It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
RPS: Do you have any concrete plans for PVP yet? Anything on how players will interact beyond creating stuff?
Georgeson: Yes. That’s all I can say right now. You can imagine, though. You can break up the world and stuff. So the PVP can be really wild. We also have a really cool housing system, but not in the traditional sense. These are PVP houses, like schools of thought behind… it’s hard to describe right now.
But there’s all kinds of stuff we can do. Obviously in Landmark, people can build their own areas. When we roll over the PVP systems, then they can build battlefields and actually play against each other. That’s where we’re going.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/11/soe-on-why-eqn-landmark-is-its-real-next-big-thing/
What do you think this means? It sounds almost like people will set the permissions on the land they own.
But as someone who has earned a plot of land and presumably wants to build on it, why would you set it to PVP? Wouldn't that make you a conspicuous sitting duck that would be ganked nonstop?
Or do you set a list of people/guilds who have permission to attack? That seems a little too contrived to satisfy people who like PVP.
Is there some kind of incentive for declaring your land a battlefield? Like that's the only way you can conquor the land of others?
Does anyone else have a theory?
Comments
Wow, thank you bidwood! Sounds like PvP is at the heart of the game. Again Planetside 2 is the largest grossing game SOE has had in years. They are using the same amazing engine. Why wouldn't they make another PvP heavy game?
inb4 - They didn't say if the PvP Housing was non-consensual
inb4-
Yes. They are blowing up the hype. They don't have any actual real solid ideas on pvp yet, much less implementation of any kind.
There will be no pvp at launch.
However, if you want to know how it'll end up, just check Minecraft pvp.
Hehe, you and I know both sides cry all the same, though for different reasons
I'm sure it will be a permissions thing along with a "state save". In the tool discussion they mention a "heal" tool that brings back a structure or modification to what it was "naturally". Say you build a little town and make a blueprint of it, a state save. Set your plot for PvP public, have some PvP fun and log for the night with your plot still in PvP mode. Come back the next day and your little town has been razed to it's foundations. Hit the restore or "heal" button and it is back the way it was when you created the blueprint.
My theory would be a pvp enabled continent. If you build there, you build within open pvp territory and know it before.. this would make the most sense.
Yeap.. maybe you can enable on your claim pvp, too. But that would be rather restricted area for pvping.. but nevertheless interesting for people, which want to create pvp arenas or battlegrounds.. think about a map created from players especially for pvp purpose.
PvP is probably going to end up like WildStar Warplot, just with more diversity in the "fortress" setup. Groups of players will take a large claim, build something on it and set it up for attack from other groups. You can save up templates, so recreating what was destroyed will be possible easily.
It will almost certainly be some sort of flagging system. Either you can flag yourself or your claim as PvP enabled and you only fight others who do the same.
A PvP continent could be cool but that is more work so I doubt they do it.
PVP continent? WHat about PVP world? They said there could literally be thousands of worlds to travel around to find link-minded people in the multiverse of Landmark.
I suspect it will be PvP ala Minecraft, some worlds have it .. others don't. The quote reads to me that they really only have idea's currently, and have yet to really test or implement those idea's sufficiently enough to describe them.
I think I can live with "some world shave it .. others don't" but the travel between worlds raises some problems they would need to fix..
For example, the PVP worlds wouldn't be as much fun if players from thousands of other worlds could just pour in whenever they want and kill you. Likewise if you're fending off an enemy who keeps getting resources/reinforcements from a safe location, that would be a pain.
I think the solution may be in the travel system... I believe the devs said you will be able to fast travel to stops on a train so-to-speak only after you've discovered them, and then cover the rest of the distance by foot. So popping in and out isn't as easy as it sounds, and you could potentially interfere with the enemy's supply route.
Quote:
" then they can build battlefields and actually play against each other. That’s where we’re going."
It is going to be instanced, that is where I believe it is going. You will be able to create and model a battleground where you can invite a player for PvP.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
"We're talking about changing the nature of the world around it so that there's a lot more to do "in between" expansions. A good example, but a very narrow example, is battlegrounds in WoW or EQII, where players get bored doing it over and over again. But imagine the entire world as part of the interaction."
http://massively.joystiq.com/2012/10/20/soe-live-2012-john-smedley-on-eq-next-and-soes-future/
It sounds more like people will have to opt into their land being part of the battlefield.. but who would do that without risk v.s. reward? You would be a sitting duck,