Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's Ryan's post
There has been a lot of talk about the different flags and I discovered a post where Ryan says there will probably be free-for-all zones where no flags are used. So I would like to hear people's opinions about this idea.
My thoughts:
I guess it's not a bad idea, but my first thought was that it will even more divide the players. Most of the flags are not RP based, therefore I would not probably go to such a free-for-all zone. In my mind the free-for-all zones would in some way disturb the cohesion of the game. I wonder if they are still to be added.
Even with war flag these kinds of zones could introduce a new play style into game. They would probably be used as battle grounds, where you bring a large force to fight for no apparent RP reason but just to get magic items from the other extremely large force that has gathered there. If no alignment changes would happen in these areas it would kill some RP. Would they be used as battle grounds for good vs evil? Would they cater to some other kind of RP purpose? PVE purpose? These areas would probably be the central points for some players or guilds. Would they change to flag areas if fully discover by players? In my fear they would become separate PVP war zones like in other MMOs. I hope this is not what the devs are trying to accomplish.
Also they would in some way be the end of the wilderness, kind of like the peak where the wilderness ends, for these would be the most rough areas of the sandbox game PVP vice.
I am not in favor of these free-for-all zones, at least not for now. Thanks for reading :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
-snip- We'll likely declare some areas free-for-all zones where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone. Where, how, why, how large, etc. all to be determined, but that is the kind of thing I'd expect in a land like the River Kingdoms. Of course, you'd have to be mad to go into such an area without being able to hold your own.... no easy targets.
Sounds in keeping, adds diversity (ie opposite = NPC super secure zones/cities eg LG with uber-guards).
Gives a truly chaotic/outlawish areas of the world for those character alignments and players bent on that blood-thirsty/dangerous game experience:
"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate", or "Abandon all hope, ye who enter here."
My understanding of the free-for-all areas is that they are so far away from what is settled that there is no law there. And if a group is strong enough to stomp in there and actually survive the building process could slowly change the hex from free-for-all to whatever alignment the settlement is.
That is how I was envisioning the FFA hexes. When they expand the map, many of the new hexes would be FFA. As people explored them and beat down the larger populations of mobs, began clearing areas to set up settlements and such, the hexes would evolve from lawless into whatever alignment the settlement is. I guess some hexes could remain lawless even when surrounded by settled hexes?
Maybe they will handle it differently, only time will tell.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am guessing that one of two models could be used here. EvE Online's or Pirates of the Burning Sea's.
In EVE, the lawless zones were far flung areas. You had to travel from safe, to less safe, to dangerous, to get to free for all.
In POTBS, the lawless zones would evolve, based on player actions vs. their opposite faction. So if France, attacked English ships, outside of an English port, the area around it would progressively become destabilized, then turn open PVP.
I can see some signs of both for PFO based on what the Devs have said.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am guessing that one of two models could be used here. EvE Online's or Pirates of the Burning Sea's.
In EVE, the lawless zones were far flung areas. You had to travel from safe, to less safe, to dangerous, to get to free for all.
In POTBS, the lawless zones would evolve, based on player actions vs. their opposite faction. So if France, attacked English ships, outside of an English port, the area around it would progressively become destabilized, then turn open PVP.
I can see some signs of both for PFO based on what the Devs have said.
Those are good ideas.
What we have now is: safe zone, marshal zone, law zone, flag zone?, free-for-all zone.
I guess this comes down to how flags are used in a lawless "flag zone" and how "law zone" and "marshal zone" are connected and how bountys and death curses are handled in each zone, to make the transition "smooth" from zone to zone. Just some thoughts.
Edit: thinking about the attacker flag and alignment. Would lawful good characters be able to attack anyone in these areas without alignment change? I hope not. That would be an rp killer and meaningless pvp.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FFA zones are likely were some of the most precious crafting materials will be located.
This has already been confirmed in the Dev Blog. The furtehr you go out of a safe zone, the higher the risk and the higher the reward will go.
If you manage to get back with raw materials from the free-for-all zone and into the safe zone, you will be able to sell those at a premium price.
In the "Most Dangerous Game" section of the Dev Blog, they detail how the relationships between caravan, bandit and market will work to maintain a "healthy" player run economy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FFA zones are likely were some of the most precious crafting materials will be located.
This makes sense, but still don't understand how a lawful good character can whack anyone without consequences. Maybe heinous and attacker flags would exist in such a zone to determine alignment.
The Arena.A discussion that could be related to this one for not much except whacking is described in Ryan's post(link in OP).
but still don't understand how a lawful good character can whack anyone without consequences. Maybe heinous and attacker flags would exist in such a zone to determine alignment.
The Arena.A discussion that could be related to this one for not much except whacking is described in Ryan's post(link in OP).
I may be misunderstanding your post, but a LG character can't just kill another without receiving a flag. Unless a player is flagged a criminal, the LG char would get an attacker flag and a criminal flag if they assaulted another just like any other alignment would.
Can you give an example of what situation your talking about that let's a LG char attack another?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FFA zones are likely were some of the most precious crafting materials will be located.This makes sense, but still don't understand how a lawful good character can whack anyone without consequences. Maybe heinous and attacker flags would exist in such a zone to determine alignment.
The Arena.A discussion that could be related to this one for not much except whacking is described in Ryan's post(link in OP).
I believe that in those zones LG players may not be flagged but they will certainly still get an alingment shift, that may be as or more punitive than a flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I may be misunderstanding your post, but a LG character can't just kill another without receiving a flag. Unless a player is flagged a criminal, the LG char would get an attacker flag and a criminal flag if they assaulted another just like any other alignment would.
Can you give an example of what situation your talking about that let's a LG char attack another?
In the OPs link Ryan talks about zones "where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone". So there can't be any alignment changes in these areas if there are no flags to determine the attacker.
I was wondering what is that all about.
I may be misunderstanding your post, but a LG character can't just kill another without receiving a flag. Unless a player is flagged a criminal, the LG char would get an attacker flag and a criminal flag if they assaulted another just like any other alignment would.
Can you give an example of what situation your talking about that let's a LG char attack another?
In the OPs link Ryan talks about zones "where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone". So there can't be any alignment changes in these areas if there are no flags to determine the attacker.
I was wondering what is that all about.
Ah ok. I see what you mean now. That's an interesting situation, one I can't answer so I'm interested in learning how that might happen as well :p.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Even with war flag these kinds of zones could introduce a new play style into game. They would probably be used as battle grounds, where you bring a large force to fight for no apparent RP reason but just to get magic items from the other extremely large force that has gathered there. I
I don't imagine that being a high profit concept, just based on the loot rules alone. This isn't full loot, it's partial loot with partial destruction. Assuming you are really good, in any PVP scenerio against a prepared opponent, in a place where other prepared opponents are showing up, you can expect a 30-70% chance of winning, based on your own skill/gear etc...
Lets say the threading is at the point where half of your things are protected (unlikely it will probably be less than half, but that is speculation), Half the unthreaded are destroyed (likely), and half are looted. So any win against an equally geared opponent, is a 25% gain, every death is a 50% loss (25% to the opponent, 25% destroyed). Simple math, if you have less than a 4:1 kill-death ratio against equally well geared opponents, you did not come out ahead.
PVP for the sake of PVP will not be profitable. On the offense, people in combat gear will rarely break you even. When those people are guiding wagons of other things, those are worth it.
Same on the defenders side, the PVP if anything is to be a nusance rather than bonus loot. Now the value of what they entered the dangerous area to get, for some other area, is intended to be large enough to make it worth the risk.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It's important to note that you will still get Flagged (for example, as an Attacker) in wilderness zones. I don't believe all wilderness zones will be FFA zones. If there are truly FFA zones, where no Flags apply, I expect them to be fairly rare, and possibly associated with an Arena of some sort.
You may find this link from Ryan worth reading: Why no "non-lethal" duels?
It's not directly on point, but is nonetheless revealing.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I may be misunderstanding your post, but a LG character can't just kill another without receiving a flag. Unless a player is flagged a criminal, the LG char would get an attacker flag and a criminal flag if they assaulted another just like any other alignment would.Can you give an example of what situation your talking about that let's a LG char attack another?
I think you might be confusing Flags and Alignment change.
Just because Flags would not exist in an FFA zone, doesn't mean alignment and reputation change can’t happen. Flags are meant to alert other players to a potential 'bad-guy'. It also prevents those 'bad-guys' from doing certain things as a sort of punishment for being bad. In an FFA zone, those flags are removed. Think of it as the legal consequences for ganking being removed.
Just because there are no legal consequences, doesn’t make attacking another PC for no good reason any less chaotic or evil. This means a LG character, if he wants to remain both Lawful and Good, will have to wait to be aggressed before he can respond to the aggressor.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think you might be confusing Flags and Alignment change.
Just because Flags would not exist in an FFA zone, doesn't mean alignment and reputation change can’t happen. Flags are meant to alert other players to a potential 'bad-guy'. It also prevents those 'bad-guys' from doing certain things as a sort of punishment for being bad. In an FFA zone, those flags are removed. Think of it as the legal consequences for ganking being removed.
Just because there are no legal consequences, doesn’t make attacking another PC for no good reason any less chaotic or evil. This means a LG character, if he wants to remain both Lawful and Good, will have to wait to be aggressed before he can respond to the aggressor.
I was under the impression that the attacker flag determines the aggressor, so that if anyone happens around a scene of fighting he immediately knows who the aggressor is. And there fore I made the assumption that the attacker flag and alignment changes are tied.
It is also true that the alignments can be measured without the flags, but then someone who happens to come around a scene of fighting can't probably tell the aggressor from first sight. And if he is a good person he must determine which side to help or not get involved based solely on the actions of the combatants or their words.
How could a lawful good person know which person to help when coming upon a scene of fighting, while wanting to abide to his alignment, without the attacker flag?
Note: there has been talks of green, yellow and red PCs and NPCs, so maybe that's the answer.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because Flags would not exist in an FFA zone, doesn't mean alignment and reputation change can’t happen.
If there are true FFA Hexes, then I expect that they will be free not only of all Flags, but also of Alignment & Reputation Shifts as well as Bounties, Death Curses, etc.
I don't expect there to be many FFA Hexes. I think the majority of the non-Settled Hexes will simply be Wilderness Hexes where the Attacker Flag, Alignment & Reputation Shifts, Bounties, Death Curses, etc. all still apply, even if the Criminal Flag and some others perhaps don't.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Just because Flags would not exist in an FFA zone, doesn't mean alignment and reputation change can’t happen.If there are true FFA Hexes, then I expect that they will be free not only of all Flags, but also of Alignment & Reputation Shifts as well as Bounties, Death Curses, etc.
I disagree. Alignment shifts must be not suppressed in FFA zones. A LG paladin who kills with no reason anywhere must suffer the consequences of his act, fo example. If not paladins will not make sense.
FFA zones are supposed to be lawless zones in relation to human laws, but not in relation to the divine laws that regulate the alignments. Or at least that is the way it should be IMO.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I disagree. Alignment shifts must be not suppressed in FFA zones. A LG paladin who kills with no reason anywhere must suffer the consequences of his act, fo example. If not paladins will not make sense.
FFA zones are supposed to be lawless zones in relation to human laws, but not in relation to the divine laws that regulate the alignments. Or at least that is the way it should be IMO.
I'm in agreement with Nihimon as to the difference between wilderness and FFA zones from what I've read through.
FFA zones would be something akin to an arena. Wilderness zones are ones that don't have laws so things like criminal flag would not apply, while other flags like attacker would.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I disagree. Alignment shifts must be not suppressed in FFA zones. A LG paladin who kills with no reason anywhere must suffer the consequences of his act, fo example. If not paladins will not make sense.
FFA zones are supposed to be lawless zones in relation to human laws, but not in relation to the divine laws that regulate the alignments. Or at least that is the way it should be IMO.
I'm in agreement with Nihimon as to the difference between wilderness and FFA zones from what I've read through.
FFA zones would be something akin to an arena. Wilderness zones are ones that don't have laws so things like criminal flag would not apply, while other flags like attacker would.
So you guys think it is ok for a LG paladin or a NG cleric to go to a FFA zone, kill whoever they want with no reason, steal loots etc and still be considered good aligned? Sorry , I beg to differ.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
No I'm saying if two (or more) individuals consent to combat in an organized free-for-all arena (which is how I have understood FFA areas to be designated as compared to wilderness) then there shouldn't be a problem. Who says that the individual has to die in such a situation. They just get *knocked* out or something similar.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...as long as it is not griefing (in other words they are playing their role), and those they attack are evil or chaotic for the LG or evil, lawful neutral, or chaotic neutral for the NG cleric, then where is the problem?
I wasn't talking about killing evil people , I'm talkin about attack indiscriminatelly anyone, including other good players. Also I don't think LG could be able to attack anyone just for being chaotic. Or do you think that is ok a paladin to attack a CG char?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
FFA zones are supposed to be lawless zones in relation to human laws, but not in relation to the divine laws that regulate the alignments. Or at least that is the way it should be IMO.
That sounds more like your standard Wilderness Hex, where you won't get the Criminal Flag, but most of the rest of the mechanics are still in place.
From Goblinworks Blog: I Can See for Miles:
Note: we're also looking at a possible option where you can turn off some fashion of the punishment mechanics against those who kill you as sort of a "come get me and you won't get punished" way to signal you want to fight. Or maybe some manner of declaration of an area being contest territory, in which some aspects of the system are not applied. But that's all very up in the air.
I believe that's the most recent dev post about this particular topic.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you guys think it is ok for a LG paladin or a NG cleric to go to a FFA zone, kill whoever they want with no reason, steal loots etc and still be considered good aligned? Sorry , I beg to differ.
I think that PFO is a game first and foremost, and that Paladins shouldn't be effectively barred from participating in true FFA PvP.
But I also think that "true" FFA zones will be extremely rare, if present at all.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So you guys think it is ok for a LG paladin or a NG cleric to go to a FFA zone, kill whoever they want with no reason, steal loots etc and still be considered good aligned? Sorry , I beg to differ.I think that PFO is a game first and foremost, and that Paladins shouldn't be effectively barred from participating in true FFA PvP.
But I also think that "true" FFA zones will be extremely rare, if present at all.
Paladins could do that in an arena for example. Not in a settlement or open territory even if it is a FFA zone. One of the main features about PFO is that things must make sense. In no way a paladin killing people without a fair reason (such as punishment for a crime or a war) will make sense.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Thanks for the link Nihimon. :)
2) Gang Fight: Need a better name, but effectively you as a group challenge them as a group to a fight without the various punishment mechanics kicking in. This is effectively a big duel that they have to accept for it to work, but if it's that or be murdered one by one by you in sneak attacks, they may go for it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Also just occurred to me that if a duel command is included in game people would be able to fight in a non-lethal way anywhere. That would be fun and not imply in any sort of punishment or debuff. Also , in this case a Paladin could fight anybody he wants as in the end nobody would end dead.
Also just occurred to me that if a duel command is included in game people would be able to fight in a non-lethal way anywhere. That would be fun and not imply in any sort of punishment or debuff. Also , in this case a Paladin could fight anybody he wants as in the end nobody would end dead.
I can't recall if it was in a blog post, or a forum post, but Ryan said there wouldn't be a /duel command in PFO. He went on to explain why, but I can't recall the reason.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I can't recall if it was in a blog post, or a forum post, but Ryan said there wouldn't be a /duel command in PFO. He went on to explain why, but I can't recall the reason.
Sixteen posts up from yours :)
You may find this link from Ryan worth reading: Why no "non-lethal" duels?