Goblin Squad Member
|
In my view if you are pvp flagged then you certainly shouldnt be able to raise a bounty otherwise we might have bluddwolf raising bounties on merchants who turned out to be stronger than they looked at which point the system ceases to make sense.
Yeah, it would be extremely perverse if the Attacker could put a Bounty on their intended victim.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...charge less than that if it means that people pay it more often.I've been wondering what happened to the bandits who once said they'd operate like a protection racket. People in that business know that if you burn down the store, you won't get any money from them any more, and if you do it too often, the rest of the neighbourhood might stop paying you anyway.
I've always thought bandits should be in a business closer to "coercive merchant escorting" than "outright robbery". If nothing else, it'd reduce the incentive to find exploits for the "I've already paid" flag.
It still operates that way. If you pay into the SAD, you get the 20 minute "I've already paid flag".
When I had first started this thread I was of the mind that my SADs would be reasonable (preferably matching whatever the Traveler Flag bonus would grant) and to send the traveler on his way.
This was still met with a litany of "I want to dump all of my belongs first", "I want to fill my pockets with junk", "1 million for defense not 1 copper for tribute" to decoys and so on and so on......
I had full intentions of being Chaotic Neutral and mixing in other activities potentially beneficial to the community (ie escalations).
But I can see now that the moderate views I was hoping to uphold will not serve me any better, than if I go full bore bad ass.
So I will go Chaotic Evil (allowing me to use either the Outlaw or Assassin Flag) and I will spend my time doing banditry on my off time from that carrying out Assassination contracts on those merchant / travelers that consistent reject SADS or travel PvE in zones that I feel should be PvP zones.
I won't have any issue about getting my training as an Assassin, because that I can get from the NPC faction.
I had said in another thread, "sometimes people have to suffer the worse that something can be, before they can appreciate the better" or something like that.....
I am once again becoming bored with this same old back and forth... No quarter asked for, none given....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
In my view if you are pvp flagged then you certainly shouldnt be able to raise a bounty otherwise we might have bluddwolf raising bounties on merchants who turned out to be stronger than they looked at which point the system ceases to make sense.Yeah, it would be extremely perverse if the Attacker could put a Bounty on their intended victim.
If not bounties, assassination contracts for those that refuse SADs (frequently) or refuse to fly an appropriate flag in the wilderness hexes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
... assassination contracts for those that... refuse to fly an appropriate flag in the wilderness hexes.
Careful, there. "I will go out of my way to kill you because you don't flag for PvP" seems very close to "PvP conflicts where the death of the target means no gain for the attacker".
Of course, I'm sure you can twist "no gain" to your purposes, but it's still a jerk move.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If not bounties, assassination contracts for those that refuse SADs (frequently) or refuse to fly an appropriate flag in the wilderness hexes.In my view if you are pvp flagged then you certainly shouldnt be able to raise a bounty otherwise we might have bluddwolf raising bounties on merchants who turned out to be stronger than they looked at which point the system ceases to make sense.Yeah, it would be extremely perverse if the Attacker could put a Bounty on their intended victim.
Once again why do you feel you can impose flagging on people for many of us flagging makes no sense and no I won't change my characters background because you think I should flag.
No one is saying you can't attack non flagged players merely that you will face consequences for doing so. These consequences are small but even so you aren't satisfied.
Stop trying to force flagging on everyone even if it makes no sense for them just because it makes it more convenient to you
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to admit I just do not understand your sense of entitlement...you seem to have this opinion that SAD is set up to give you a free lunch...it is not. It is designed as a way to limit (aka use the carrot to encourage better) bandit behaviour, it is not intended to change traveler behaviour at all.
As a traveler, it is still my prerogative to attempt to keep what I hold...it is still mine until you take it from me. If I can prevent you from taking it...it never becomes yours. Your comments make me feel like you think the fact you have issued a SAD automatically makes whatever you asked for yours...and hence I am griefing you when I do not simply hand it to you with a smile. This is not the case at all. Again, the system was not designed to limit my traveler behaviour, rather your bandit behaviour by giving you some way to be a non-CE bandit. If you have no qualms with being a CE bandit or cannot accept the limitations, by all means ditch the SAD mechanic, make what money you can by smashing faces...deal with (and embrace) the repercussions of your choices.
But please...stop whining about me having the right to protect what is mine by whatever means I can.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Bandits
You go about saying that you have decided to up your SAD demands to more than 50% (of whatever is available to give to SAD) because of new dev posts and mechanics.
You chase away curious lurkers with broad, harsh, and misleading statements.
You threaten to go completely "bad/wrong/fun" because anti robbery proponents discuss ways to make it difficult.
You rage and holler when your misconceptions of dev blogs/posts are not what you thought they meant. Acting like it is terrible and wrong and must be changed because YOU misunderstood it in the first place...
You are not acting any better (worse IMO for your idle threats) than anyone else here.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...I was of the mind that my SADs would be reasonable...and to send the traveler on his way.
I had originally envisioned you posting a member of your Company at the gates of a settlement, there to remind travellers leaving of the risks of the road ahead. Those who paid there and then...voila! 20-minutes of safety along the road. I even thought you could call it "selling tickets".
When things got more complicated--flags and such--I thought you might offer escort services arranged in town, but with appropriately-flagged folks meeting the caravan just out of NPC-retaliation range. Collect your fee, accompany them along the road, after 20 minutes, collect again, and so on.
Now many of your statements sound uncooperative, sometimes leaning toward greedy, and don't feel as if there's any interest left in de-escalating the Millions/Copper crowd from their equal vehemence on the other side of the fence. I feel as if there's quite a large niche opening up for a "shady mercenary" Company to offer true road-protection, and you might be losing out on revenue to such folks.
...whom you'll also be fighting against when merchants hire them.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There will be greedy outlaws. Those people will look only at their bottom line, and I suspect that they will realize that they do best by picking one small area, charging little for passage through it, and attacking everyone who does not pay that small tribute with enough forces to overwhelm them, even if that caravan is well-defended enough to be a loss to attack and defeat.
Such a group will need to be strong enough to handle not only the 'not one copper' crowd, (who will themselves be at a competitive disadvantage against groups that decide what to do on the basis of profit rather than ideology) but also to handle the crazy bandits who want more than a sustainable amount and try to move into what they think is easy territory.
The crazy bandits who demand lots and fight only when they will make a profit will be driven out of business by smart travelers, to make room for the greedy bandits who always have their demands met.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Guards aren't free* and you don't always get to pick your fights. If you only move caravans when you have overwhelming force, then there will be lots of hurry-up-and-wait built into your game sessions - read that as boring game time. You also won't be as responsive to changes in the market if you're only moving cargo when you can assemble forces. And if your caravans are rich enough then somebody will set out to demonstrate that your overwhelming force, isn't.
* Even using settlement/company members, there's the opportunity costs; like the coin you might have made guarding DeciusBrutus.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
...I was of the mind that my SADs would be reasonable...and to send the traveler on his way.I had originally envisioned you posting a member of your Company at the gates of a settlement, there to remind travellers leaving of the risks of the road ahead. Those who paid there and then...voila! 20-minutes of safety along the road. I even thought you could call it "selling tickets".
When things got more complicated--flags and such--I thought you might offer escort services arranged in town, but with appropriately-flagged folks meeting the caravan just out of NPC-retaliation range. Collect your fee, accompany them along the road, after 20 minutes, collect again, and so on.
Now many of your statements sound uncooperative, sometimes leaning toward greedy, and don't feel as if there's any interest left in de-escalating the Millions/Copper crowd from their equal vehemence on the other side of the fence. I feel as if there's quite a large niche opening up for a "shady mercenary" Company to offer true road-protection, and you might be losing out on revenue to such folks.
...whom you'll also be fighting against when merchants hire them.
All of this may have been possible but for a few limiting factors:
1. A SAD can only be issued while flying the Outlaw Flag. So the waiting at the gates would not be possible. Besides the Millions/Copper crowd would have even less incentive to accept where they are safest.
2. The real money / Loot is not in be outgoing trade, its in the incoming raw materials.
3. It goes against the spirit of what the Devs have said they would like to see. They really want PvP to take place in the wilderness hexes, other than war, bounties and assassinations.
Ryan Dancey had even written in a post that he does not want to see to many ways or work arounds to avoid PvP (I'll get the quote later).
Everything else as far as offering reasonable SADs and honoring the 20 minutes, is still in effect.
If I am out in the wilderness and I see a merchant, flagged as Traveler, and I know I can easily defeat him, he will be offered a reasonable SAD. I prefer for it to match the bonus that he received for using the Traveler Flag. He may freely go on his way and be unde the 20 minute protection of the "I already paid" Flag.
If he were flagged and he refused my SAD, we fight and win or loss, that is a part of e game. He can even take a bounty on me if I won, I would bear him no ill will. He played by the rules and used what tools he had available to exact revenge. Meaningful PvP. If he killed me, I would congratulate him and thank him for the experience.
If I come by a merchant that is not flagged, and laden with valuable cargo. He will be issued a SAD, slightly higher than if he were flagged but hopefully still reasonable. If he rejects it and I kill him and it remains at that, fine. If he then takes out a Bounty, I will take out an Assassination contract. If he kills me, I will not have praise for him, because he began the interaction hiding behind the PvE status.
There have been some new approaches that I have decided on, based on the resistance towards any moderation or balance from the Millions/Copper crowd.
Those that deserve moderation will still receive it. Those that refuse it will get the full brunt of what Chaotic Evil is capable of.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is what I have been advocating all of this time. Give us a zone that requires PVP flagging or at least does not punish...
We'll likely declare some areas free-for-all zones where conditions are so bad that nobody gets any penalty for whacking anyone. ...Of course, you'd have to be mad to go into such an area without being able to hold your own.... no easy targets.
The sad part is, it will probably be shoved in the corner and have no real value... Unlike Eve, where the real wealth is in the FFA areas.
Bringing wealth and population to the FFA zone will necessitate a settlement in said FFA zone. One where the pvp window is smashed open 24-7, so there's no significant guard presence to worry about . A complete array of alignments can show up, if they're tough enough. A place where those high-value cargoes get resold at competitive prices, and where unscrupulous crafters can make the very hard to create items (or repair them) using material from those same fabulous cargoes. Imagine the sieges there, all the bandits teaming up to try and defend it ... blood everywhere !
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
because he began the interaction hiding behind the PvE status
This is all what it comes down too. They want a PvP Free For All without Consequences. They do not respect that some people dislike PvP. They do not respect that some of us are cooperative by nature. And they wish to do everything they can to ruin the game for anyone who does not wish to play their way.
They are very obviously unwilling, by everything I have read thus far, to compromise.
Get it through your skulls. This game is not a Pure PvP Game. This game is not a Pure PvE Game. This game is a SANDBOX MMO that wishes to INCENTIVISE PvP, not FORCE it down people's throats.
The rules and discussions that are occurring are meant to provide benefits to those who are willing to engage in PvP for flagging themselves as targets to be content for other people. The rules in place to disadvantage others for attacking unflagged players is meant to make them less appealing targets, without giving them the feeling of such complete safety that they think they can play this game as a solo player.
/rant
Not flagging does not equal pve status it just signifies they are currently operating in one of the niches designated. If none of the niches designed by GW benefits you why would you be flagged.
If you were not able to attack a non flagged character I would agree with you however this is not the case. What you are arguing for is people should be flagged because it means you can kill them without consequence rather than weigh up whether the minor penalties make it worth attacking them.
My character will be able to fly two flags due to alignement, enforcer and assassin.....how does it possibly benefit a character with less combat skills than a blind kitten to fly either? Answer is it doesn't all it does is make me free kill
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I am not unhappy about the open pvp. It has a purpose, and an interesting one. To force people to play together. Many MMOs are a conglomeration of people playing a Single Player Game with a Chatroom, that just happen to sometimes join a Multiplayer Game Session (dungeon/raid).
I just wish to insure that PKs, whether R or not, are incentivised for PvPing with flagged individuals and disincentivised for PvPing with unflagged individuals. However, there should be the static reward for doing either (loot). That way unflagged characters do not have the benefit of complete safety.
Given the choice of attacking two equal targets, one flagged and one not, the flagged character should be more appealing to make the game the most enjoyable for the most players. (reposting to Paizo as well)
The reality is that juicier targets are unlikely to flag themselves. Meaning bigger risk (attacker flag/rep loss) for bigger reward. In order to help combat this, traveler PvP flags should be enticing enough to make even these wealthy travelers consider flying one.
A successful merchant that flies PvP all the time should have slight benefits over the merchant that never flies a flag.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This means that Pathfinder Online does not have open world unrestricted PvP. It is a game where there is non-consensual PvP, but not a game where that PvP occurs everywhere and without warning or consequence.
We know that some players would like to have the ability to opt out of PvP altogether. We are not going to enable that kind of functionality, because we feel that PvP is an intrinsic, critical part of "meaningful human interaction".
We feel that the presence of PvP creates interesting dynamic behavior. It creates risk and risk makes reward have value. PvP risk makes it valuable to transport goods from one location to another. It makes it valuable to work with other players to protect one-another as they explore the world, or fight monsters, or harvest resources.
PvP means that the players automatically create their own content. In other words instead of relying on the development team to create encounters that become boring and predictable, your fellow players will be creating encounters that are never boring and predictable. It will keep the game interesting to play long after the novelty of encountering developer-created content wears off.
If you are one of those people who doesn't like the idea of PvP we ask for you to keep an open mind. We're well aware of the kind of non-fun experiences that PvP has created in some games, and we think we have lots of ideas on ways to keep misbehavior under control in Pathfinder Online. We think that you'll find that the heightened sense of meaning that comes from knowing that you're up against not just scripted AI monsters but wily, creative, motivated human opponents will deliver some of the most exciting and memorable gaming you've ever experienced.
I would argue that your traveling through a wilderness hex, with a full cargo of material, without being flagged is an attempt to opt out of the PVP dynamic mentioned in this post.
Just as we face consequences for attacking a PVE character without proper use of flags and or in the proper circumstances, so too should the opposite be considered.
The consequence of a non PVP flagged merchant declining a SAD should not be, the bandit gets no hit to Reputation if he kills the merchant. The merchant should take a Reputation hit for not being flagged in a circumstance (condition or location) that warrants being flagged.
if there is no penalty for not PVP flagging on the part of the traveler, merchant, gatherer in the wilderness hexes than the goal of the Devs in the Dev Blog "The Most Dangerous Game" will fail.
This along with Ryan Dancey's post that speaks about creating an FFA zone is all that we are hoping for. A balanced compromise between PVE and PVP interests.
This is basically what the Devs have described:
NPC Settlement (Starter Zone) = Virtually no PVP (War, Bounty or Assassinations are exceptions).
Settlement Zones: Depends of Laws, but still leaning towards PVE due to NPC wardens.
Wilderness Hexes: PVP centered, but PVE can still travel with some consequences. My suggestion included.
Uncontrolled Hexes: FFA PVP zone, enter at own risk, no consequences
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Not flagging does not equal pve status it just signifies they are currently operating in one of the niches designated. If none of the niches designed by GW benefits you why would you be flagged.
If you were not able to attack a non flagged character I would agree with you however this is not the case. What you are arguing for is people should be flagged because it means you can kill them without consequence rather than weigh up whether the minor penalties make it worth attacking them.
My character will be able to fly two flags due to alignement, enforcer and assassin.....how does it possibly benefit a character with less combat skills than a blind kitten to fly either? Answer is it doesn't all it does is make me free kill
I you are not a merchant hauling a caravan load of gold across the wilderness, bandits will pay you no mind.
I'm strictly talking about merchant caravans not using the Traveler flag, and then rejecting SADs, so as to place the additional penalty on the bandits of the Aggressor Stack.
* Although it has not be clarified (specifically) if a rejected SAD does trigger the attacker flag. We are waiting on a response for Stephen Cheney when he releases the PVP flag revamp.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bluddwolf wrote:
It goes against the spirit of what the Devs have said they would like to see. They really want PvP to take place in the wilderness hexes, other than war, bounties and assassinations.
I only lurk here infrequently atm so I have not seen this spelt out quite so clearly - I was under the impression that they were keen on promoting all player interaction, which would included all of the above mentioned PvP, not just bandit activity. Could you (or anyone else) provide any links that shows this to be so - or will I find the answer in the Nihimonicon?
Bluddwolf wrote:
I would argue that your traveling through a wilderness hex, with a full cargo of material, without being flagged is an attempt to opt out of the PVP dynamic mentioned in this post.
And I would argue that it is an attempt to take part in the PvP dynamic (i.e. being present in an area where PvP is an inherent danger), but on terms of your own choosing. If being flagged does me no favours, why should I flag myself just to make life easier for you?
Please note that I am not having a go - I think there is a place for banditry in the game. It just seems to me that you want to be able to dictate not only the where and when (which is, after all, what any bandit worth their salt will do and is their prime advantage) but also the how. That is what I have the problem with.
EDIT:
As Bluddwolf posted this while I was writing my post, I should be fair and address it:
I you are not a merchant hauling a caravan load of gold across the wilderness, bandits will pay you no mind.
I'm strictly talking about merchant caravans not using the Traveler flag, and then rejecting SADs, so as to place the additional penalty on the bandits of the Aggressor Stack.
That may seem to make things fairer for the individual traveller like me(in your case I would argue that it does - though not all bandits will see things your way), but it is still deliberately removing one of the weapons in the caravan's arsenal (the rep hit you will take *might* make someone rethink) before the fight has even begun. Do you think you should get to dictate all the terms of the interaction?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would argue that your traveling through a wilderness hex, with a full cargo of material, without being flagged is an attempt to opt out of the PVP dynamic mentioned in this post.
And an extremely poor attempt it would be, because being unflagged doesn't actually prevent PvP, all it does is add some additional consequences. It's up to the potential attacker to weigh those consequences versus the potential prize and decide whether attacking is worthwhile. It sounds to me though that you see even the smallest consequence as being too much.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Traveler (Neutral)
This flag is for people who are primarily crafters or merchants, but want to be involved in PvP and get some extra speed and carrying capacity for the extra risk.This flag can be activated if the player is neutral in regards to either axis (i.e., as long is the player is not LG, LE, CG, or CE).
This flag is automatically disabled by gaining the Attacker, Criminal, or Heinous flag.
This flag cannot be activated while the Attacker, Criminal, or Heinous flag (or any of their 24-hour versions) is active.
While Traveler is active:
The player gets a bonus to Encumbrance so he can carry more items. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player gets a bonus to Move Speed. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player gets a bonus to all Profession skill totals, improving his ability to harvest resources. This increases each hour the flag is active up to ten hours.
The player earns reputation at the end of the first hour this flag is active. This award increases each hour up to a set maximum. This count resets whenever the bonuses from the flag reset.
Just in case anyone does not grasp what Zen has been pointing out.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The unflagged merchant takes full loot loss if he refuses a SAD and can't back his bluff. I think he's staring at plenty of penalty for his game style.
The flagged merchant (Traveler) can carry more cargo and move faster, but risks being attacked by *anyone* without a SAD demand. Even characters flagged as Enforcers and Champions can quickly drop those flags to waylay a flagged merchant. I think the Traveler is the weakest long-term flag right now.
Note that if the Traveler is carrying extra cargo because of the flag, he *can't* drop the flag to run away; he'll be overburdened. Weak.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would argue that your traveling through a wilderness hex, with a full cargo of material, without being flagged is an attempt to opt out of the PVP dynamic mentioned in this post.And an extremely poor attempt it would be, because being unflagged doesn't actually prevent PvP, all it does is add some additional consequences. It's up to the potential attacker to weigh those consequences versus the potential prize and decide whether attacking is worthwhile. It sounds to me though that you see even the smallest consequence as being too much.
If I minded the consequences so much I would say, I'm not doing this anymore. I have taken it in the opposite direction, haven't I?
What gets me is that I see the potential for the slow creep towards catering too much to that "care bear" mentality that has just as much chance of make PFO unplayable as if the other extreme of Greifers running wild does.
Yes, they are both equally destructive to an Open World PVP Sandbox MMO.
I'm not saying no flags, no reputation and no zones of virtual safety. I'm saying there should be a balance, and I don't see that in the current PVP vs. PVE dynamic. All of the consequences are currently placed on the PVP side of the interaction.
Both sides share the potential for death and looting, so that consequence is not exclusive to the PVE player. You have the option to hire NPC guards, I have heard or read no such option for me to hire NPC raiders.
I'm waiting to hear the balance from the PVE side, or the compromise.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
The unflagged merchant takes full loot loss if he refuses a SAD and can't back his bluff. I think he's staring at plenty of penalty for his game style.
The flagged merchant (Traveler) can carry more cargo and move faster, but risks being attacked by *anyone* without a SAD demand. Even characters flagged as Enforcers and Champions can quickly drop those flags to waylay a flagged merchant. I think the Traveler is the weakest long-term flag right now.
Note that if the Traveler is carrying extra cargo because of the flag, he *can't* drop the flag to run away; he'll be overburdened. Weak.
I concur. As I pointed out back in January in a discussion regarding bounties, a travelling merchant is already essentially placing a bounty on his own head, out of his own pocket, every time he steps out on the road with a pack or wagon full of goods - for anyone with the strength to claim it. Flagging yourself for PvP at the same time is ... reckless.
The extra speed is also mostly useless if the merchant's hired guards can't keep up.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What/who is the PVE side?
The balance is in the original design of the flag system when read and understood properly. Finding out that it was not exactly as you thought, does not make it unbalanced. It may come out soon in a more refined manner, but only better balanced. Certainly, I hope, more clear.
Both sides share the potential for death and looting, so that consequence is not exclusive to the PVE player. You have the option to hire NPC guards, I have heard or read no such option for me to hire NPC raiders.
I'm waiting to hear the balance from the PVE side, or the compromise.
Sorry but now you have to be joking bandits worry about being looted? You have told us over and over how you and your bandits will only be using gear that can be threaded and its not like you are going to be going banditting while your bags are full of loot from the last attack
You will lose nothing by looting virtually whereas the merchant is likely to be carrying a lot more value to lose
You really cannot be arguing being looted is a consequence to the bandit and expect to keep any credibility
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
a travelling merchant is already essentially placing a bounty on his own head, out of his own pocket, every time he steps out on the road with a pack or wagon full of goods - for anyone with the strength to claim it. Flagging yourself for PvP at the same time is ... reckless.
The extra speed is also mostly useless if the merchant's hired guards can't keep up.
Two Points:
1. So you are saying that the Traveler Flag is a detriment and requires a revamp. That maybe coming with the Flag Revamp. I also agree that the Traveler Flag should give such benefits that a merchant would be compelled to use it. As you describe it now, they would be crazy to. Not working as intended.
2. I think it is safe to assume that the Fast Travel benefit of the traveler Flag applies to the traveler (merchant's) entire entourage. It wouldn't make sense otherwise.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it is safe to assume that the Fast Travel benefit of the traveler Flag applies to the traveler (merchant's) entire entourage. It wouldn't make sense otherwise.
Maybe that will be addressed in the next iteration. It's easy to see how flags are used by individuals. To be used by a group, does the entire group need the appropriate alignment, or is it based on the group's average alignment?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
If I minded the consequences so much I would say, I'm not doing this anymore. I have taken it in the opposite direction, haven't I?
What gets me is that I see the potential for the slow creep towards catering too much to that "care bear" mentality that has just as much chance of make PFO unplayable as if the other extreme of Greifers running wild does.
Yes, they are both equally destructive to an Open World PVP Sandbox MMO.
I'm not saying no flags, no reputation and no zones of virtual safety. I'm saying there should be a balance, and I don't see that in the current PVP vs. PVE dynamic. All of the consequences are currently placed on the PVP side of the interaction.
Both sides share the potential for death and looting, so that consequence is not exclusive to the PVE player. You have the option to hire NPC guards, I have heard or read no such option for me to hire NPC raiders.
I'm waiting to hear the balance from the PVE side, or the compromise.
You've taken it in the opposite direction in an attempt to intimidate, it's hardly an action in good faith.
I get that you have a different idea of what makes an Open World PVP Sandbox MMO than Goblinworks does. Something destructive to your concept is not automatically destructive to GW's concept.
I'm not sure what you are referring to when you say "PvP vs PvE dynamic". All inter-player dynamics are PvP. PvE dynamics have been so little addressed so far that we have no idea what the consequences are of PvE, so it's pointless to discuss those.
You and I and everyone else reading all know that when PvP player meets PvE player, the "potential for death and looting" weighs heavily in favour of the PvP player. The PvP consequences are there in part to balance that.
NPC guards are for NPC settlements, and for player settlements to protect themselves outside of PvP windows - I am fairly certain no such option exists for travellers outside of some wishful thinking.
NPC raiders, on the other hand, do exist - they're called escalations. I'm sure you haven't paid much attention to those carebear PVE blogs, but you might find it worthwhile reading them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What/who is the PVE side?
The balance is in the original design of the flag system when read and understood properly. Finding out that it was not exactly as you thought, does not make it unbalanced. It may come out soon in a more refined manner, but only better balanced. Certainly, I hope, more clear.
I'm sorry, did they release the clear and refined versions yet?
I've raised questions about the flagging system where they are not clear. Just because you or Nihimon say that they are to you, does not make them so. Stephen Chaney will hopefully make them clear with the revamp. The mere fact that there will be a revamp is indication that parts of them no longer mesh together, or are imbalanced.
Reading something "properly" won't make vagaries concise or misconceptions clear, if the systems described don't work with changes that are developing. This is especially true with systems that are still in the conceptual stages.
This will likely not be the last of the revamps, but perhaps just one of a few dozen yet to come.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who's done extensive trading in unrestricted PVP environments I think the traveler flag is great.
Sure, it's kind of useless for the wagon driving merchant going down the road who's guards can't keep up, but it's freaking awesome for the armed merchants leading pack mules through swamps and mountain passes.
Increased carrying capacity for them and their wagons / pack animals would be more universally useful to traders though.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What/who is the PVE side?
The balance is in the original design of the flag system when read and understood properly. Finding out that it was not exactly as you thought, does not make it unbalanced. It may come out soon in a more refined manner, but only better balanced. Certainly, I hope, more clear.
I'm sorry, did they release the clear and refined versions yet?
I've raised questions about the flagging system where they are not clear. Just because you or Nihimon say that they are to you, does not make them so. Stephen Chaney will hopefully make them clear with the revamp. The mere fact that there will be a revamp is indication that parts of them no longer mesh together, or are imbalanced.
Reading something "properly" won't make vagaries concise or misconceptions clear, if the systems described don't work with changes that are developing. This is especially true with systems that are still in the conceptual stages.
This will likely not be the last of the revamps, but perhaps just one of a few dozen yet to come.
Indeed we will have to wait and see. Perhaps all of your dreams will come true. Who knows but the Devs?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
While I appreciate the back-and-forth on mechanics since it can illuminate problems so the devs can take action, I think this discussion is spiraling off into ridiculousness.
We are getting into pretty deep waters without enough knowledge to fully grasp what we are discussing. Flags are being reworked, possibly making all previously available information moot.
What we do know is that the game is going to provide a world allowing for conflict and all alignments and -many- playstyles will have a place.
Obviously GW wants bandits, or they wouldn't be working on a bandit flag. They want players to compete, they don't want anyone to think they are completely safe etc.
If it turns out during EE that bandits have it too easy, the mechanics will be adjusted. If it turns out we all end up playing Farmville, the mechanics will be adjusted to change that.
I see the temptation in defending your chosen in-game occupation or ideas of world peace against perceived hostile posters and everyone is entitled to do so.
Just consider: what are we gaining from all of this? 19 pages in this thread alone, with spillover into several others. Are we really getting anywhere further discussing this topic?
I think no, not until we have a new large chunk of solid info concerning these matters.
This will be my last post in a long while on issues of banditry, anti-banditry measures, PvP flags, FFA-PvP vs. carebearism etc. That said, it's up to everyone to consider whether this cow has been milked dry or if there are still some drops left to squeeze out of it.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
We know that some players would like to have the ability to opt out of PvP altogether. We are not going to enable that kind of functionality, because we feel that PvP is an intrinsic, critical part of "meaningful human interaction".
I would argue that your traveling through a wilderness hex, with a full cargo of material, without being flagged is an attempt to opt out of the PVP dynamic mentioned in this post.
Just as we face consequences for attacking a PVE character without proper use of flags...
Your ability to quote mine, compartmentalize, and twist the meanings behind someone's words is mind-boggingly dishonest. Can you really not understand the message here? Not sure if you are serious or if just trying to get a rise out of people anymore. I am losing massive respect for you on an OOC basis at this point. I no longer trust that you want what is best for the community, but simply what is best for you.
This means that Pathfinder Online does not have open world unrestricted PvP. It is a game where there is non-consensual PvP, but not a game where that PvP occurs everywhere and without warning or consequence.
Travelling unflagged is not avoiding the spirit of the game. It is very much in the spirit of the statement DIRECTLY before the one you just emphasized. Quit taking just the bits you like and ignoring the rest!
Travelling unflagged is ensuring that there are CONSEQUENCES for Non-Consensual PVP. Plain and simple. It is not to protect PvE players. It is to direct your attention at folks who want to PvP.
This is NOT an Open World PVP Sandbox MMO. This is a Fantasy Sandbox MMO. It uses PvP as a tool. But that PvP is not Open PvP. It is CONSEQUENTIAL PVP.
Go read the freaking about blurb and tell me once where you see it stated that this game is ALL ABOUT THE PVPs. Here, I will make it easy...
https://goblinworks.com/
Funny... I only see PvP mentioned once... at the end of a list. A list about territory defense. It is not BIG AND BOLD in the product description.
TLDR @Bluddwolf - You are good at ignoring the big message to focus on and twist the meaning of what this game is about. You, sir, are violating 'the spirit' of the Fantasy Sandbox MMO that is being built by harassing players that are not signaling that they wish for active PvP. The reason you would take a penalty for attacking them is that IT IS the spirit of the game for you to suffer for harassing unflagged characters. The reason that you are still allowed to attack them is that they are violating the spirit of the game by not involving enough other players in order to dissuade you from your course.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
As someone who's done extensive trading in unrestricted PVP environments I think the traveler flag is great.
Sure, it's kind of useless for the wagon driving merchant going down the road who's guards can't keep up, but it's freaking awesome for the armed merchants leading pack mules through swamps and mountain passes.
Increased carrying capacity for them and their wagons / pack animals would be more universally useful to traders though.
And I look forward to meeting you and your guards in the swamps, Andius. I would not SAD you, because you and your band will be a fine test for our combat skills. If you should beat us (which is likely with the benefits of formation battle)we will learn much from the experience, and if we should beat you... I will guard your body personally, to allow you to retrieve your belongings.