Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Do you prefer ffa-pvp everywhere, only consensual, or something in-between?

24

Comments

  • inBOILinBOIL turkuPosts: 669Member

    Originally posted by mrcalhou

    I'd like to see something in-between: like a game with twitch combat mechanics (though better than what Darkfall and Xsyon offer), but a pvp system where players can play the game and not feel worried about getting ganked all the time, while there would also be content and resources unique to pvp areas to encourage players to go play in those areas.

     

    What are your opinions?

    people needs to get absolutely bored to rifts and wows first ,then couple years and we will see Role Playing Games coming back

    for example better flagging system,todays devs are not even trying.

    Generation P

  • DunghoDungho Anderson, INPosts: 5Member

    Does the people running eve still let new players get ganked in starter areas, couple of my friends said it does happen and that was one of the reasons they left.

  • IAmMMOIAmMMO LondonPosts: 1,332Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Otakun

    It boils down to the point that FFA OWPvP fits a niche market or in a more common term it doesn't please casual gamers. People who like FFA OWPvP will still play a game without it as long as the PvP is good in general but casual gamers will not play a game with FFA OWPvP cause they will get frustrated and quit.

    Personally my problem with FFA OWPvP is that people will generally kill you for no reason other then just to do it and possibly grief you and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it unless you happen to have friends online who care enough to help you. This basically says, "Well, you can play this game unless someone else wants to come around and ruin your day." cause other then sitting around and getting killed over and over your only option is to log off and that is a game that I wont pay for. I wouldn't mind a B2P MMO that has FFA OWPvP cause then I ain't losing money when not playing.

     

     There may be nothing you can do about it at the time, but open PVP world also means reputation. You make a bad enough rep for yourself you're going have a hard time in a these games were community and player politics are king. Darkfall just recently on EU server a griefer clan just lost all their assets and were forced off their land and griefed back by the servers biggest alliance hammering them hard for days.

     You can't beat community and player policing over dev trying to force to control players with too many mechanics put in place that ends getting in the way. I do think newbies in these worlds should be giving a break from being attackable until they learn the ropes though as it can makes all the difference getting into an established open world pvp MMO as this is where griefers affect the interest of the company behind the MMO they're trying to expand its playerbase since there are griefer communties out there whose aim is to make players quite and vets can't always be in newbie areas to deal with them.

  • Paradigm68Paradigm68 New York, NYPosts: 884Member Uncommon

    I like open world ffa pvp as long as the game provides tools/dynamics to avoid if they are careful/smart. Like EvE.

  • WorstluckWorstluck the valley, CAPosts: 1,269Member

    Originally posted by Dungho

    Does the people running eve still let new players get ganked in starter areas, couple of my friends said it does happen and that was one of the reasons they left.

     

    Nope.  In the starter systems, the systems you first spawn in, you have never been able to "gank" people.  If someone is caught doing it, they will be dealth with swiftly.  This includes "can baiting" noobs, also not allowed in starter areas.

    image

  • EndDreamEndDream orange county, CAPosts: 1,152Member

    FFA PvP is best for me. But only in games where the discrepancy between players is not huge. its pointless in lvl based games where higher lvls can 1 shot you and you and your 20 friends can cant do anything *miss* *dodge* *parry* etc

    Remember Old School Ultima Online

  • Akarn1007Akarn1007 detriot, MIPosts: 47Member

    FFA pvp is cool but the world would need to be big enough for you to get away from any "ganking" areas

  • EvasiaEvasia rotterdamPosts: 2,827Member

    Free for all pvp mmo's and with full loot i prefer also, dont need safezones or its to carebear for me.

    Games played:AC1-Darktide'99-2000-AC2-Darktide/dawnsong2003-2005,Lineage2-2005-2006 and now Darkfall-2009.....
    In between WoW few months AoC few months and some f2p also all very short few weeks.

  • Miner-2049erMiner-2049er PortsmouthPosts: 435Member

    Like many people here I think EVE pretty much has the ultimate model.

    The game design should do everything possible to prevent bored people ganking newbies. At the same time the best stuff should be in full-on PvP areas to encourage people to go there.

    I think CC is often overpowered. If you are clearly outgunned you should have some chance of actually getting away.  I also think that we should have some ant-ganking tools available, like smoke bombs, or suicide attacks that do high damage to all people in a small radius.

    I also think that in any game a group of low level players should be able to work together with a chance of beating the high level attackers. 

    Finally, although I like the idea of full loot I think that this should only be implemented in a game where the weight and size of items has an clear and significant effect on your movement and mobility. This would mostly limit you to taking a few items, and if you attacked someone lower level it really wouldn't be worth you while to loot anything. 

  • mrcalhoumrcalhou St. Bernard, LAPosts: 1,444Member

    Originally posted by Miner-2049er

    Like many people here I think EVE pretty much has the ultimate model.

    The game design should do everything possible to prevent bored people ganking newbies. At the same time the best stuff should be in full-on PvP areas to encourage people to go there.

    I think CC is often overpowered. If you are clearly outgunned you should have some chance of actually getting away.  I also think that we should have some ant-ganking tools available, like smoke bombs, or suicide attacks that do high damage to all people in a small radius.

    I also think that in any game a group of low level players should be able to work together with a chance of beating the high level attackers. 

    Finally, although I like the idea of full loot I think that this should only be implemented in a game where the weight and size of items has an clear and significant effect on your movement and mobility. This would mostly limit you to taking a few items, and if you attacked someone lower level it really wouldn't be worth you while to loot anything. 

    Yeah this is pretty much how I feel. Personally I don't mind gank squads. I'd just like more options. If I get attacked by a gank squad I'd like to have some way of getting out of it--like how Eve has stealth. And I'd like for gankers to have some counter-measure against me doing that--but at a cost. Actually that's how I'd want anything in a sandbox/emergent gameplay MMO; at a cost such that players have to make a conscious decision with how they wish to do something. Where they have the pros and cons of a situation and choose the lesser of two evils.

    An example of what I mean is: Lets say you are in a gank squad. You find your prey and go after him or her. They use an ability that blinds you and your team mates (This blind effect might last for a minute, but if you get attacked it'll go away after 3 seconds) and gets away. Next time, you and your gank squad find another gatherer. But this time, instead of charging ahead after the gatherer, you lay some traps around in the direction you expect them to flee. You charge. They blind you, run off, but get caught in one of your traps. The gatherer yells out in pain (represented by a color flash on your screen or something) and you charge in that direction.

    --------
    "Chemistry: 'We do stuff in lab that would be a felony in your garage.'"

    The most awesomest after school special T-shirt:
    Front: UNO Chemistry Club
    Back: /\OH --> Bad Decisions

  • SlampigSlampig Chantilly, VAPosts: 2,376Member Uncommon

    I liked the way DAoC had their PvP. I also liked EQ on the RZ server, could PvP basically anywhere but there were limits on who could hit who. 

    FFA I like in theory, but in practice when you have a bunch of donkies camping people over and over and the like, that plain sucks. And save the wolves and sheep comments, been hearing that crap since UO. Camping zone lines or camping corpses, that doesn't make you an awesome PvPer, makes you a twatty chump.

    That Guild Wars 2 login screen knocked up my wife. Must be the second coming!

  • DnomsedDnomsed Fairbanks, AKPosts: 260Member Uncommon

    I'd like to see an open world game, factionless, with a consensual 'pvp flag' mechanic.  In this world you would have NPC factions that you could choose to join, possibly linked to specific regions, so that if a player wanted to follow that factions storyline and be a part of their struggle and conflicts they could.  It's time to do away with arbitrary factions once and for all.  A player should join the Horde/Alliance/Order/Destruction/etc. because they have a vested interest in or fascination with said factions.  Those people that don't want to pvp could happily go about their business anywhere without fear of reprisal from gankers.  I like the concept of guilds/alliances being able to declare war upon other player created entities as well and would like to see more of this in future products.

    This wouldn't have to be and 'epic' conflict to be enjoyable either.  For example, in one zone in WoW there were 2 warring tribes of centaurs that you could do quests with.  These 'factions' would be an excellent place for factions specific world pvp flags that would add spice for players in that one zone.  

    Warhammer fanatic since '85.
    image

  • CactusJackCactusJack South, FLPosts: 393Member

    Open World PvP is dependent upon many things, particularily the economy. "Consensual" PvP flags are only good if you DO NOT have a player controlled, i.e supply/demand system. No player should be able to activate their "PvP' flag and interact with the market especially  if there is in game crafting and selling on an AH or market.

    Starter zones where people get camped/ganked to me..has both good and bad effects. I got ganked outside of the starter Orc city in DF when I started. I learned a few things. I needed to adjust my gamma settings, because I couldn't see squat at night. I also learned that sound matters more at night. I also learned certain mounts could be seen better at night and made little noise, unlike this fat, stinky pig I had. Positively, I learned that I needed to move away from the starter city and start interacting/find a guild. I also learned that some newbs didn't understand that, so I tried to help them, which in turn, got more of us together to join the same guild.

    Ganking does provide GOOD consequences sometimes..lest we forget. I agree that squashing greenhorns isn't particularly difficult and can in the long run hurt the game...but I don't think those people would have stayed on anyway. Most of the whining from those people, want a game that "permits" player interaction.

    I chose to play MMO's that demands it. OP World PvP allows players to ENFORCE their rules, as a group. If you come into my system, my island, etc...you might get killed. It's as simple as that.

     

    Edit:spelling

    Playing: BF4/BF:Hardline, Subnautica 7 days to die
    Hiatus: EvE
    Waiting on: World of Darkness(sigh)
    Interested in: better games in general

  • VengerVenger York, PAPosts: 1,318Member

    Consentual pvp with a robust pvp system including guild wars, guild controled areas, events to name a few.  Make people want to pvp don't arrogantly force it down their throats.

  • LerxstLerxst Phx, AZPosts: 550Member

    Open world PvP only works if the penalties are severe (IE - Permadeath).  Desipte what many people would believe, the harsher the death penalties, the less likely people are to go around attacking everything in sight - there's always a fear that you'll end up on the wrong side of a blow and "lose all your stuff".

     

    As you reduce the penaltyo to dying, then you need to increase the restrictions to PvP.  Picture not losing anything and simply respawning 5 seconds later on an open PvP server.

     

    The best system I saw restricted PvP to a certian level range +/- your own, but had no restrictions as to where you could attack.  You would lose all your stuff when you died... and I do mean ALL of it, no banks, no bound items or anything.  You would also recieve an exp penalty, which could put you "in exp debt" if you died too often.

  • MumboJumboMumboJumbo LondonPosts: 3,221Member

    Ah this is a good topic. I'd like to see an MMO that implements ffa-pvp but as above with potentially harsh penalities: You'd have to weigh the risk/reward ratio etc... it could be a great gaming experience: "Safety is on the shore; royal pearls are in the depths of the ocean."

  • TorikTorik London, ONPosts: 2,343Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Lerxst

    Open world PvP only works if the penalties are severe (IE - Permadeath).  Desipte what many people would believe, the harsher the death penalties, the less likely people are to go around attacking everything in sight - there's always a fear that you'll end up on the wrong side of a blow and "lose all your stuff".

    There is also the question of balance when it comes to those death penalties in a PvP setting.  Often the actual death penalty is much more severe for the 'non-aggressive' players and easily mitigated by the 'kill everyone for the evuls' crowd.

  • JB47394JB47394 Sterling, VAPosts: 409Member

    I'd like to see a game that has FFA PvP everywhere, but where PvE and PvP characters don't directly interact.

    For example, consider a game where the PvP players form into factions, similar to EVE Online.  They control territory that has resources, settlements and so on.  That constitutes their empire.  The PvP players fight to defend their territory and to expand it into neighboring territories. The PvE players operate within those empires to do all the PvE stuff.  Harvesting, manufacturing, researching, etc.  That could even include fighting NPCs.

    The twist is that when a PvE character spots an enemy PvP character, it will automatically run away.  Or hide.  Or cower in fear.  A PvE character is a non-combatant from the standpoint of the PvP game.  If the enemy PvP guy wants to take stuff from the enemy empire's settlements, he can do that and he'll know that the PvE guys won't bother him while he does it.  It's the job of the PvP overlords to ensure that the enemy raids fail.  All the PvE guys can do is call their PvP overlords to come over and help.

    The stuff that a PvP raider could take would be anything that has been warehoused by the PvE guys.  That could be raw materials, finished goods or anything else in the PvE game that supports the PvP guys.

    Oh, I guess I left that out.  The success of the PvP players is dependent on the success of the PvE guys.  If the PvE guys can operate without interruption then they can supply their PvP overlords with the equipment that they need.  Perhaps one farm raising feed for war horses can support 2 war horses.  If you have 20 PvP players who want war horses, then their empire must have 10 feed farms.  The PvE guys manufacture the gear that their PvP guys use.  Because combat breaks gear, there's a constant need for new gear.

    There are issues with such a system, but I offer it only as an illustration of the sort of interaction that I'd like to see.  EVE Online could implement something like this and I'd be happy to play it.  I want to play, and I'm willing to sacrifice the ability to fight back or even to leave my empire's territory if that means that I don't have to worry about other players attacking me.

  • shawn01shawn01 nashua, NHPosts: 153Member Common

    Daoc was the best PVP game i ever played. The concept of seperate pve and pvp zones is an amazingly sound one. Having 3 factions also made the game so much more fun.

    In a 2 faction system you have population imbalances that there really is nothing you can do anything about. In a 3 faction system like Daoc if one faction was overpopulated, the other 2 would gang up on the overpopulated side.

    FFA pvp is not that much fun for me. I like my pve to be safe and relaxing, something i do when i need a break from Pvp. Mostly its just higher level or greater numbers ganking people, often while they are already in combat with npcs.

    There is nothing to fight for really.

    Designated PvP zones make so much more sense. 

  • TorikTorik London, ONPosts: 2,343Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by JB47394

    I'd like to see a game that has FFA PvP everywhere, but where PvE and PvP characters don't directly interact.

    For example, consider a game where the PvP players form into factions, similar to EVE Online.  They control territory that has resources, settlements and so on.  That constitutes their empire.  The PvP players fight to defend their territory and to expand it into neighboring territories. The PvE players operate within those empires to do all the PvE stuff.  Harvesting, manufacturing, researching, etc.  That could even include fighting NPCs.

    The twist is that when a PvE character spots an enemy PvP character, it will automatically run away.  Or hide.  Or cower in fear.  A PvE character is a non-combatant from the standpoint of the PvP game.  If the enemy PvP guy wants to take stuff from the enemy empire's settlements, he can do that and he'll know that the PvE guys won't bother him while he does it.  It's the job of the PvP overlords to ensure that the enemy raids fail.  All the PvE guys can do is call their PvP overlords to come over and help.

    The stuff that a PvP raider could take would be anything that has been warehoused by the PvE guys.  That could be raw materials, finished goods or anything else in the PvE game that supports the PvP guys.

    Oh, I guess I left that out.  The success of the PvP players is dependent on the success of the PvE guys.  If the PvE guys can operate without interruption then they can supply their PvP overlords with the equipment that they need.  Perhaps one farm raising feed for war horses can support 2 war horses.  If you have 20 PvP players who want war horses, then their empire must have 10 feed farms.  The PvE guys manufacture the gear that their PvP guys use.  Because combat breaks gear, there's a constant need for new gear.

    There are issues with such a system, but I offer it only as an illustration of the sort of interaction that I'd like to see.  EVE Online could implement something like this and I'd be happy to play it.  I want to play, and I'm willing to sacrifice the ability to fight back or even to leave my empire's territory if that means that I don't have to worry about other players attacking me.

    The main problem with this setup is that the PVE players would have no incentive to play this game since they would be merely serfs to be robbed by any PvP player.  They do all the real work and the PvPers just steal it or extort it.   I don't play video games to have the bully 'steal my lunch money'. 

  • EliandalEliandal Chelmsford, ONPosts: 796Member

      Not interested in FFA - at all.  I'm another one in the "DAOC camp"  Best game for me out there yet.  I can pvp on my terms, and if I don't want to, I don't have to.

  • AethaerynAethaeryn Kitchener, ONPosts: 1,973Member Uncommon

    FFA everywhere but without huge disparity in player "stats"  meaning if you play longer you can fine tune your character more to your playstyle but not roll every noob.  Also with this. . .  .no flagging system so that people can attack griefers who would abuse it.  (think red anti-pks in UO).

     

    The amount of exploits etc though these days make this almost impossible to implement without the FPS "I want to kill crafters while complaining about carebears" crowd swooping in.

     

    I want a virtual world and it will never happen.

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • DarkPonyDarkPony RotterdamPosts: 5,566Member

    Originally posted by mrcalhou

    I, personally, love Eve-online's pvp system. While it's technically ffa-pvp everywhere, the consequences in many systems makes random pvp happen extremely infrequently in those areas, while pvp is actually encouraged in other parts of the game map.

    Seconded. I love EVE's take on pvp.

    I also like WOW's ruleset on pvp servers: when you were careful you were able to sneak into enemy capitals on a rogue. I had a blast with that.

    As long as I can experience the added excitement of having players stalking around to get me when out in the open world.

  • ReallyNow10ReallyNow10 Pile It High Town, LAPosts: 2,010Member Common

    I think FFA PVP ought to be limited to certain hardcore PVP games or to certain servers in other games.

  • LerxstLerxst Phx, AZPosts: 550Member

    I'll add to the intial reponse I posted.

     

    The best PvP system I found was in Aliens Online... and I bet I'm one of the only people who played that.  It wasn't an MMO and it wasn't even an RPG, but a FPS with two sides - one fo the first to do it.

     

    LOTRO had a promising system that I thought failed miserably.  The concept of having player-controlled mobs, is one I would still support though.  Being given a skill and stat bank you could spend on each mob you could control and then choose a region that had player-adventurers wandering through and being transported to a mob in that region (with your skills and stats being transferred) would be a huge break from the typical PvP debate and mob grind in most MMO's.

     

    Think of what it would be like if 1 out of every 10 mobs you pulled and were grinding had a player controlling them with a slight boost to their base skills.  Rift had huge potential for doing this and then... they didn't.

Sign In or Register to comment.