Howdy, Stranger!

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

Care Bears Can Kill (If PVP was Fair and Competitive)

1235

Comments

  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017



    anemo said:



    If you're trying to add open PvPer to a "World of Everclone" game you might as well toss money somewhere else.

    ___________

    Safezone mechanics, banking, auction houses, flagging, and all those other mechanics.   Do more to help PvPers than they do to help PvEers.

    open world PvPer MMOs that I've enjoyed (Haven and Hearth, WurmOnline PvPer/beta servers, and screeps).  Are all set up to be very 'hardcore' complete with severe skill loss, map removals, no safe banking and similar.   The thing is that you don't find random PvPers since the risks are just too high for them (they don't don't have safe zones, they don't have banks, and best of all you can't really log off to protect yourself/stuff).  

    When a world is properly set up a being a random PvPer just doesn't work.   You'll need some combination of a social network to keep yourself supplied, to safely store items, to even find targets, and protect you from bigger fish.






    Just like random murder for sport isn't all that common in the real world.  Especially not in the past when the members of different communities depended on each other for survival.

    But if you do have access to a bank in any given town or city, it should not be immune from attempted (and sometimes successful) robbery.

    I don't like default maps either.  A character should need skill in cartography to make a map, at least some rudimentary skills in drawing and some intelligence and/or wisdom in order to map out a dungeon, or have enough coin to buy a map somewhere or from someone.  There's no reason a map needs to be 100% reliable either.  There can be incomplete maps or fake maps.  Even fake maps made on purpose by players or npcs.  The only way one really knows if a map is accurate or not is after they he or she tries to use it.  Or a player shows the map to another player who has traveled the region before.  If they remember correctly or know or can see it corresponds to a good map they have in their possession.

    And I definitely want dying to carry a heavy penalty.

    There should be no zone, area, town, or city or whatever that is 100% safe.  Players can work to make it safer, but there is no such thing as 100% safety anywhere in the real world.
    Post edited by cantankerousmage on
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 10,938



























    Well, that's the point of most MMORPGs as they are currently made.  But even in pencil-and-paper Dungeons & Dragons (first released in 1974), upon which most of these games are based, the whole point was actually being able to experience what it was like to live to in a fantasy world (in D&D's case, similar to that of Tolkien's novels).  The player role-played by talking and acting how his or her character would talk or act according to said character's history and personality.  Most importantly, the character could effect and even change the game world based on his or her words or deeds.  All the stats, equipment, adventures, dungeons and campaigns were just a means to an end, not the end in and of themselves. 








    Oh I dunno about that... when my Paladin got his Holy Avenger Sword it was kind of a big deal.   Even in pen and paper I loved collecting stuff.  I loved seeing my character develop...







    But would is it really a big deal if all you can ever do with your paladin in a game world is follow orders (do quests), raid dungeons, or kill another player-character?  If you never need to defend your kingdom against another kingdom or monster/undead horde?  If you never have a chance of becoming a lord with his own castle or leading an army in battle?  If your chosen deity never interrupts your day and commands you to go on a specific quest to defeat evil somewhere in some far off realm or plane?


    But I can do some of that in today's PvP games.  I'll use Darkfall as an example even though I haven't played in years.  In DF we grouped together, formed an alliance, built up towns and cities, negotiated with other "nations", declared war, laid siege to enemy strongholds, lost a city that we pourred our hearts and souls into, rallied the troops, negotiated with new allies and took our home back.  In that game, not only did my character develop but so did our city.  The more you developed it, the stronger it got.

    Another great example would be Shadowbane.  You could do much of what I described above but one difference was that the GMs also got involved.  They would spawn massive PvE events and attack our cities.  One time I actually RPed my way to join this massive Demon as his lieutenant and swore allegiance to him during the fight and he gave me special blessings "buffs" and sent his troops behind me.  Again, your character would need to develop their skills.  This is what allows the emergence of heroes and legendary enemies.  This is what gives us a goal to meet and overcome the challenges posed by other players.


    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017

























































    Well, that's the point of most MMORPGs as they are currently made.  But even in pencil-and-paper Dungeons & Dragons (first released in 1974), upon which most of these games are based, the whole point was actually being able to experience what it was like to live to in a fantasy world (in D&D's case, similar to that of Tolkien's novels).  The player role-played by talking and acting how his or her character would talk or act according to said character's history and personality.  Most importantly, the character could effect and even change the game world based on his or her words or deeds.  All the stats, equipment, adventures, dungeons and campaigns were just a means to an end, not the end in and of themselves. 














    Oh I dunno about that... when my Paladin got his Holy Avenger Sword it was kind of a big deal.   Even in pen and paper I loved collecting stuff.  I loved seeing my character develop...













    But would is it really a big deal if all you can ever do with your paladin in a game world is follow orders (do quests), raid dungeons, or kill another player-character?  If you never need to defend your kingdom against another kingdom or monster/undead horde?  If you never have a chance of becoming a lord with his own castle or leading an army in battle?  If your chosen deity never interrupts your day and commands you to go on a specific quest to defeat evil somewhere in some far off realm or plane?








    But I can do some of that in today's PvP games.  I'll use Darkfall as an example even though I haven't played in years.  In DF we grouped together, formed an alliance, built up towns and cities, negotiated with other "nations", declared war, laid siege to enemy strongholds, lost a city that we pourred our hearts and souls into, rallied the troops, negotiated with new allies and took our home back.  In that game, not only did my character develop but so did our city.  The more you developed it, the stronger it got.

    Another great example would be Shadowbane.  You could do much of what I described above but one difference was that the GMs also got involved.  They would spawn massive PvE events and attack our cities.  One time I actually RPed my way to join this massive Demon as his lieutenant and swore allegiance to him during the fight and he gave me special blessings "buffs" and sent his troops behind me.  Again, your character would need to develop their skills.  This is what allows the emergence of heroes and legendary enemies.  This is what gives us a goal to meet and overcome the challenges posed by other players.





    That's cool that such things have been possible in games you've played.  But I still don't want the ability to become a god.  Or for other players to become gods.  Gods don't usually walk the earth and go around killing random people for fun.  If gods decide to end someone's life, they usually have a purpose and reason behind it.



  • ZionBaneZionBane Member UncommonPosts: 328
    @anemo and @cantankerousmage

    Lets say you build this Open PvP world, that requires all these means to play, and there are no safe spots, etc.

    What motive would I.. as a Carebear... have to play this game? Why would I even bother to play it?


  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    @ZionBane - FREEDOM!  More fun, more challenge, opportunities for true role-playing, the ability to effect and change the world with words and deeds.  No need to repeat the same actions over and over while waiting for new content to be released.  The players will create most of the game's content themselves.  You will most likely never play the same game twice.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    edited April 2017
    If he doesn't PvP then he has all the same freedom he would have if he participated in in a pve game. Freedom to PvP would not interest him, role playing through PvP would not interest him, changing the world through PvP would not interest him.

    Your answer was basically you can PvP. That doesn't interest that person. 

    What is the draw to a person not interested in PvP?

    If your going to draw the pve crowd your going to have to explain how your game positively impact pve.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017






    If he doesn't PvP then he has all the same freedom he would have if he participated in in a pve game. Freedom to PvP would not interest him, role playing through PvP would not interest him, changing the world through PvP would not interest him.

    Your answer was basically you can PvP. That doesn't interest that person. 

    What is the draw to a person not interested in PvP?






    No, that is not what I said at all.

    You could effect and change the world without having to kill people in a well-made PvP world.  There are things like diplomacy, making trade deals, forming alliances, breaking alliances, remaining neutral during a time of war between two other kingdoms or choosing to side with one against another.  Gathering enough resources, growing enough food, crafting enough essential items in order for your community to prosper or failing to do so.  Fixing a damaged wall before invaders arrive.  All kinds of things.  So many, many possibilities.  And just because there wouldn't be quest givers, that doesn't mean there wouldn't be adventures or dungeons or the ability to find some magical item (though magic should be rare, as in most people might never encounter it or find it).  There aren't many wizards or magical items in the Lord of the Rings, which all these medieval fantasy games are based on.

    If you read the rest of this thread, you might get some other ideas.  Anyway, it doesn't matter right now.  The important thing would be to make the game first.  Many times, people don't know whether or not they would like something until they try it.

    Oh, and you already have to the freedom to choose to PvP in most mmorpgs.  It's just that PvP in most mmorpgs is horribly implemented.

    EDIT:  If you're really smart, wise, and/or careful, you may never or rarely ever have to engage in battle.  Fighting is usually a last resort for most people.  Or they have some important goal in mind that they believe is worth fighting and even dying for. 

    Also, resurrection should not be commonplace.  The raising of someone from the dead is a pretty miraculous event.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    edited April 2017
    Everything you described except remaining neutral between to warring kingdoms can be done in a pve game and many have been done. Horizons now istaria when the AI used to attack cities you had to do all that stuff. Fix walls, reinforce walls, stockpile supplies.

    Diplomacy and trade deals can also be done and have been done through guilds and even individual Crafters in many games, without the need for an actual diplomatic UI.


    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017






    Everything you described except remaining neutral between to warring kingdoms can be done in a pve game and many have been done. Horizons now istaria when the AI used to attack cities you had to do all that stuff. Fix walls, reinforce walls, stockpile supplies.

    Diplomacy and trade deals can also be done and have been done through guilds and even individual Crafters in many games.








    Sure, it's possible to do certain things with AI mobs and scripted events, but it's not the same.  To me, playing card games, chess, Monopoly, Life, Risk, Axis & Allies, or Samurai Swords (aka Shogun) is always more fun to play with people than to play against the computer.  Even in pencil-and-paper rpgs, there is a human element controlling the monsters and npcs.  They are called the Dungeon or Game Master. 

    As I've said before in another thread, I'm fairly confident that humans will always make more intelligent, challenging, interesting, creative, and imaginative opponents than AI.  Also, there's not so much need to constantly create new content if the players themselves are creating the majority of the content for each other.

    But you don't have to agree or ever play such a game.  No one will force you to play a game you don't want to play.  I hope.


  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    I don't mean to sound like a dick. I do mean to drive home that point though that you are going to have to expand on that if you want to get the pve people in whatever game that has pvp.

    Many games have also instituted player made content, usually in ways that involve dungeon making, or making quests. Heck even without the formal ability I've seen people just shout out, "X reward for first person that accomplishes this feat..."

    All forms of player made content. 

    Your right that humans are often more interesting, also more irritating. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017










    I don't mean to sound like a dick. I do mean to drive home that point though that you are going to have to expand on that if you want to get the pve people in whatever game that has pvp.

    Many games have also instituted player made content, usually in ways that involve dungeon making, or making quests. Heck even without the formal ability I've seen people just shout out, "X reward for first person that accomplishes this feat..."

    All forms of player made content. 

    Your right that humans are often more interesting, also more irritating. 










    Have you read all of my posts in this thread? 

    And, yes, I agree that people can be irritating at times, but we often have to take the good with the bad in life.  Just the way it goes.

    But there are some people that simply never want to compete with another human being for anything.  Obviously, a game that involves PvP would not be for such people.  Cooperation is better than competition, but the ability to choose to cooperate is not quite so meaningful if we can't also choose to compete.

    EDIT:  Human history has been an endless cycle of moments and situations where people have chosen to either cooperate or compete with each other.  And the cycle continues to the present day, even up until this very minute.  Do I try to help someone, hurt them, or ignore them?  Do I build people up, tear them down, or leave them alone?  Do I speak to someone kindly, harshly, or with indifference?  Do I love a person, hate a person, or not care either way about a person?  All these options we have in life, our ability to weigh the potential consequences or rewards of our choices, and our potential decisions at any given time are what make life interesting and meaningful.  Our choices may result in benefits and/or drawbacks, advantages and/or disadvantages, positives and/or negatives.  We have the ability to effect or change some person or some part of the world every day, every hour, every moment.

    Life wouldn't be worth living if everything I did everyday was scripted.  Nor do I believe that playing a game where everything is scripted is worth my time.
  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    edited April 2017
    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • ZionBaneZionBane Member UncommonPosts: 328


    @ZionBane - FREEDOM!  More fun, more challenge, opportunities for true role-playing, the ability to effect and change the world with words and deeds.  No need to repeat the same actions over and over while waiting for new content to be released.  The players will create most of the game's content themselves.  You will most likely never play the same game twice.


    @cantankerousmage

    Ok, how would the PvP allow me to change the world/game, overall, in a manner that say, PvE, does not also allow. Would I be able to say, lead a or participate in charge that destroys a starting city, raze it to the ground?

    Now if you say yes, now my next question is, what would inspire me, as a player, to play a game where I could watch all the money, and time of my life, I have invested into a game, get utterly destroyed?

    I understand there is a select group of people that would like that, but, what attraction to me, as a carebear, (or a mostly solo player due to time/obligations limitations) would there be to play a game where I sincerely risk loosing everything after perhaps years and maybe thousands of real life dollars have been invested into the game, simply because, lets say, some member of large clan took a dislike to me? 

    What would be the attraction to the game where I would legitimately want to invest myself into it? 

    As it stands, if I just want to kill, I can play MOBA's, if I want to world build, there are plenty of games that allow user content, if I want to do realms vs realms or World vs World, there are many PvX games out there that provide that.

    In short, what would be there in this PvP game, that would entice me to buy it?

  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017




    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 




    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017


    ZionBane said:








    @ZionBane - FREEDOM!  More fun, more challenge, opportunities for true role-playing, the ability to effect and change the world with words and deeds.  No need to repeat the same actions over and over while waiting for new content to be released.  The players will create most of the game's content themselves.  You will most likely never play the same game twice.






    @cantankerousmage

    Ok, how would the PvP allow me to change the world/game, overall, in a manner that say, PvE, does not also allow. Would I be able to say, lead a or participate in charge that destroys a starting city, raze it to the ground?

    Now if you say yes, now my next question is, what would inspire me, as a player, to play a game where I could watch all the money, and time of my life, I have invested into a game, get utterly destroyed?

    I understand there is a select group of people that would like that, but, what attraction to me, as a carebear, (or a mostly solo player due to time/obligations limitations) would there be to play a game where I sincerely risk loosing everything after perhaps years and maybe thousands of real life dollars have been invested into the game, simply because, lets say, some member of large clan took a dislike to me? 

    What would be the attraction to the game where I would legitimately want to invest myself into it? 

    As it stands, if I just want to kill, I can play MOBA's, if I want to world build, there are plenty of games that allow user content, if I want to do realms vs realms or World vs World, there are many PvX games out there that provide that.

    In short, what would be there in this PvP game, that would entice me to buy it?






    PvP is the only hope of creating a true role-playing game online without the need for incredibly advanced AI and/or VR.

    If we want a good MMORPG PvP game, we need to get rid of level and gear progression.  It's not realistic anyway.  Stats should only represent skills and abilities, and they should have limits to how much they can be trained.  No one should be able to be a god in a PvP game.  Unless everyone is a god in the game from the beginning.  No one should be able to master every skill or ability.  Geniuses are rare in real life. 

    What if progression is tied to the advancement of one's family/community/tribe/clan/nation and the perpetuation of a family line, just like in real life.  Fable II allows you to have children.  Why can't we have children and play one of them after our original character dies?  If our character dies without an heir, we can start over with another character in the same community.  I've played a my share of mmorpgs, and I would rather do that in such a game than climb another hamster wheel treadmill grind ladder in some WoW clone or imitator with different bells and whistles.

    Wealth, property, possessions, and titles can be passed down in the same family line, just like in the real world.  There's a reason the desire to reproduce is so strong in humans.  It is built into our DNA.



  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    edited April 2017
















    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 










    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.






    That could be very interesting. One way I would expand on that would be say artifacts. The explorers could find them, crafters could build them and they would help dramatically in the supply, stock, upkeep, defense... whatever. They can also be captured.

    edit - I disagree with your true role playing. We'll just leave it at that. That's been discussed to death, the horse was dust years ago.
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 10,938








    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 






    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.


    http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/archduke-ferdinand-assassinated

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

    My ignore list finally has one occupant after 12 years. I am the strongest supporter of free speech on here, but free speech does not mean forced listening. Have fun my friend. Hope you find a new stalking target.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Member RarePosts: 6,541
    edited April 2017
    Many historians say Ferdinands death was a scapegoat and propose that events would have started anyway mere weeks later. 
    Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017




























    I've skimmed through the whole thread and kept tabs on it as I was participating earlier as well. I've read many of your posts. No I didn't read every single post. Perhaps I missed something. 

    There are also other forms of competition that do not involve killing the other player or being killed by them. Crafting comes to mind quite well for that. As does some form of merchant (yourself, npc, auction house whatever it is).

    The person that doesn't want to touch pvp at all, there is no hope of attracting them. I'm thinking more of people like me. That only occasionally pvp, we hate being ganked because it interrupts whatever goal we are trying to do, would not gank the person that was just sitting there fishing. Factions seem interesting and add a touch of excitement but the previous sentence still applies. What is the draw for me that I can't either already get in some pve game or in a theoretical future well made pve game. 

    - edit. Just went through your posts on this thread. 














    What if a war that eventually shook the foundations of your game world and dramatically changed the course of future events was started because someone robbed you or killed you while you were fishing?

    Wherever humans or creatures based humans exist, they will fight each other at some point in time.  People do not always get along.










    That could be very interesting. One way I would expand on that would be say artifacts. The explorers could find them, crafters could build them and they would help dramatically in the supply, stock, upkeep, defense... whatever. They can also be captured.

    edit - I disagree with your true role playing. We'll just leave it at that. That's been discussed to death, the horse was dust years ago.




    Yes, explorers and crafters (or even inventors) or other non-military personnel have been known to effect or change the world in many different ways.  Even the way a mother raises a child can alter the course of human history. 

    Btw, as to your point about being killed while you're fishing, it wasn't usually a good idea to go out into the wilderness by yourself before the invention of gunpowder.  There are lions, and tigers, and bears out there.  Even wolves.

    It's fine if you disagree with me about true role-playing.  But I played a lot of single-player rpg games when I was kid.  I also messed around with Dungeons & Dragons from junior high onward, read rule books of several different pencil-and-paper role-playing games, then eventually Dungeon Mastered a few games after high school.  I believe I have a good understanding of what true role-playing is.  I even played with other kids while I was growing up and role-played being knights and stuff like that.  Never touched an MMORPG until I was in my early thirties.  Not that it is totally relevant, but I've read a lot of books, articles, and other printed materials about many different topics.  Even explored some of the darkest and most mysterious corners of the internet.  I've also had a plethora of different life experiences and talked with people from all walks of life.
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992


    Many historians say Ferdinands death was a scapegoat and propose that events would have started anyway mere weeks later. 


    That may be true, but it was still used as an excuse to start World War I.  The War to End All Wars that also led to World War II.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited April 2017
    @ZionBane - People like you are why I advocate for different levels of danger in different areas of them. 

    Let me me know what you think of this scenario.

    There are different levels of danger in different areas of the game.

    There are large areas of the game non-consensual PvP is not practical and NPC paladins would utterly destroy anyone who attacks you and then revive you. In other words 0% chance of losing your gear through things like suicide ganks. The only kind of PvP available would be tournament style PvP you willingly subject yourself to. (LAWFUL GOOD AREAS)

    Other areas you will only be subjected to non-consensual PvP within certain limitations. For instance if you are a spy trying to sabotage the an opposing party, and you get caught in the act of sabotage you will be open to attack. But they could never just walk up to you and run you through without provocation. (CHAOTIC GOOD AREAS)

    In other areas certain fights are sanctioned. The ruling party is largely determined through the spilling of blood and if you have pledged your blade in service of your faction you will be involved with bitter blood feuds with opposing factions. You aren't just going to be randomly ganked by people for no reason but you are under constant threat by your declared enemies. Commoners who have not declared their support for a faction are pretty safe so long as they obey the laws.(LAWFUL EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are sections of the game you can be killed by anyone, anywhere, for any reason without major consequences for them doing so. (CHAOTIC EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are areas that mix and match some of the elements of these areas for their own unique cultural feel (NEUTRAL GOOD, LAWFUL NEUTRAL, TRUE NEUTRAL, CHAOTIC NEUTRAL, NEUTRAL EVIL)

    Now suppose I tell you those lawful good areas have ways for you to contribute the the sandbox elements and story narrative of the game without ever having to participate in combat against other players.

    Assuming the other qualities of the game were at least satisfactory to you (Graphics, combat system etc.) how interested would you be in the game on a scale of 1-10?
  • cantankerousmagecantankerousmage Member UncommonPosts: 992
    edited April 2017


    Eldurian said:


    @ZionBane - People like you are why I advocate for different levels of danger in different areas of them. 

    Let me me know what you think of this scenario.

    There are different levels of danger in different areas of the game.

    There are large areas of the game non-consensual PvP is not practical and NPC paladins would utterly destroy anyone who attacks you and then revive you. In other words 0% chance of losing your gear through things like suicide ganks. The only kind of PvP available would be tournament style PvP you willingly subject yourself to. (LAWFUL GOOD AREAS)

    Other areas you will only be subjected to non-consensual PvP within certain limitations. For instance if you are a spy trying to sabotage the an opposing party, and you get caught in the act of sabotage you will be open to attack. But they could never just walk up to you and run you through without provocation. (CHAOTIC GOOD AREAS)

    In other areas certain fights are sanctioned. The ruling party is largely determined through the spilling of blood and if you have pledged your blade in service of your faction you will be involved with bitter blood feuds with opposing factions. You aren't just going to be randomly ganked by people for no reason but you are under constant threat by your declared enemies. Commoners who have not declared their support for a faction are pretty safe so long as they obey the laws.(LAWFUL EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are sections of the game you can be killed by anyone, anywhere, for any reason without major consequences for them doing so. (CHAOTIC EVIL AREAS)

    Finally there are areas that mix and match some of the elements of these areas for their own unique cultural feel (NEUTRAL GOOD, LAWFUL NEUTRAL, TRUE NEUTRAL, CHAOTIC NEUTRAL, NEUTRAL EVIL)

    Now suppose I tell you those lawful good areas have ways for you to contribute the the sandbox elements and story narrative of the game without ever having to participate in combat against other players.

    Assuming the other qualities of the game were at least satisfactory to you (Graphics, combat system etc.) how interested would you be in the game on a scale of 1-10?




    I like these ideas.  I'm interested in making MMORPGs more logical and realistic, more reflective or the real world and actual, recorded and observable human behavior.  If there weren't relatively safe and peaceful areas and times throughout human history, our species may not have survived long.  Not sure I like the idea of any area being 100% safe, but sometimes we have to accomplish things one step at time.  If we have to give some people absolutely safe zones in order for them to at least investigate and experience what a good open pvp world is like (that is fair and competitive), then I wouldn't mind.



  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member UncommonPosts: 1,058

    Eldurian said:

    I think there is an interesting paradox in the PvP community as a whole. Let's call it "The Trammel Paradox."

    The Trammel Paradox is this:

    Many PvPers: "UO was ruined when they split it into a PvP and a PvE server."

    Same PvPers: "If people can't tolerate consistent abuse I don't want them in my PvP game! We can't let the carebears dumb this game down!"

    In simple the idea of the Trammel Paradox is the idea that you want everyone who plays the game to be subjected to whatever forms of abuse you wish to inflict on them, and that you despise carebears. But on the same hand you feel something was lost from UO when the community was separated.

    In 2017 there are many MMOs. Most of them are catered primarily to PvEers. So if you believe that Trammel was a mistake and there shouldn't be separation it is logically inconsistent to despise carebears and want them driven from your games. They will simply say "**** this ****!" and return to carebear games continuing the divide between between PvErs and PvPers personified by the Trammel split.

    So which is it:

    A. Did the Trammel split not harm the PvP community and was it in-fact a good move?

    B. Did we lose something when we lost the carebears/crafters/PvErs?

    I am a firm believer in B. If you also believe in B, then this a situation we need solutions to. We need to find ways to curb the behaviors that drive them away and allow them to comfortably exist in our community, and we need to give actual draws to our games most PvE games can't offer.



    I read many of your post.  You seemed to want all type of gamers to play your ideal of games.  But you forget if people don't like ffa pvp, people simply don't play it.

    Obviously many wolf felt something is lost when the sheeps no longer want to play with them.  But that's what the carebears want.  Which is not to play on the same servers with these wolf.

    Many people out of their twisted mind felt UO shouldn't have the split because apparently they want to play with carebears who don't even want to play with them.

    Obviously your idea could work if someone create a ffa pvp games with pve elements so great it can lure the pve crowd.  But that is too far fetched it'll ever happen.
  • EldurianEldurian Member EpicPosts: 2,736
    edited May 2017
    I think that's something that would be discovered. People would get into the Lawful Good areas and then decide to try areas with a bit more relaxed PvP rulesets and actually enjoy it. And someday they might even find themselves venturing into the chaotic evil areas but doing so on their terms. Not feeling forced into unwanted situations where PvP is thrusted upon them.

    That being said I think any game that's trying to bring the PvP and PvE community together under one title on the same server needs to accept that both groups of players have distinct wants and needs that don't always line up perfectly. 

    Bringing them back together requires both sides seeing the value of coexisting with the other community in the same world, and it also requires both sides seeing the game is trying to take care of their needs and not just ignore them while focusing on the other.

    Fully safe areas (Not just as starter zones but a place you can enjoy a satisfying game experience at any level of play) is an essential olive branch to the PvE community that I think many of them need to see before they will even be interested in hearing the rest of why they should consider playing such a game.

    If implemented well I can't see any downsides to the PvP community that outweigh the benefit to the PvE community.
  • AAAMEOWAAAMEOW Member UncommonPosts: 1,058

    Eldurian said:

    I think that's something that would be discovered. People would get into the Lawful Good areas and then decide to try areas with a bit more relaxed PvP rulesets and actually enjoy it. And someday they might even find themselves venturing into the chaotic evil areas but doing so on their terms. Not feeling forced into unwanted situations where PvP is thrusted upon them.

    That being said I think any game that's trying to bring the PvP and PvE community together under one title on the same server needs to accept that both groups of players have distinct wants and needs that don't always line up perfectly. 

    Bringing them back together requires both sides seeing the value of coexisting with the other community in the same world, and it also requires both sides seeing the game is trying to take care of their needs and not just ignore them while focusing on the other.

    Fully safe areas (Not just as starter zones but a place you can enjoy a satisfying game experience at any level of play) is an essential olive branch to the PvE community that I think many of them need to see before they will even be interested in hearing the rest of why they should consider playing such a game.

    If implemented well I can't see any downsides to the PvP community that outweigh the benefit to the PvE community.


    If I don't like open pvp why would I play a game with open pvp in the first place.

    Unless you are telling me some open pvp games makes their pve so great that can lure me in.  But sounds pretty much far fetch isn't it.  I could just play games specialize in pve which most likely is much better.
Sign In or Register to comment.