shot. Ryan and the other devs have said repeatedly the range in levels will be much closer in power than in any MMO today.
The only reason anyone should get truly 'ganked' if if a guy's been stalking you and waits for the opportune moment to strike, and brings all of his skills to bear in one precise attack, not a herp derp auto attack just because he's higher 'level'.
That's a meaningful interaction.
Equally meaningful? You get a group of friends together and stop him from doing it to someone else.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I don't like EVE. I want to play the crap out of PFO.
Your negative opinion of this game doesn't determine its target audience.
I don't have a negative opnion of this game. I wouldn't have funded the kickstarter if I did.
I have a negative opinion of EVE and I'd like to make sure PFO does not end up like Eve.
As far as the target audience, PFO is eve in a fantasy setting. People that like eve's playstyle should love pfo. Yes, the dev's look to be tweaking the rules a bit to try to tone down the blatant pvp abuses and griefing that show up in eve, but essentially its the same game.
In EvE, the devs, players, player organizations, and game mechanics all encourage Random Player Killing and griefing. PFO an its design team has nothing in common with that
PFO has many similarities to eve online, several of the devs worked on it. The skills system is similar, the universe layout is similar, fast travel as described is similar, alignment, factions, and so on down the line are all similar.
When I look at the things they are taking from Eve, I see many of the same things that are in eve that promote the RPK's and griefing in eve being brought over to PFO.
Just look at there comments on fast travel, people will have the ability to interupt fast travel (warp bubbles from eve). Now why would someone want to do that? Oh I don't know, maybe to engage in a little "meaningful human interaction" i.e. non-consenual pvp, i.e. random player killing? Just like eve?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"If you don't like it, go somewhere else, stop doing what you want"
This is the difference in philosophy we're talking about.Go somewhere else is precisely what I would do, I would grab some support and go back to clear them pout, chase them back to their base or settlement and try to raid it in revenge,but for someone who just wants to go on an adventure with a few friends, to have it disrupted by other players is just no fun.
The worse case is when that group of players comes in and follows you killing the types of mobs your looking for, gathering the resources that you're searching out, locks the dungeons you approach... and there is nothing you can do about it, since there is no PvP.
This, I believe is the real problem with the "even once" argument. If there is no non-consensual PvP, there are still griefers in an MMO.
Only now, you can't do anything about it. You can' call your friends, guild mates, settlement members, your local anti-griefer Chartered Company... you can't place an infinite number of bounties to make sure they lose many times over what you lost; cast a death-curse, causing them to lose their prized, normally protected weapons/armor... they aren't subject to heavy mechanical costs for their actions.
They can grief you with impunity. This is incredibly common on WoW PvE servers. On the WoW PvP servers I played on, the people that managed to cause me the most grief were my own teammates, since I couldn't do anything to stop them.
In PvE grief, your only option is to leave. In PvP grief, leaving is one of many options. This is the important difference between non-consensual PvP and not having non-consensual PvP: Players have more options to deal with griefers.
In PFO, a game in which griefing is a bannable offense (strong support from the devs) and there are steep penalties for even just killing a random person, I expect there to be much less grief than in any WoW server. Not to mention that we have a classy community growing here ;)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Jameow, that post betrays your assumption that level gaps in PFO will be the same as the yare in other games. It won't be. Will a low skilled character beable to take on a guy who;s hit his capstone? Probably not, but they won't get one-shot. Ryan and the other devs have said repeatedly the range in levels will be much closer in power than in any MMO today.
The only reason anyone should get truly 'ganked' if if a guy's been stalking you and waits for the opportune moment to strike, and brings all of his skills to bear in one precise attack, not a herp derp auto attack just because he's higher 'level'.
That's a meaningful interaction.
Equally meaningful? You get a group of friends together and stop him from doing it to someone else.
Actually the point was "characters of sufficient ability to disrupt your gameplay"
And again the point is, at that time, they don't want to be dealing with them AT ALL. They don't have to have been specifically targeting you, maybe thru discovered the dungeon and went and got some friends and have a superior force. The point is they have come in and ruined your enjoyment , souring the experience. I'm trying to explain the MINDSET to you, not the mechanics of the situation.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I look at the things they are taking from Eve, I see many of the same things that are in eve that promote the RPK's and griefing in eve being brought over to PFO.
Just look at there comments on fast travel, people will have the ability to interupt fast travel (warp bubbles from eve). Now why would someone want to do that? Oh I don't know, maybe to engage in a little "meaningful human interaction" i.e. non-consenual pvp, i.e. random player killing? Just like eve?
Ok, I'm glad you brought up at least one example to back up your strong claims on what PFO 'is.'
PFO is not EvE. There are numerous posts by devs on blogs, in other threads, and posts by long-time followers of this project in this very thread that refute this.
The only things that matter in regards to how PvP will work in PFO as compared to EvE is how the systems of PvP are similar, not all the other things like skill training etc.
I spelled out the dissimilarities clearly, in one sentence, in what you quoted of my post. For specifics, please read the rest of mine and others' posts in this thread, as it's getting tiresome to repeat it.
I will, however, address your specific example:
I expect that few characters will interrupt fast travel in order to RPK or grief, as you suggest.
The reasons are: Random Player Killing is severely punished by game mechanics in PFO, to the point where RPKers will be far behind players that don't engage in this behavior in terms of wealth, character development, and settlement development. All of this is expanded upon by earlier posts in this thread.
The reason that fast travel is interruptable, and indeed, the reason for PvP in PFO, is for warfare between settlements. This is consensual. If your settlement gets into too many wars for your taste, you should find a settlement that isn't so focused on warfare and can better address your playstyle. They are out there.
I am not nearly so interested in PvP in PFO now that I know I can't choose to go out killing random players on a whim. I think I'll be a merchant.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Ok. I am indeed not understanding. Are you looking for a game you and only people you know log into? Because there are many ways another player can 'sour the experience' besides through PvP. And worse.
Besides, other players "of sufficient ability to disrupt your gameplay" aren't going to be out willy nilly attacking people. If they do, there are in game and community enforced consequences. Most likely, if you are attacked by another player at all, there is going to be an in-game reason for it.
This won't be normal run of the mill open PvP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Jameow For what it's worth, I understand what you don't personally hold that opinion (any longer?)
@Summersnow Thanks for backing the kickstarter with us. If I may make a point directly for you:
Many of the people posting in this forum that are trying to explain how PvP in PFO will be drastically different from PvP in EvE/UO/Darkfall/Mortal Online/insertanygamehere had exactly the same fears you do about PvP in PFO, almost exactly a year ago.
Since then, through a year of developer interaction, they have seen more and more information come out limiting random PvP encounters more and more, not to mention the numerous, strongly-worded dev posts stating that griefing in particular will not be tolerated, and will be bannable. I think it was on the previous page, maybe two pages back, that many of these people spoke up and I made a post specifically about this, stating that the rabid griefers that were here a year ago left after they decided they couldn't have their fun in PFO. I hope you read those posts with an open mind; as they know, it takes time and (hopefully not a full year of) reinforcement to believe it :)
We're glad to have you here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Is this a fair statement:
"When I log into my MMO of choice, I like that I can engage computer controlled creatures and get the same result every time. This helps me better plan and spend my time while I play more constructively. Non-consensual PvP adds an element of chaos, by way of the presence of unpredictable human controlled creatures that I can not plan for. They may attack me or not bother me at all. There is no way to tell from day to day, and I do not enjoy this lack of control of my time in game."
Does this better capture some folks' problem with open PvP?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok. I am indeed not understanding. Are you looking for a game you and only people you know log into? Because there are many ways another player can 'sour the experience' besides through PvP. And worse.
Besides, other players "of sufficient ability to disrupt your gameplay" aren't going to be out willy nilly attacking people. If they do, there are in game and community enforced consequences. Most likely, if you are attacked by another player at all, there is going to be an in-game reason for it.
This won't be normal run of the mill open PvP.
*sigh* as I have said several times today, I am fine with the system as it is. I am sticking up for the pve'ers not because I agree that the system should be changed, but I'm trying to explain to other people where they are coming from.
Stop thinking about the mechanics. It's not about those, it is about the actions of the people involved. There is a group, they are doing something together, enjoying themselves, having a good time. Someone else comes along and does something that interrupts their enjoyment. In rl such a thing would be considered impolite or rude. Perhaps at some other point in time they would have enjoyed the activity that has intruded in on what they are doing, but at this time they were dling something else, and someone has ruined that for them.
I realise that to you this interruption adds a new dimension of excitement, for them it is the opposite. For them the whole experience was just ruined.
If you can understand their point of view, THEN you can start discussing the mechanics of situations, but until you understand that point of view solutions like "but you can get your revenge any of these ways or "they will suffer for it" will only cause more agitation.
I'm not trying to pick on anyone in particular here, in just frustrated that I apparently suck so bad at getting a point across and end up repeating myself all day.
There is a proportion of the population that really dislike aspects of pvp THAT much that it totally ruins their enjoyment, for some it's looting, for some it's just an aggressive competitiveness they find distasteful.
But to say they want a theme park is simply not true and is another frustrating point. They want a sandbox where human interaction is not based around what they consider antisocial behavior. For some, PFO will not be right for them. This, in itself can be frustrating because it has a great deal of potential. For others it's just a case of presenting to them the system in a way that mollifies their anxiety. Many of these are pledged and willing to try, others are not at the point where they are convinced it will deliver on it's promises, I'm expecting many more of these over the next 12 months leading up to beta. Many people could potentially be driven away and give the game a bad reputation like darkfall's community if this perception as a pvp centric game is not shifted. I think the key to that is for the people who understand the system as it has been described so far that are exited about the potential of the game to understand the perspective of people that aren't particularly interested in open pvp so that this perceived antagonism between the two groups can be overcome.
Everyone here wants the game to live up to its potential, it is a very exciting project, but to communicate, we have to understand eachother's perspectives.
Wow. That was long.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just look at there comments on fast travel, people will have the ability to interupt fast travel (warp bubbles from eve). Now why would someone want to do that? Oh I don't know, maybe to engage in a little "meaningful human interaction" i.e. non-consenual pvp, i.e. random player killing? Just like eve?
Don't be fooled into thinking it will always be random :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand their perspectives, they don't want other people to prosper off of their dissatisfaction. If an AI mimicked the behaviors of a griefer, they would be more or less fine with it, and look at it more like a challenge.
I have yet to see an advocate for consensual PvP make an argument that wouldn't result in a fundamental change of the current game design. And on top of that 90% of the posters seem to have little knowledge of the game, and simply read 'open PvP' and got all fired up. Then there are the more entertaining times, when they donate to the kickstarter, and don't realize it is Open-PvP until after their money is gone and come complain about it.
I'm seeing a lot of understanding from the Open-PvP'er to the Consent-PvP'er, but not the other way. I would say most of the game's defenders understand the consent-PvP side of things, and we give the same explanation every time. We tell them 'why', they tell us 'no', not 'why not'.
To the Consent-PvP advocate, the game based on their beloved IP is not going to be what they want. To the Open-PvP advocate, we finally found a game to really get behind, and we have these people coming in and making suggestions that would degrade our experience in the game.
Some more understanding from the consent-pvp advocate is what needs to happen next. I want to see someone argue for a consent PvP system that doesn't unravel the current game idea.
When I got here I wan't a huge fan of the idea of Open PvP, I was more interested in the sandbox. I didn't even know what Pathfinder was, I just saw a story on Massively for the 2nd blog post. I was trying hard to come up with ways to make the game have consensual PvP, but every time I ended up seeing open PvP as a superior system.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I understand their perspectives, they don't want other people to prosper off of their dissatisfaction. If an AI mimicked the behaviors of a griefer, they would be more or less fine with it, and look at it more like a challenge.
I have yet to see an advocate for consensual PvP make an argument that wouldn't result in a fundamental change of the current game design. And on top of that 90% of the posters seem to have little knowledge of the game, and simply read 'open PvP' and got all fired up. Then there are the more entertaining times, when they donate to the kickstarter, and don't realize it is Open-PvP until after their money is gone and come complain about it.
I'm seeing a lot of understanding from the Open-PvP'er to the Consent-PvP'er, but not the other way. I would say most of the game's defenders understand the consent-PvP side of things, and we give the same explanation every time. We tell them 'why', they tell us 'no', not 'why not'.
To the Consent-PvP advocate, the game based on their beloved IP is not going to be what they want. To the Open-PvP advocate, we finally found a game to really get behind, and we have these people coming in and making suggestions that would degrade our experience in the game.
Some more understanding from the consent-pvp advocate is what needs to happen next. I want to see someone argue for a consent PvP system that doesn't unravel the current game idea.
When I got here I wan't a huge fan of the idea of Open PvP, I was more interested in the sandbox. I didn't even know what Pathfinder was, I just saw a story on Massively for the 2nd blog post. I was trying hard to come up with ways to make the game have consensual PvP, but every time I ended up seeing open PvP as a superior system.
I came to the same conclusion, but that isn't being conveyed very well. The ones that are just a flat out "no, I don't want any pvp ever" or "No looting me!" those ones there's not much you can say to them, but there are plenty of others that either are concerned that it won't work, or that it's too pvp centric. THOSE are the ones that need better answers than "but you can pvp back at them" or "well you should play better (ie you should have brought a bigger group with you, you shouldn't have had that equipment on you etc etc)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvP to me, opens up a myriad of roleplaying options. I've posted in other threads about how to react to a PK or to a griefer, but it honestly opens up so many doors that are otherwise not there to even open. Even if you're not into roleplaying, the fact other players are your 'opposition' means you're not going up against pure AI. If you're a merchant, you're fighting against other player merchants in the market place. If you're an explorer or settler, you're racing against other players to find dungeons/resources/land to settle. If you're a diplomat, you actually have something to do that is not scripted.
The fact you can stick someone with a sword is just a single aspect of PvP. I wish people would look at all the aspects of PvP other than just the griefing and pure combat side of things.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
PvP to me, opens up a myriad of roleplaying options. I've posted in other threads about how to react to a PK or to a griefer, but it honestly opens up so many doors that are otherwise not there to even open. Even if you're not into roleplaying, the fact other players are your 'opposition' means you're not going up against pure AI. If you're a merchant, you're fighting against other player merchants in the market place. If you're an explorer or settler, you're racing against other players to find dungeons/resources/land to settle. If you're a diplomat, you actually have something to do that is not scripted.
The fact you can stick someone with a sword is just a single aspect of PvP. I wish people would look at all the aspects of PvP other than just the griefing and pure combat side of things.
This is true, but FIRST you need someone to become comfortable with the PvP idea before you can get to that point.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I came to the same conclusion, but that isn't being conveyed very well. The ones that are just a flat out "no, I don't want any pvp ever" or "No looting me!" those ones there's not much you can say to them, but there are plenty of others that either are concerned that it won't work, or that it's too pvp centric. THOSE are the ones that need better answers than "but you can pvp back at them" or "well you should play better (ie you should have brought a bigger group with you, you shouldn't have had that equipment on you etc etc)
The OP of this thread should have enough information for someone to get a good idea, the next step is moving into specific questions, and they get those answers. I have yet to see someone open to the idea of OPvP, but unsure, not get a reasonable answer, or be treated rudely by a regular. I do see a lot of people coming here, complaining, then acting like a wounded animal and accuse of rudeness when they are shot down by PFO's gurus. Knowledge is just offensive to some people. :)
I know I'm not as understanding as some others here, I require a desire to learn, and an admission of ignorance before I seriously help someone. If someone doesn't come here with an open mind, I don't really care about their opinion. If they are causing trouble, and I see people forming opinions based on their incorrect statements, I will try and put an end to it without consideration of their feelings. PFO is already getting enough bad press due to wrong, or incomplete information.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I came to the same conclusion, but that isn't being conveyed very well. The ones that are just a flat out "no, I don't want any pvp ever" or "No looting me!" those ones there's not much you can say to them, but there are plenty of others that either are concerned that it won't work, or that it's too pvp centric. THOSE are the ones that need better answers than "but you can pvp back at them" or "well you should play better (ie you should have brought a bigger group with you, you shouldn't have had that equipment on you etc etc)The OP of this thread should have enough information for someone to get a good idea, the next step is moving into specific questions, and they get those answers. I have yet to see someone open to the idea of OPvP, but unsure, not get a reasonable answer, or be treated rudely by a regular. I do see a lot of people coming here, complaining, then acting like a wounded animal and accuse of rudeness when they are shot down by PFO's gurus. Knowledge is just offensive to some people. :)
I know I'm not as understanding as some others here, I require a desire to learn, and an admission of ignorance before I seriously help someone. If someone doesn't come here with an open mind, I don't really care about their opinion. If they are causing trouble, and I see people forming opinions based on their incorrect statements, I will try and put an end to it without consideration of their feelings. PFO is already getting enough bad press due to wrong, or incomplete information.
Yeah but that just causes more antagonism and then they won't listen to you. Bringing people round to the idea that a little bit of controlled pvp isn't so bad, and that it won't be a gankfest lol
If I wanted that sort of environment I'd go back to Darkfall... actually I might try it anyway since unholy wars comes out today lol