Topic: Open PVP and Full Loot

This topic has 45 voices, contains 334 replies, and was last updated by davan101 77 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 335 total)

1 2 … 23 →

Author	Posts
Author	Posts
December 2, 2011 at 9:01 pm #10559
Esquire Player	Just got around to reading a thread on PVP and the intended system for it. http://www.dawntide.net/community/topic/question-about-pvp To be honest, I believe this decision needs to be re-visited. Many a game have tried this and tends to lead to a very small playerbase. Many a game that has included this feature has closed and never got off the gorund at their launches. You all have built a great crafting system that includes many features that are favorable for players who just like crafting and non-combat related gameplay. That is a definate plus. But, having a crafter toon wondering around looking for resources and then having a fully decked combat toon come up, kill the crafter, and then loot the resouses he carries is a game breaker for many specific players. It is just a bit too intrusive to draw ANY PVE crowd. You have put in very good social aspects with the player citiys, etc and I would imagine that the griefers will have their way with that system as well, thereby limiting your playerbase even further. Just had a guy download and come into Dawntide last night, in fact, that is an avid PVPer and really likes that gameplay. 1st thing he told me on vent was all the games he has tried since Star Wars Galaxies and he made mention of anther PVP full loot game. He liked the gameplay but even being an avid PVPer he left that game for greener pastures. And that is the usual case, not the exception. Game, with this type of gameplay, usualy ends up with just 1 group of players wondering around looking for some1 to kill and not finding any1 cause they’re just not there in the 1st place. They ran them all off. I have been known to take part in PVP gameplay myself and most probably would in Dawntide as well. However, with a fully open PVP and full loot system, I would also have to take a 2nd look, here. However……, I could see where this idea might work with an UNLOCKED ALPHA profession simuliar to the old jedi back in pre-CU SWG. Unlock a combat character by some hiden means that would be TEFed or flaged PVP 100% of the time. Koster used perma-death as a means to control the population of these toons and probably something like that would have to happen here as well to keep the numbers down. But normal toons should be PVP optional, both on land and at sea with maybe an Ils set aside as a full PVP area. Anything else is just too limiting to get any playerbase at all. With all the social content in this game, please do not mess that up with full open/full loot PVP system. All open PVP leads to is griefing beyound measure and even avid PVP players are not going to stand that for very long. There are many games (all with very low playerbases) to get this if a player wants it. Dawntide should be a little different to draw as many as it can get.
December 3, 2011 at 2:52 am #10568
catnips Player	LOL sounds like I wrote this but I didnt, heres how I see it, PVPers out of the box killing anyone that dares try to make a crafter or gather char. Of course I keep hearing that the fighter type will run with the crafters and gather chars. No clue where anyone could have ever gotten such an idea, or they have never ever played PVP. And hes right in a short time there will be a handful of PKers running around screaming why dont anyone play this game so we tea bag thier corpse yelling you suck we rock. And we offered the idea before about setting aside an area for PVP and even setting it up so you chose to PVP or not to, the problem with that is, it will run off the PVPers since they are basicly cowards and only wish to fight someone they know they can beat with a few exceptions. So crafters and gather char will be thier cup of tea. well all we can do is wait and see how this pans out.
December 3, 2011 at 3:14 am #10569
TinkerTot Player	way i see it is crafters need pets. thats what crafters use in SWG althought there wasnt open pvp but still have the pet fend off pkers while the crafter can run hide.
December 3, 2011 at 4:48 am #10570
Glossen Player	Esquire is completely right. Humanity is barbaric and the few powerful players will attempt to keep others players below or close to the NOOB status. If not they will threaten or force players to part with their valuable resources for their life. I agree: The crafting system (which is already tedious) as well as the social exploitative aspect of this game will get boring if all players do is kill people before they can carry back all the trees/ores/resources they gathered. People will QUIT if they believe they can’t enjoy the game because of (Cyber game bullies) in virtual world like this. It’s not fair to a (new player) who took a whole month to make a GREAT boat and then puts it on the water (before long a doosh of a player who is 5X stronger just destroys it with no mercy). Not worth it if your efforts can’t be protected. This game won’t last subscription very long if there are too many conflicts.
December 3, 2011 at 7:20 am #10572
GMPathy GameMaster	My suggestion is stop thinking about crafters and PK’s. Yes you will have purist PVP players, but you WONT have purist crafters unless they intend to sit in non-pvp areas for all eternity. All gathering professions will require players to think about combat, and building characters in the current climate does offer a bad example of a finished game. Players will need to think about tactics, groups, defence and offence when building a character. Solo play will be almost impossible unless you choose the path of a PK and then you will be instantly recognisable server wide, and potentially unable to trade with anyone. Purist crafters will be able to survive only if they have the protection of safe areaa AND a faction to supply them resources or to defend them while they gather. This is the way in other sandbox games such as EVE. As a counter to having the PK route too easy to take, materials costs for equipment are pretty large so the time investment in replacing them is also large. A PK is not able to have a town, so must rely on NPC towns and safe zones to store supplies, this makes their existance even more difficult as they can be hunted more easily. A pure PK cannot choose his loot also, so replacing damaged equipment may take SEVERAL kills of other players all the time putting themselves at risk of losing everything. In a start up situation the PK style will have an advantage for a short time, until factions become organised and train their crafters. One the factions “outgear” the PK groups then they have an even easier time defending themselves. Next will come the argument of PK factions, well that is where the politics begin and what makes the game interesting. Nobody has said PVP will be everywhere, but to have a succesful sandbox game you cant alienate one group becuase they will upset another. Maintaining playerbase balance can be tinkered with by altering game mechanics, a simple increase to decay rates will benefit the crafters at the cost of the PVP players. Allowing faction to set localised laws with PVP off is also an option, this will offer factions small areas of safe space to work in outside of official declared war. It is very easy to make statements and claims about PVP worlds and how its the end of the game, but MO still runs and has low population not due to pvp but because of game issues. EVE is also full loot pvp in certain areas, yet those areas yeild the best profits for both industrial/manufacturing players AS WELL as the PK community. Ultima Online was hardly a failure but that is a long time ago, and did have its imballances, so to say it cant work is wrong. From my perspective most of the issues stated can be monitored and controlled to a degree, but until combat and pvp is working and the beta moves closer to a live game it is not easy to see if and where any adjustments are required.
December 3, 2011 at 8:19 am #10575
TinkerTot Player	You have an unlimited skill system (which I already know will get shot down) which would allow crafters to have high level combat skills. But I am not that worried about pkers, because I like a good challenge and I want to see how sneaky I can be.
December 3, 2011 at 5:58 pm #10583
Esquire Player	GMPathy, Read every word. UO did do OK but has the other games that have came out since? And it was the 1st. You mention yet another game that has these features that is yet another very small playerbase also. These developers also HAVE to be businessmen. The game your talking about ALREADY exists and it included all of the things that I, others here, and even yourself have discussed. The one common denominator is low playerbase. Ralp Koster did UO. Koster also did SWG. Pre-CU SWG had a reported 350,000 subscriptions at 14.99 a month each. That ends up being $5,246,500.00 per/month. You mention EVE. It has a reported 250,000 subscriptions at 14.99 per month also and only includes PVP in limited areas. Both are not full PVP/full loot. SOE messed up their 350K subs with CU, again with NGE, and yet again with C6CD ( for those that didn’t stay, that’s The Chapter 6 Combat Downgrade). What that tells me, is DO NOT have a full PVP/full loot system included in a game PLUS, DO NOT CHANGE A GAME substantialy after the launch, unless it’s just completed dead anyway. (IE: Champions Online) The game you outline in your post is already out there. Does the world and the market need yet another? Is this game subnificantly different to excel against the exact same business model that is proven to be not as sucessful as what myself, and appearently others have said here? The model we are suggesting does not exist atm. SWG is closing on Dec 15th, EVE is a full space game. This would be different. This model we are perporting would be a place for all of the 350,000 SWG vets, the EVE vets that actualy want to play an avatar, and even the people who want to play an MMO but do want to become engaged in any combat whatsoever. And believe me, those players exist. There were MANY in SWG as dancers and crafters. Choices seem to be what the mainstay of MMO players want. The more choices, the better. Open PVP/Full loot limits choices no matter how you spin it and therefore limits your playerbase. Is that what these developers, or their investors want? I am investor in many different things and I do not want anything limited in any investments I make. Being a purist gamer is one thing, being a businessman, is yet another. Besides that, the game I am talking about was and is a Ralp Koster game. You do not need Open PVP and Full Loot to have a sandbox. BOTH of the ones that could be even called sucessful have NOT included that model but have limited PVP to certain areas. And this comes from some1 who tends to PVP a lot. There are ways to impliment a balance between PVP and PVE content. If one over powers the other it simply does not work. Look at the 800lb gorilla in the room. How many PVP servers does WoW have? How many PVE servers does WoW have? Or any game for that matter. There is a reason why PVE servers outnumber PVP servers in any game. If I happen to like PVP gameplay or not, any1 has to acknowledge these facts. This reply was modified 167 days ago by Esquire.
December 3, 2011 at 6:18 pm #10587
Esquire Player	You could also have a compromise here also between the purist gameers who want this and the ones who do not. At launch, have a PVP server and a PVE server that includes a PVP area on an Ils and the water area around it, and you have the option to either/or or both. It would be interesting to see which server would outnumber the other. That’s probably the best option. That would offer the choice that I call out above. Both sides could get what they want and the devs here and the investors win, period. I’ve now had the chance to talk to a few of the regulars in game now. They tell me that there is very few who stay with the game. I, personaly, have brought now about 10 players to Dawntide. My vent had 10 in it last night and only 1 was in the TOR beta weekend. The rest were in Dawntide. Every one of these players stated they knew some1 who would really like this game. Everyone of them said they will call that person or persons and tip them off about Dawntide (and this is a very bugged version, IE beta. Do these devs and investors not want that? I seriously doubt that any of these 10 would play a Open PVP/FUll Loot game. They are already out there if we would want to. The PVP and PVE server suggestion would surfice for both camps and everybody would have “their game”. And best of all, these developers would have ev1s $ per/month. They could tell rather quickly which model is most viable and makes the most profit and manage their dev time accordingly (or close the server and move the others over if 1 is just simply not making it). This reply was modified 167 days ago by Esquire.
December 3, 2011 at 6:47 pm #10592
GMPathy GameMaster	All I can say is that I dont make decisions or judgements, but the powers that be do read and take note of all player opinions. I personally can never see a pve only sandbox game, its completely against the whole ethos IMO. If I want to be a murdering pain in the backside then I should have that option, much like if you want to be a holier than thou law abiding citizen that is your right also. The problem is when PVP can be allowed to roam free with no restrictions at all. By having safe zones such as NPC towns and beginer areas people can play happily with no risk, and also trade for more rarer resources producing global trade. PVP players cannot kill you in these safe area, likewise you cannot get the BEST resources without the risk of leaving them. Factions want a town, then they need to risk their resources by building and defending that land, with it comes the benefit of being local to the best resources and the control of setting local laws. Of course this is all still theory, but it is the intended design afaik. I would find it highly unlikely that more than one game server will exist, especially with different rulesets, however I could be wrong. I would presume the first issue is getting one full and stable server, but that sort of question needs to be answered by someone in a position of authority. Everything posted is theory, as I have not been given the “inside information” on post release plans. Unless something is on the website, NOT the forums, then it is just speculation and debate. All opinions are obviously welcomed, and mine is just another to add to the collection :D
December 3, 2011 at 7:14 pm #10593
Esquire Player	AoC tried the building a town that is subject to player tear downs. What happened to AoC? The sub base went soooo low, they went F2P to try and save the game. Most players do not want to put in all the time and effort to build something just for some1 elses enjoyment of tearing it down. In Open PVP/FUll loot systems, griefers are rampant at launch. All this does is run the masses off to other games. The griefers end up being by themselves haveing large hunts for nothing more than trying to find the unsuspecting “noob” in which to yell, “Ipwndjoooooo”. That guy will leave for TOR, WoW, or another game that does not allow this also along with the others that left for this exact reasoning. Sandbox CAN EXIST without PVP/FUll loot. SWG lasted for 8 years and had large IP payments to make for those years. Koster built it and he was the one who defined “sandbox”. Appearently, he just learned a few things between UO and SWG. Hopefully, the devs here will listen. There is also a reason why there is not a large population in a free open beta. We can change that but we can’t if we do not have devs listening and learning as I believe they do here just due to the fact that they read, learn, and talk about it. That is a definite asset for this game. Hopefully, the 2 server option can be explored, thought about, and implimented. It will not help if this game launches with 1 server that is Open PVP/FUll Loot and only draws 1000 or less players that stay as most of the others that have came out with this model have. The other server will never make it to fruition that way. The game will die and close. This probably needs to be done at launch. You only get 1 launch and one hype and if you blow that, it’s pretty much over. This reply was modified 167 days ago by Esquire.
December 3, 2011 at 8:10 pm #10601
Cindyb Player	Esquire, very well put post.. PVP has its place..however full pvp and full loot = failure in the long run. Unless perhaps as you have said there are two servers at launch
December 3, 2011 at 9:20 pm #10603
Xix13 Player	Where’s TIM? He shot me down hard for even bringing this up. UO went to Trammel for a reason. They didn’t just decide to split out the full loot PvP zone from the safe PvE play on a whim. There was an obvious decline in playerbase that led to the decision. And with the addition of Trammel, the servers became so full of houses, etc., that I had to resort to playing my UO life on the Aussie server (least populated) just to be able to build a house. And I live East Coast USA, so getting up at 4 AM to get to guild meetings (their 7 PM or so) was worth it. SWG was never open full-loot PvP. You had to flag yourself as Imp or Reb before you could PvP at all. Or be a Jedi, of course. EVE is fine for casual play. You just stay out of low sec space (0.0-0.5) or take your chances. These games appeal to BOTH styles of player, and the only reason I can see for insisting on a wide open, full-loot PvP game when there are crafters and social players is to grief. The arguement about crafters needing to be heavy on combat is also a bit off in a limited skill point system, particularly if the crafts are as interdependent as these. If a weaponsmith, for example, just needed mining, then, OK, you could do Mining, WS, Weapon, Armour, Tactics, Block and Preservation (even here you don’t have room for Spellcraft unless you replace Block and use 2H weapons, certainly viable) and be fine. But you need wood too, so you can’t be a combat capable WS. Worse with Armoursmith. Fletching needs the wood stuf but also metal for the arrowheads. You’ll absolutely be required to be in a faction if you can’t get by with limited combat skills on a crafter. The only way it can work is with some VERY severe penalties for PKing. Even then, it will most likely be that the dedicated PKer has learned the mechanism of the PK alt, an alt specifically designed to PK with no regard for towns, or dealing with society in any way other than to kill players. And what of new players? If the fully skilled and decked out PKer just sits on the road out of the safe zone and PKs anybody who sticks his head out (as happened to me when I tried to play Siege Perilous), the new player will undoubtedly decide to spend his time in a different game. I’ve yet to see the whole “protection” thing work out because the combat guy just doesn’t want to spend his game time sitting around watching a rock hunter bang his pick into the ground. If the combat guy(s) are around, the PKer will go elsewhere ’cause he’s not interested in a fair fight. So the combat guy(s) spend a few hours sitting on their heels doing nothing “guarding” the crafter/gatherer. But it all really boils down to how much profit the group behind the game is willing to sacrifice to provide the kind of game THEY want to see. If a small playerbase produces enough income to justify the cost of servers, development, etc., then it’ll be fine.
December 3, 2011 at 10:37 pm #10605
GMPathy GameMaster	Just as an insight as to how things worked before pvp was switched off, the entire start island was PVE only, and only when leaving that continent was pvp enabled. Players could not build in PVE lands so had to take some risks to settle. That would mean that on day 1 almost 20% of the landmass would be no pvp. If factions have the ability to turn off pvp in their zone of control that percentage would increase, leaving less space for PVP encounters. I cannot understand the anti-pvp mindset as it can be controlled with many in game mechanics. I also fail to see how people can “recognise” a crafter, even if they want to grief potentially every character could be combat based. You can be a very deadly combat player with only 500 points in combat, adding a further 200 points to combat is almost a waste as you cant increase damage or survivablity any further once you get to a certain point. A players combat capabilities is a ballance of skill and itemisation, so without havig FAR superior in both elements you are always going to have a relatively balanced fight. There is the option to run and not fight, or use magic to conceal or stealth to evade. There is the option to work as a group, in terms of gathering and crafting. One person chopping wood, another hunting animals for skins and a third picking herbs to make potions. People have lost focus over the years of how MMORPG’s were originally designed, for people to play together. Maybe I am just old and insane, but just because nobody has succesfully found that ballance between pvp and pve does not mean it cannot happen. I am curious as to how people imagine being a crafter, how they will gather hides with no combat skills, how they will mine in caves full of mobs, and how they will travel and trade with no way to protect themselves. Currently we have a world with crazy mob agro yet players can adapt and survive, having pvp is no different. If there is sufficient safe space for new players to learn the basics, and crafters to collect basic resources then there is no problem at all. Even a dedicated pvp faction cannot completely surround an entire continent succesfully. What started out as a minor point has returned to a mini-rant, and I am not a pvp player. The PK players would be laughing their asses off right now with chants of QQ carebear run back to wow… but the reality is this IS a very important issue. I am not saying that PVP should have freedom to kill on sight any living player in any given location, far from it. I want to see a game that sets rules and boundaries that allows both styles of play to co-exist in the same world. Putting the best resources in the pvp area as a form of lure, to offer pvp players some action. Still allowing crafters and solo players to operate in sufficient space to play the game to the poitn where they feel comfortale escaping the comfort zone to make some money. You will ALWAYS have a safe storage area, in the means of a bank. You dont have to enter pvp zones at all, and when you do only take what you can afford to lose. Respawn points will (I hope) be in the safe zones, close to your back-up supplies, so there is no fear of repeat ganking like in some other games. A corpse run will most likely be pointless as it will be empty when you get there, so you might as well train and stockpile LONG before you consider leaving safe areas. PVP players will also have issues of their own, especially in a world where you cannot hide, and everyone knows who you are. They will need to deal with large factions and alliances actively hunting them. They will need to source itemisation and materials or they will be naked PVP players. In the reas world criminals are rarely well off, or in the higher tiers of society and this will also be the case in a sandbox game world. I am only one person, and one opinion so I will leave it there, but please understand I am not a pvp player, I am a crafter at heart but I just appreciate the extra dimension a little danger can add to the profit margins.
December 3, 2011 at 10:49 pm #10606
TinkerTot Player	why Are you guys argueing what has already been decided. While its probably not the best idea it is the one that fits a sandbox. and Esquire you go on about pve but this game has the worst pve ever. I have been here about a year I have already crafted everything and killed all types of mobs. Pre-CU had several planets each with their own types of mobs (i assume i dont really know i didnt play it then) and EVE drowns people in customization (from ship types to weapons, ammo types, engines, ect. oh and even your avatar) You want a PVE server then the devs are in for a lot of work to keep it interesting enough to keep people here, i doubt they want to do that thats why they want open pvp in the first place they want the players to keep everything interesting.
December 4, 2011 at 3:32 am #10609
Xix13 Player	What GMPathy describes is fine by me. He differentiates between PvP and PK, which I do as well. PvP is fine. Despite its many flaws, I spent more time in PvP zones than PvE in Warhammer. PvP is fun. PK, however, is not, at least not for the one who’s PK’d. That’s what I object to, NOT PvP itself. And higher level resource gathering is one of the better reasons for PvP, to my mind. A sandbox doesn’t need quests. But it does need some way for players to advance to the point where they can have a chance in PvP. I really enjoyed Warhammer’s PvP for a number of reasons. You could start PvPing from Lvl 1 because the zones were level restricted. If you outleveled a zone and were still in it, you turned into a chicken. Was one of the funniest mechanisms I’d ever seen, and it DID happen to me once. While a lvl 1 was nowhere near as survivable as a lvl 9, it was still possible to start getting into the swing of things from the very beginning. IF you wanted to. If not, there was the PvE content to wade through. Interestingly, almost everyone admitted that the best PvP was to be had in the 1st and 2nd tier zones. By the time you got to the 3rd, and definitely the 4th, tiers, the class imbalances because overwhelming. But, yes, I can see the kind of split that GMPathy proposes as being a good working system. Give me the starter island to get my skills to the point where I can venture out into the more dangerous (and lucrative) world, and I’m fine. But if I can’t get out of the starter city without being PK’d by a high skill, fully decked mage… that’s the kind of PKing to which I really object.