I never said it was an example of how to be a raging douche to other players, I said it was a good example of PvP.
and the games you linked were 1st person shit shooters.. Nothing at all like Eternal Crusade. Ok at this point, I know you never played the game, thanks for the display of speaking out your ass.
lol so weak . thats what your gonna hang your hat on again .. Its a fucking shooter even the devs describe it as so(1st, third matter little )Its a lobby based coop Shooter an not a very good one at that .. , and No i have not tried cause it because its shit , with barely anyone playing its F2P sorry excuse for a game ..
Give it up man .. Its not a good example of anything , unless you want to include how a Dev can waste time/money.resources on a failed attempt at what should have been a slam dunk with a powerful IP ..
I would guess it shutters sooner than later
LOL. this is so you man.. just.. so you.. You never played the game, so you have no idea what you are talking about, and yet overwhelmly blast your opnion based on ignorance for all to witness.
Always a laugh seeing you in action.
Lol people dont have to take my word for it , they can just go to Steam and read players thoughts , after they wade thru the ...
Is this Game Dead Threads..
They can get to the ones telling all its short comings and deficient buggy exploitable game play ..
The smart kids do research first and dont get caught up in shit like EC ,, the Other kids well you know all about them ..
Always a laugh watching you dance your way around your own shit pile
No, the mini-factions within factions could have PC leaders, but the main faction leaders would be NPCs. Not all evil leaders want their subordinates to go around killing, robbing, abusing, and destroying everything in sight. There are different degrees of evil. Just like there are different degrees of good. Evil people are often not completely evil, just as Good or decent people are often not entirely good or decent.
Lawful Evil isn't the same as Neutral Evil which isn't the same as Chaotic Evil.
But the question is, how do you prevent griefers from gravitating to the Faction that allows them to grief all the time? They do cheat too, they'll use other characters to help them do the things they themselves can't do (buy/sell loot, scout, etc.). The only way to limit that is to also limit the non-grief players, which isn't a good strategy.
What faction or factions do you think would allow players to grief all the time?
From the sounds of it, whatever ones are evil. What is preventing griefers from doing what they want, regardless of what the Faction leader wants, when their Faction's rewards are based on being evil?
Lawful Evil kings and rulers would want their subjects to be obedient and follow orders. They wouldn't like loose cannons or careless and disobedient subjects. Lawful Evil characters usually have some form or honor code as well.
Anyway, the greatest threat of griefing would come from players who chose to try to grief other player characters in their own faction.* Which is where Reputation loss comes in.
(*Because players won't find it so easy to grief players of opposing
factions who choose to stay in the safer, more populated and guarded
areas.)
You're planning large land zones of control for Factions, then? And with alignments (good, neutral, and evil), evil will control about 1/3 of the game world? I'm assuming that the zones of control will be spread out and not all in one location. Hot spots, a valley here, a mountain there, etc.
How will neutral be allowed to act towards good? What's keeping them from also trying to grief any and all?
On this Lawful evil, will there be different groups of them, with different PvP allowances for faction points?
I'm trying to understand the world you envision.
Yes, the Primary Factions would rule over a province or provinces. Might be a budding Empire or two among the Factions. Though some Factions might just be City-States with smaller areas over which they exert control.
No such thing as true Neutral IMHO. (Except for maybe a deity who is a predominantly Neutral Arbiter who strives to maintain the balance between good and evil in the world.) Though there may be Factions which are more Isolationist and Independent, refusing to take a side in larger regional alliances or wars. So a 'Neutral' faction won't want its members causing trouble with other factions.
I think most civilized and organized evil Factions would be ruled over by a lawful evil monarch or council. Neutral Evil characters wouldn't generally be leaders of nations. True some kings who inherit their thrones might be Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil, but they may or may not last very long before their populations rebel and/or they are deposed. Some monster tribes and criminal gangs (bandits, pirates) might have Chaotic Evil and maybe even Neutral Evil leaders.
Generally, PCs with a Lawful Evil ruler shouldn't be killing people outside of designated battlefields and contested areas unless they are given a specific quest/mission to infiltrate a certain faction's territory in order to spy, subvert (spread rumors, sow dissent), sabotage, or assassinate. Btw, of course evil humans would have an easier time infiltrating territories ruled over by good human factions and vice versa. But humans wouldn't have an easy time infiltrating Dwarven or Elven lands, of course.
But as soon as Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil characters start committing crimes, they begin to gain Infamy in a province (with a faction) and eventually a region (with multiple factions). Soon enough they will become so well known that it will be very difficult for them to travel in those areas without being killed. Of course, they might also be captured/arrested, but maybe we don't want that to happen very often.
Don't forget that PCs also have the ability to run to safe/guarded areas, raise alarms, and maybe even blow war horns/sound trumpets to alert any allied forces (PC or NPC) nearby if they are in trouble. Then we have the roaming patrols of NPC soldiers.
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Yes, and not just in theory. Uncharted Waters Online actually did it. How, you ask?
1) The penalties for piracy are really harsh. Most ports in the world won't accept you. You're free for everyone else to attack without them facing any piracy penalties, and indeed, they'll win a bounty if they sink you. And if you want to get rid of your red name and not be a pirate anymore, you'll likely have to spend hours at sea in which you're fair game for anyone else to attack.
2) Being a successful pirate almost requires you to be a whale. There are so many things working against you that if you're not a whale, it's going to be very hard to be a pirate for all that long without going broke. So that means that there aren't very many pirates at a time.
3) Pirates can't hide. Players have a command to list everyone online in their zone. Non-pirates can hide from this list. Pirates can't. If you're a pirate, everyone in your zone knows that you're there. They don't necessarily know exactly where you are, but they know that you're there.
4) It's nearly impossible to catch someone who is actively trying not to get caught. If a level 60 pirate attacks a level 30 player who is playing defensively, that usually won't end with the pirate winning. It will usually end with the low level player escaping and then the pirate being unable to attack him again for an extended period of time. Pirates may prefer to attack botters, as they aren't able to fight back effectively.
5) While most of the oceans are intermittently open to PVP, there are safe zones. Everywhere on land is safe from non-consensual PVP, as is most of Europe (basically, the starting areas).
I've never played. I tried once, but something about the style drove me away ... I can't remember exactly and will have to give it another try to see. I have some questions.
Is it full open world pvp or are there safe zones?
How hard is it for someone to create a new or, alternatively, have an alt (multiple alts?) for the sole purpose of griefing or farming other players?
Do you think these things actual work against the type of player people are referring to, or is it perhaps the game itself tends to not draw them and instead draws the role player or sensible player who isn't going to go out of the way to find exploits in the system?
1) Everywhere on land is safe. For the oceans, most of Europe is permanently safe. Everywhere else varies, with each zone safe or not independently. For a zone to be neutral means that it's open PVP. If a zone is neutral and has lots of PVE players sinking NPC ships, it becomes safe for a week before going back to neutral. If a zone is neutral and has significant pirate activity, it becomes stuck as open PVP for a week before going back to neutral.
2) It's an extremely slow leveling game, so that alt is going to be really weak unless you put a ton of time into leveling it. To give you some idea of how slow the leveling is, there are three main levels, not one. Two of those three take so long to reach the cap that hardly anyone ever does, even after playing for several hundred hours in-game.
3) I doubt that the game would attract griefers because there's not that much that griefers can do to legitimate players. About the worst that a would-be griefer can do to you is to corner you in a remote port so that you can't leave without getting attacked. But even that is easily countered by logging off for a while, which will probably get the griefer to give up and leave pretty quickly.
To give you some idea of why it's so hard to catch someone who is playing defensively, there are three stages to combat. The first is initiating combat, where everyone is sailing around in the world and you have to get close to someone to have the option to initiate a battle.
The second phase of combat has the ships sailing around firing cannons at each other. They are in a fixed combat circle, and if either player leaves the circle, the battle ends and the combatants cannot initiate combat against each other again for something like 10 minutes. The second phase of combat starts with ships located wherever they were when combat was initiated, but with both ships at a dead stop.
Better ships commonly have more cannons, more crew, more cargo space, more durability, more sails, and a higher top speed. But a ship's acceleration is inversely proportional to the ship's capacity, so a higher end ship will commonly accelerate much more slowly than a lower end ship. As the second phase of combat starts with both ships at a dead stop, if a big pirate ship attacks a small newbie ship, the latter might have two or three times the acceleration of the former. That often makes it easy to sail right out of the combat circle long before the big ship can get up to speed to chase you down.
Pirates have two ways to counter this. One is to not initiate combat until they're in front of their target, so that when their target tries to accelerate away, they're moving right toward the pirate. That can work pretty well if you catch someone who isn't paying attention. But someone who sees you coming from a ways off can just log off. In order to log off at sea, you have to wait 15 seconds without giving any commands--no turning, and no raising or lowering sails. Your ship keeps moving during that time, and no one else can see that you're in the process of logging off. A pirate might be able to get close enough to initiate combat, but sailing past someone to be in front takes a lot longer and makes it pretty obvious that you're there and what you're doing.
The other approach that pirates have is to target the big merchant ships that also have low acceleration. They tend to be equipped with a ton of cargo space, but not a lot of crew and few or no cannons. For the high level merchants, that might mean that they accelerate more slowly than pirates, while also being pretty useless in a fight.
Pirates can't just pick a small ship themselves, as they need to move to the third phase of combat, which is boarding the enemy ship. You could just sink the other player if you're just trying to be mean, but you can't loot a ship after sinking it, so you have to board the ship if you want to steal anything. If you're in a small ship with not a lot of crew, you could easily lose that third phase. A pirate in a small ship could easily be attacked by random people who happened to be around if those random people are geared for combat.
A pirate who loses a battle to a non-pirate has to pay a bounty to the non-pirate. If you don't have it on you, the game will take it out of your bank. If you don't have the money in the bank, either, it will start vendoring the pirate's items to raise the money and use that to pay the bounty.
Doesn't sound like it's much fun to play a pirate in Uncharted Waters.
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Doesn't sound like it's much fun to play a pirate in Uncharted Waters.
It probably shouldn't be "fun."
Challenging, rewarding, perhaps, but fun, nah.
What do you mean? Pirates have lots of fun. Haven't you ever watched One Piece?
"If everything was easy, nothing would be hard."
"Show me on the doll where PVP touched you."
(Note: If I type something in a thread that does not exactly pertain to the stated subject of the thread in every, way, shape, and form, please feel free to send me a response in a Private Message.)
I never said it was an example of how to be a raging douche to other players, I said it was a good example of PvP.
and the games you linked were 1st person shit shooters.. Nothing at all like Eternal Crusade. Ok at this point, I know you never played the game, thanks for the display of speaking out your ass.
lol so weak . thats what your gonna hang your hat on again .. Its a fucking shooter even the devs describe it as so(1st, third matter little )Its a lobby based coop Shooter an not a very good one at that .. , and No i have not tried cause it because its shit , with barely anyone playing its F2P sorry excuse for a game ..
Give it up man .. Its not a good example of anything , unless you want to include how a Dev can waste time/money.resources on a failed attempt at what should have been a slam dunk with a powerful IP ..
I would guess it shutters sooner than later
LOL. this is so you man.. just.. so you.. You never played the game, so you have no idea what you are talking about, and yet overwhelmly blast your opnion based on ignorance for all to witness.
Always a laugh seeing you in action.
Lol people dont have to take my word for it , they can just go to Steam and read players thoughts , after they wade thru the ...
and they shouldn't take you word for it as You never played the game, in fact, moving forward, they should really not trust anything you have to say, because you are willing to talk from total ignorance and act like you are an authority.
They should however take my word for it, as I played the game.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Doesn't sound like it's much fun to play a pirate in Uncharted Waters.
If everyone wanted to be a pirate and go harass the PVE players, then the game just wouldn't work. It needs for there to be not very many pirates so that people doing PVE can mostly get on with it.
Even so, my explanation about how it's nearly impossible to catch someone who is paying attention only applies if your prey is paying attention. Some of the long haul routes can take about an hour of real life time to get from your origin to your destination. Most of the time, not very much happens. You sail in a straight line for several minutes, then turn by this amount when you get to here. Then another ten minutes in a straight line, then turn again. And so forth.
Who has time to constantly watch the screen while doing that on the off chance that a pirate might show up? And it's really not that hard to catch someone who is mostly AFK but just checking their screen every few minutes. Or better yet, botters who aren't checking their screen at all. The botters largely figure that their cargo will get raided by pirates now and then, but most of the time, it will get through and they'll be fine. Think of it as non-consensual PVP where you can attack players who are botting and loot their cargo and gear. That can be very lucrative if you can find them in the northern Atlantic, not far from the European ports where they intended to sell their cargo.
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
The UWO approach is to make it hard to kill and loot real players, but much easier to kill and loot bots that are out farming gold. That way, the real players don't get particularly annoyed. If the bots get annoyed and quit, no one liked them anyway.
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
Very spot on.
And I really think the people that champion these kinds of idea do not get this. When it comes to these kinds of PvP games, where the idea is have a whole segment of the player base that is "bad" or "evil" the game takes on a predator/prey ecosystem, where you have these self styled aggressive players that want to prey upon the weak PvE players.
The thing is, no one wants to play a game where they are "Prey" for other players. No one wants to be someone else's entertainment, especially at their own expense.
This is a very "Mic drop/End of Discussion" kind of situation, there is no "Well if we.
As such, anyone that is not looking to kill another player, anyone not looking for that PvP component in their game, will not be inclined to play these games.
And there is nothing that anyone will do, to change that.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
Very spot on.
And I really think the people that champion these kinds of idea do not get this. When it comes to these kinds of PvP games, where the idea is have a whole segment of the player base that is "bad" or "evil" the game takes on a predator/prey ecosystem, where you have these self styled aggressive players that want to prey upon the weak PvE players.
The thing is, no one wants to play a game where they are "Prey" for other players. No one wants to be someone else's entertainment, especially at their own expense.
This is a very "Mic drop/End of Discussion" kind of situation, there is no "Well if we.
As such, anyone that is not looking to kill another player, anyone not looking for that PvP component in their game, will not be inclined to play these games.
And there is nothing that anyone will do, to change that.
Well, there are a few odd PVEers like me who will play a game like EVE where I was well able to manage my risk levels, at least until 3 yrs ago when CCP made design changes to encourage more player interaction (aka, more risky for krabs) which were untenable, at least to me.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I never said it was an example of how to be a raging douche to other players, I said it was a good example of PvP.
and the games you linked were 1st person shit shooters.. Nothing at all like Eternal Crusade. Ok at this point, I know you never played the game, thanks for the display of speaking out your ass.
lol so weak . thats what your gonna hang your hat on again .. Its a fucking shooter even the devs describe it as so(1st, third matter little )Its a lobby based coop Shooter an not a very good one at that .. , and No i have not tried cause it because its shit , with barely anyone playing its F2P sorry excuse for a game ..
Give it up man .. Its not a good example of anything , unless you want to include how a Dev can waste time/money.resources on a failed attempt at what should have been a slam dunk with a powerful IP ..
I would guess it shutters sooner than later
LOL. this is so you man.. just.. so you.. You never played the game, so you have no idea what you are talking about, and yet overwhelmly blast your opnion based on ignorance for all to witness.
Always a laugh seeing you in action.
Lol people dont have to take my word for it , they can just go to Steam and read players thoughts , after they wade thru the ...
and they shouldn't take you word for it as You never played the game, in fact, moving forward, they should really not trust anything you have to say, because you are willing to talk from total ignorance and act like you are an authority.
They should however take my word for it, as I played the game.
Lol .. once again they dont need to
The game is shit ..
There are 70 people playing it ..
It is full of bugs and exploits
The Devs have abandon it
The forums consist mostly of.. " Is this Game Dead "
You do not need to play a game to form an educated opinion on it ....Like anything in life it just takes a little research and time ... Many times one look at a trailer for 3 minutes and you know a game is trash it happens frequently here .. well at least for the smart kids ..
Some people look out into that great big backyard of MMOS and need to go step in every pile of shit to find out they stink ..
Some people can just look and know to avoid such pile of shit like EC ..
You stepped in it ...
Now go get a hose and wash the stink off , next time be more careful ..
No, the mini-factions within factions could have PC leaders, but the main faction leaders would be NPCs. Not all evil leaders want their subordinates to go around killing, robbing, abusing, and destroying everything in sight. There are different degrees of evil. Just like there are different degrees of good. Evil people are often not completely evil, just as Good or decent people are often not entirely good or decent.
Lawful Evil isn't the same as Neutral Evil which isn't the same as Chaotic Evil.
But the question is, how do you prevent griefers from gravitating to the Faction that allows them to grief all the time? They do cheat too, they'll use other characters to help them do the things they themselves can't do (buy/sell loot, scout, etc.). The only way to limit that is to also limit the non-grief players, which isn't a good strategy.
What faction or factions do you think would allow players to grief all the time?
From the sounds of it, whatever ones are evil. What is preventing griefers from doing what they want, regardless of what the Faction leader wants, when their Faction's rewards are based on being evil?
Lawful Evil kings and rulers would want their subjects to be obedient and follow orders. They wouldn't like loose cannons or careless and disobedient subjects. Lawful Evil characters usually have some form or honor code as well.
Anyway, the greatest threat of griefing would come from players who chose to try to grief other player characters in their own faction.* Which is where Reputation loss comes in.
(*Because players won't find it so easy to grief players of opposing
factions who choose to stay in the safer, more populated and guarded
areas.)
You're planning large land zones of control for Factions, then? And with alignments (good, neutral, and evil), evil will control about 1/3 of the game world? I'm assuming that the zones of control will be spread out and not all in one location. Hot spots, a valley here, a mountain there, etc.
How will neutral be allowed to act towards good? What's keeping them from also trying to grief any and all?
On this Lawful evil, will there be different groups of them, with different PvP allowances for faction points?
I'm trying to understand the world you envision.
Yes, the Primary Factions would rule over a province or provinces. Might be a budding Empire or two among the Factions. Though some Factions might just be City-States with smaller areas over which they exert control.
No such thing as true Neutral IMHO. (Except for maybe a deity who is a predominantly Neutral Arbiter who strives to maintain the balance between good and evil in the world.) Though there may be Factions which are more Isolationist and Independent, refusing to take a side in larger regional alliances or wars. So a 'Neutral' faction won't want its members causing trouble with other factions.
I think most civilized and organized evil Factions would be ruled over by a lawful evil monarch or council. Neutral Evil characters wouldn't generally be leaders of nations. True some kings who inherit their thrones might be Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil, but they may or may not last very long before their populations rebel and/or they are deposed. Some monster tribes and criminal gangs (bandits, pirates) might have Chaotic Evil and maybe even Neutral Evil leaders.
Generally, PCs with a Lawful Evil ruler shouldn't be killing people outside of designated battlefields and contested areas unless they are given a specific quest/mission to infiltrate a certain faction's territory in order to spy, subvert (spread rumors, sow dissent), sabotage, or assassinate. Btw, of course evil humans would have an easier time infiltrating territories ruled over by good human factions and vice versa. But humans wouldn't have an easy time infiltrating Dwarven or Elven lands, of course.
But as soon as Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil characters start committing crimes, they begin to gain Infamy in a province (with a faction) and eventually a region (with multiple factions). Soon enough they will become so well known that it will be very difficult for them to travel in those areas without being killed. Of course, they might also be captured/arrested, but maybe we don't want that to happen very often.
Don't forget that PCs also have the ability to run to safe/guarded areas, raise alarms, and maybe even blow war horns/sound trumpets to alert any allied forces (PC or NPC) nearby if they are in trouble. Then we have the roaming patrols of NPC soldiers.
Ok, I'm beginning to understand what you want to create here. I think it's a great PvP game, better because it has the things that keep it from just being a wide open gank fest. It has RP directed play through the Faction rewards system.
I hope you can create a huge world, because the larger the Faction areas are, the better the game will be. With lots of dungeons and ruins, and lots of critters and ancient mysteries to add needed spice.
I hope you keep the deities toned down to, basically, Event status. Demigods are a different thing, though.
You need a great economy too.
I think this can be a great game for all but the pure PvE players. Maybe even some of them, if they want a truly worldly RP experience. I'm wishing you luck. If you can get the funds to make it great, I'll definitely be there.
I never said it was an example of how to be a raging douche to other players, I said it was a good example of PvP.
and the games you linked were 1st person shit shooters.. Nothing at all like Eternal Crusade. Ok at this point, I know you never played the game, thanks for the display of speaking out your ass.
lol so weak . thats what your gonna hang your hat on again .. Its a fucking shooter even the devs describe it as so(1st, third matter little )Its a lobby based coop Shooter an not a very good one at that .. , and No i have not tried cause it because its shit , with barely anyone playing its F2P sorry excuse for a game ..
Give it up man .. Its not a good example of anything , unless you want to include how a Dev can waste time/money.resources on a failed attempt at what should have been a slam dunk with a powerful IP ..
I would guess it shutters sooner than later
LOL. this is so you man.. just.. so you.. You never played the game, so you have no idea what you are talking about, and yet overwhelmly blast your opnion based on ignorance for all to witness.
Always a laugh seeing you in action.
Lol people dont have to take my word for it , they can just go to Steam and read players thoughts , after they wade thru the ...
and they shouldn't take you word for it as You never played the game, in fact, moving forward, they should really not trust anything you have to say, because you are willing to talk from total ignorance and act like you are an authority.
They should however take my word for it, as I played the game.
Lol .. once again they dont need to
The game is shit ..
There are 70 people playing it ..
It is full of bugs and exploits
The Devs have abandon it
The forums consist mostly of.. " Is this Game Dead "
You do not need to play a game to form an educated opinion on it ....Like anything in life it just takes a little research and time ... Many times one look at a trailer for 3 minutes and you know a game is trash it happens frequently here .. well at least for the smart kids ..
Some people look out into that great big backyard of MMOS and need to go step in every pile of shit to find out they stink ..
Some people can just look and know to avoid such pile of shit like EC ..
You stepped in it ...
Now go get a hose and wash the stink off , next time be more careful ..
Do you ever get tired of making an embarrassment of yourself trying to save face?
I mean anyone with any self respect, or even basic common sense by now would have just accepted they misspoke and really don't know about a game, it's mechanics, or how it worked, but here you are, just digging your heels into your own ignorance screaming how you must be right, even after you admit you have never played the game and no working idea about the game itself.
I can't .. I can't even think how to respond to that. I mean I can't insult you more then you have insulted yourself, and no logic would work against that kind of raging ignorance.
So.. Umm yah.. as always.. feel free to not respond to me in the future.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
Very spot on.
And I really think the people that champion these kinds of idea do not get this. When it comes to these kinds of PvP games, where the idea is have a whole segment of the player base that is "bad" or "evil" the game takes on a predator/prey ecosystem, where you have these self styled aggressive players that want to prey upon the weak PvE players.
The thing is, no one wants to play a game where they are "Prey" for other players. No one wants to be someone else's entertainment, especially at their own expense.
This is a very "Mic drop/End of Discussion" kind of situation, there is no "Well if we.
As such, anyone that is not looking to kill another player, anyone not looking for that PvP component in their game, will not be inclined to play these games.
And there is nothing that anyone will do, to change that.
Well, there are a few odd PVEers like me who will play a game like EVE where I was well able to manage my risk levels, at least until 3 yrs ago when CCP made design changes to encourage more player interaction (aka, more risky for krabs) which were untenable, at least to me.
I wager you are more than ready to throw down if a fight started.
The thing is, when people talk about putting in PvP and then trying to talk about ways to stop PvP, that is like saying "lets put in crafting, but try to think of find ways to punish people for crafting"
"Lets put in raids, but we need to find ways to punish people if they raid"
In the end, If it sounds stupid with other game modes, it's stupid. if you put in PvP, it should fit into the game as well as any other game mode. PvP should fit into the game as well as the crafting system does, or the Raids, or the Dungeons, or anything and everything else in the game, the PvP needs to fit.
If you as a developer have to try to think of ways to punish people for playing a game mode you gave them to play with, or stop them from playing it, then whatever it is, no matter what it is, you put it in wrong.
That is my feels on the matter, if you can explain a fault in that logic, I am willing to hear it.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
It is quite a hard balance to strive to achieve because a PvP player who enjoys the thrill of killing and looting will find it hard to accept penalties for doing what they like and players who don't want to be killed and looted cannot accept that the punishment the person that killed them is receiving is enough. Both sides feel aggrieved. How can you balance totally opposite wishes?
Very spot on.
And I really think the people that champion these kinds of idea do not get this. When it comes to these kinds of PvP games, where the idea is have a whole segment of the player base that is "bad" or "evil" the game takes on a predator/prey ecosystem, where you have these self styled aggressive players that want to prey upon the weak PvE players.
The thing is, no one wants to play a game where they are "Prey" for other players. No one wants to be someone else's entertainment, especially at their own expense.
This is a very "Mic drop/End of Discussion" kind of situation, there is no "Well if we.
As such, anyone that is not looking to kill another player, anyone not looking for that PvP component in their game, will not be inclined to play these games.
And there is nothing that anyone will do, to change that.
Well, there are a few odd PVEers like me who will play a game like EVE where I was well able to manage my risk levels, at least until 3 yrs ago when CCP made design changes to encourage more player interaction (aka, more risky for krabs) which were untenable, at least to me.
I wager you are more than ready to throw down if a fight started.
The thing is, when people talk about putting in PvP and then trying to talk about ways to stop PvP, that is like saying "lets put in crafting, but try to think of find ways to punish people for crafting"
"Lets put in raids, but we need to find ways to punish people if they raid"
In the end, If it sounds stupid with other game modes, it's stupid. if you put in PvP, it should fit into the game as well as any other game mode. PvP should fit into the game as well as the crafting system does, or the Raids, or the Dungeons, or anything and everything else in the game, the PvP needs to fit.
If you as a developer have to try to think of ways to punish people for playing a game mode you gave them to play with, or stop them from playing it, then whatever it is, no matter what it is, you put it in wrong.
That is my feels on the matter, if you can explain a fault in that logic, I am willing to hear it.
That's ridiculous. With PvP, it negatively affects other players, and you have to keep it in it's place, and not rampantly overrunning the game and all it's players.
Well, pvp isn't the problem and not what they're trying to solve. It's the negative side effects that come along with open world pvp. Many people including myself have spent countless hours thinking and discussing this very issue so it's quite understandable that people are still trying.
First you need to decide if you want to allow open world free for all PVP. If you do then just accept greifing as a fact. If not, then...
If you are adding in features just to deter people from something like griefing just so you can have the option in "open world" for realisms sake then you are wasting massive amounts of resources and still leaving gaps that people can and will exploit to their advantage. There are no advantages, other than "realism", to providing the option to murder someone else at any location in your game if you are creating a seemingly endless array of consequences just to deter them from doing it in the first place.
It is very important to understand that this is not real life. There is no morality and you cannot invoke any penalty big enough to fully deter the player from performing these negative actions. If you want to limit or prevent griefing then you simply cannot allow it.
Add in laws that players must follow in certain areas that don't allow them to attack others. Have dedicated areas, times, reasons, for people to attack others; E.G. Faction v Faction areas, PVE only areas, PVP only areas, etc that restrict, not limit, but completely restrict players to following these exact rules.
When a player is inside the pvp allowed areas they are fair game for anyone. Then you can still have your alignments, your faction standings or whatever you want to deter the actions, but leaving it entirely up to the players if they want to
Make anyone that wants to play at being evil or pirate, (always the excuse i hear we want to "role-play" bad guys) types roll hardcore, perma-death on dying.
After first attack on any innocent person ( one that has not attacked or is in enemy faction) is permanently made red to all and perma-death forever.
Anything less is always going to be easily worked/gamed around to be made so that it is not worth the effort for normal pve players to put up with any type of loot/loss in games.
You want to play like a pirate,thief,murderer? Then take the consequences that that brings for real. Makes zero sense to have rules protect people that want to play by breaking all the rules...let me put bounty or hire people to track them down and when they die that's it...no coming back for that character.
How many people that claim they want to "role-play" bad guys will that game attract???
Do you perma die too, mr. hero of blah blah?
Sure...soon as i go around ganking people for no reason other than i want to.
I never said it was an example of how to be a raging douche to other players, I said it was a good example of PvP.
and the games you linked were 1st person shit shooters.. Nothing at all like Eternal Crusade. Ok at this point, I know you never played the game, thanks for the display of speaking out your ass.
lol so weak . thats what your gonna hang your hat on again .. Its a fucking shooter even the devs describe it as so(1st, third matter little )Its a lobby based coop Shooter an not a very good one at that .. , and No i have not tried cause it because its shit , with barely anyone playing its F2P sorry excuse for a game ..
Give it up man .. Its not a good example of anything , unless you want to include how a Dev can waste time/money.resources on a failed attempt at what should have been a slam dunk with a powerful IP ..
I would guess it shutters sooner than later
LOL. this is so you man.. just.. so you.. You never played the game, so you have no idea what you are talking about, and yet overwhelmly blast your opnion based on ignorance for all to witness.
Always a laugh seeing you in action.
Lol people dont have to take my word for it , they can just go to Steam and read players thoughts , after they wade thru the ...
and they shouldn't take you word for it as You never played the game, in fact, moving forward, they should really not trust anything you have to say, because you are willing to talk from total ignorance and act like you are an authority.
They should however take my word for it, as I played the game.
Lol .. once again they dont need to
The game is shit ..
There are 70 people playing it ..
It is full of bugs and exploits
The Devs have abandon it
The forums consist mostly of.. " Is this Game Dead "
You do not need to play a game to form an educated opinion on it ....Like anything in life it just takes a little research and time ... Many times one look at a trailer for 3 minutes and you know a game is trash it happens frequently here .. well at least for the smart kids ..
Some people look out into that great big backyard of MMOS and need to go step in every pile of shit to find out they stink ..
Some people can just look and know to avoid such pile of shit like EC ..
You stepped in it ...
Now go get a hose and wash the stink off , next time be more careful ..
Do you ever get tired of making an embarrassment of yourself trying to save face?
I mean anyone with any self respect, or even basic common sense by now would have just accepted they misspoke and really don't know about a game, it's mechanics, or how it worked, but here you are, just digging your heels into your own ignorance screaming how you must be right, even after you admit you have never played the game and no working idea about the game itself.
I can't .. I can't even think how to respond to that. I mean I can't insult you more then you have insulted yourself, and no logic would work against that kind of raging ignorance.
So.. Umm yah.. as always.. feel free to not respond to me in the future.
Someone is ignorant and foolish for sure , and your wall of passive aggresive response does not change a thing ..
Like i said the game speaks for itself and its a terrible example to use for anything .. ...
Fact ..
Its own community response speaks volumes ..
Only a real idiot would think that someone has to play a game to form an opinion on it , Its like saying you have to drive a car before you can have an opinion on it , or watch a movie , or eat a pizza , or .. or most anything in life , smart people are capabale of researching and forming an opinion before diving in .. Stupid kids not so much .. they will jump into any pile of shit feet first .. because they see shiny .. EC was a perfect example of that ..
Research/Read/Learn/Watch/ Decide like all things in life .. Start here
Anyone with self respect or basic common sense would stop posting and suggesting this trash game as some basis of PvP ..Particualarly in an OWPVP MMO discussion
For a F2P game this is beyond terrible , shuttering this would be merciful
Even during these times with Covid , while many games are booming and bloated the best it could do on Sunday prime time was 70 players ... So in a game that touts 60 vs 60 as its top matches , thats how many 60vs60 matches possible..
When your done taking your shoes and socks off to count its NONE..
You would think at this point you would say heh " hey guys bad example " but noo , you just wanna keep pushing it and insulting others along the way ..
OP....I have said this OVER and OVER AGAIN and AGAIN......YOU CANNOT MIX OWPVP and PVE together. IT WILL NOT AND DOES NOT WORK!!!!!!!! MORONS!!!!!!!! Use what works. Make an MMORPG like EQ...WOW...ESO...you know, something ...THAT WORKS!!!!!!!!!!!
It works just fine as long as they don’t expect to get and keep pve only players.
There are some people who don't like losing and don't like the idea of losing to other players. Actually though, it seems like lots of people are willing to try PVP in MMORPGs. Until they find out that it's totally unfair and pointless to participate in unless you're A) Twinked Higher or Max Level C) Have Better or BIS gear
D&D was not designed for PVP.
Final Fantasy was not designed for PVP.
MMORPGs that use the Character Level/Combat Power/Gear progression systems found in D&D and FF will not ever have good PVP.
However, D&D/AD&D Gear is a little better. +5 was originally the highest a weapon or piece of armor could be enchanted by magic or blessed by divine means.
You are delusional if you think you can create a game that is both open world pvp and will attract pve only players. You MUST choose. You can have a pvp toggle, faction only pvp with pve areas, or simply separating pve and pvp areas in general.
Or
doing expect to get get pve only players.
They will only be willing to try pvp if it’s 100% optional.
We don't need PVE only players anyway.
Then why are you so worried about griefers?
PvP players accept the unfairness, thrive on it, and figure out how to overcome it. That is what "Player VS Player" means.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Make anyone that wants to play at being evil or pirate, (always the excuse i hear we want to "role-play" bad guys) types roll hardcore, perma-death on dying.
After first attack on any innocent person ( one that has not attacked or is in enemy faction) is permanently made red to all and perma-death forever.
Anything less is always going to be easily worked/gamed around to be made so that it is not worth the effort for normal pve players to put up with any type of loot/loss in games.
You want to play like a pirate,thief,murderer? Then take the consequences that that brings for real. Makes zero sense to have rules protect people that want to play by breaking all the rules...let me put bounty or hire people to track them down and when they die that's it...no coming back for that character.
How many people that claim they want to "role-play" bad guys will that game attract???
Do you perma die too, mr. hero of blah blah?
Sure...soon as i go around ganking people for no reason other than i want to.
Any other stupid questions idiot?
Yooooo f them gankers! Cast your spell of “I’m awesome you can’t touch me”!
OP....I have said this OVER and OVER AGAIN and AGAIN......YOU CANNOT MIX OWPVP and PVE together. IT WILL NOT AND DOES NOT WORK!!!!!!!! MORONS!!!!!!!! Use what works. Make an MMORPG like EQ...WOW...ESO...you know, something ...THAT WORKS!!!!!!!!!!!
It works just fine as long as they don’t expect to get and keep pve only players.
There are some people who don't like losing and don't like the idea of losing to other players. Actually though, it seems like lots of people are willing to try PVP in MMORPGs. Until they find out that it's totally unfair and pointless to participate in unless you're A) Twinked Higher or Max Level C) Have Better or BIS gear
D&D was not designed for PVP.
Final Fantasy was not designed for PVP.
MMORPGs that use the Character Level/Combat Power/Gear progression systems found in D&D and FF will not ever have good PVP.
However, D&D/AD&D Gear is a little better. +5 was originally the highest a weapon or piece of armor could be enchanted by magic or blessed by divine means.
You are delusional if you think you can create a game that is both open world pvp and will attract pve only players. You MUST choose. You can have a pvp toggle, faction only pvp with pve areas, or simply separating pve and pvp areas in general.
Or
doing expect to get get pve only players.
They will only be willing to try pvp if it’s 100% optional.
We don't need PVE only players anyway.
Then why are you so worried about griefers?
PvP players accept the unfairness, thrive on it, and figure out how to overcome it. That is what "Player VS Player" means.
Sometimes I think that all of this is just about hating PvP and PvPers and wanting to punish them for having different tastes much more than it is about any desire to have a more "realistic world"... whatever the fuck that means
"You're playing wrong and enjoying the wrong things so I will design a game to force you to play properly." .
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
OP....I have said this OVER and OVER AGAIN and AGAIN......YOU CANNOT MIX OWPVP and PVE together. IT WILL NOT AND DOES NOT WORK!!!!!!!! MORONS!!!!!!!! Use what works. Make an MMORPG like EQ...WOW...ESO...you know, something ...THAT WORKS!!!!!!!!!!!
It works just fine as long as they don’t expect to get and keep pve only players.
There are some people who don't like losing and don't like the idea of losing to other players. Actually though, it seems like lots of people are willing to try PVP in MMORPGs. Until they find out that it's totally unfair and pointless to participate in unless you're A) Twinked Higher or Max Level C) Have Better or BIS gear
D&D was not designed for PVP.
Final Fantasy was not designed for PVP.
MMORPGs that use the Character Level/Combat Power/Gear progression systems found in D&D and FF will not ever have good PVP.
However, D&D/AD&D Gear is a little better. +5 was originally the highest a weapon or piece of armor could be enchanted by magic or blessed by divine means.
You are delusional if you think you can create a game that is both open world pvp and will attract pve only players. You MUST choose. You can have a pvp toggle, faction only pvp with pve areas, or simply separating pve and pvp areas in general.
Or
doing expect to get get pve only players.
They will only be willing to try pvp if it’s 100% optional.
We don't need PVE only players anyway.
Then why are you so worried about griefers?
PvP players accept the unfairness, thrive on it, and figure out how to overcome it. That is what "Player VS Player" means.
Sometimes I think that all of this is just about hating PvP and PvPers and wanting to punish them for having different tastes much more than it is about any desire to have a more "realistic world"... whatever the fuck that means
"You're playing wrong and enjoying the wrong things so I will design a game to force you to play properly." .
That's on both sides. There is a type of a certain type of pvp player wanting to punish pve players and a certain type of pve player who wants to punish pvp players.
It's always that same selfish coin, just different sides.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
PvP players accept the unfairness, thrive on it, and figure out how to overcome it. That is what "Player VS Player" means.
I think they are under some illusion that they can make a "One game" where everyone can come together, like a "Real Life" MMO.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
Answers
2) It's an extremely slow leveling game, so that alt is going to be really weak unless you put a ton of time into leveling it. To give you some idea of how slow the leveling is, there are three main levels, not one. Two of those three take so long to reach the cap that hardly anyone ever does, even after playing for several hundred hours in-game.
3) I doubt that the game would attract griefers because there's not that much that griefers can do to legitimate players. About the worst that a would-be griefer can do to you is to corner you in a remote port so that you can't leave without getting attacked. But even that is easily countered by logging off for a while, which will probably get the griefer to give up and leave pretty quickly.
To give you some idea of why it's so hard to catch someone who is playing defensively, there are three stages to combat. The first is initiating combat, where everyone is sailing around in the world and you have to get close to someone to have the option to initiate a battle.
The second phase of combat has the ships sailing around firing cannons at each other. They are in a fixed combat circle, and if either player leaves the circle, the battle ends and the combatants cannot initiate combat against each other again for something like 10 minutes. The second phase of combat starts with ships located wherever they were when combat was initiated, but with both ships at a dead stop.
Better ships commonly have more cannons, more crew, more cargo space, more durability, more sails, and a higher top speed. But a ship's acceleration is inversely proportional to the ship's capacity, so a higher end ship will commonly accelerate much more slowly than a lower end ship. As the second phase of combat starts with both ships at a dead stop, if a big pirate ship attacks a small newbie ship, the latter might have two or three times the acceleration of the former. That often makes it easy to sail right out of the combat circle long before the big ship can get up to speed to chase you down.
Pirates have two ways to counter this. One is to not initiate combat until they're in front of their target, so that when their target tries to accelerate away, they're moving right toward the pirate. That can work pretty well if you catch someone who isn't paying attention. But someone who sees you coming from a ways off can just log off. In order to log off at sea, you have to wait 15 seconds without giving any commands--no turning, and no raising or lowering sails. Your ship keeps moving during that time, and no one else can see that you're in the process of logging off. A pirate might be able to get close enough to initiate combat, but sailing past someone to be in front takes a lot longer and makes it pretty obvious that you're there and what you're doing.
The other approach that pirates have is to target the big merchant ships that also have low acceleration. They tend to be equipped with a ton of cargo space, but not a lot of crew and few or no cannons. For the high level merchants, that might mean that they accelerate more slowly than pirates, while also being pretty useless in a fight.
Pirates can't just pick a small ship themselves, as they need to move to the third phase of combat, which is boarding the enemy ship. You could just sink the other player if you're just trying to be mean, but you can't loot a ship after sinking it, so you have to board the ship if you want to steal anything. If you're in a small ship with not a lot of crew, you could easily lose that third phase. A pirate in a small ship could easily be attacked by random people who happened to be around if those random people are geared for combat.
A pirate who loses a battle to a non-pirate has to pay a bounty to the non-pirate. If you don't have it on you, the game will take it out of your bank. If you don't have the money in the bank, either, it will start vendoring the pirate's items to raise the money and use that to pay the bounty.
Challenging, rewarding, perhaps, but fun, nah.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
What do you mean? Pirates have lots of fun. Haven't you ever watched One Piece?
They should however take my word for it, as I played the game.
Even so, my explanation about how it's nearly impossible to catch someone who is paying attention only applies if your prey is paying attention. Some of the long haul routes can take about an hour of real life time to get from your origin to your destination. Most of the time, not very much happens. You sail in a straight line for several minutes, then turn by this amount when you get to here. Then another ten minutes in a straight line, then turn again. And so forth.
Who has time to constantly watch the screen while doing that on the off chance that a pirate might show up? And it's really not that hard to catch someone who is mostly AFK but just checking their screen every few minutes. Or better yet, botters who aren't checking their screen at all. The botters largely figure that their cargo will get raided by pirates now and then, but most of the time, it will get through and they'll be fine. Think of it as non-consensual PVP where you can attack players who are botting and loot their cargo and gear. That can be very lucrative if you can find them in the northern Atlantic, not far from the European ports where they intended to sell their cargo.
And I really think the people that champion these kinds of idea do not get this. When it comes to these kinds of PvP games, where the idea is have a whole segment of the player base that is "bad" or "evil" the game takes on a predator/prey ecosystem, where you have these self styled aggressive players that want to prey upon the weak PvE players.
The thing is, no one wants to play a game where they are "Prey" for other players. No one wants to be someone else's entertainment, especially at their own expense.
This is a very "Mic drop/End of Discussion" kind of situation, there is no "Well if we.
As such, anyone that is not looking to kill another player, anyone not looking for that PvP component in their game, will not be inclined to play these games.
And there is nothing that anyone will do, to change that.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I think it's a great PvP game, better because it has the things that keep it from just being a wide open gank fest.
It has RP directed play through the Faction rewards system.
I hope you can create a huge world, because the larger the Faction areas are, the better the game will be. With lots of dungeons and ruins, and lots of critters and ancient mysteries to add needed spice.
I hope you keep the deities toned down to, basically, Event status. Demigods are a different thing, though.
You need a great economy too.
I think this can be a great game for all but the pure PvE players. Maybe even some of them, if they want a truly worldly RP experience.
I'm wishing you luck. If you can get the funds to make it great, I'll definitely be there.
Once upon a time....
I mean anyone with any self respect, or even basic common sense by now would have just accepted they misspoke and really don't know about a game, it's mechanics, or how it worked, but here you are, just digging your heels into your own ignorance screaming how you must be right, even after you admit you have never played the game and no working idea about the game itself.
I can't .. I can't even think how to respond to that. I mean I can't insult you more then you have insulted yourself, and no logic would work against that kind of raging ignorance.
So.. Umm yah.. as always.. feel free to not respond to me in the future.
The thing is, when people talk about putting in PvP and then trying to talk about ways to stop PvP, that is like saying "lets put in crafting, but try to think of find ways to punish people for crafting"
"Lets put in raids, but we need to find ways to punish people if they raid"
In the end, If it sounds stupid with other game modes, it's stupid. if you put in PvP, it should fit into the game as well as any other game mode. PvP should fit into the game as well as the crafting system does, or the Raids, or the Dungeons, or anything and everything else in the game, the PvP needs to fit.
If you as a developer have to try to think of ways to punish people for playing a game mode you gave them to play with, or stop them from playing it, then whatever it is, no matter what it is, you put it in wrong.
That is my feels on the matter, if you can explain a fault in that logic, I am willing to hear it.
With PvP, it negatively affects other players, and you have to keep it in it's place, and not rampantly overrunning the game and all it's players.
Once upon a time....
First you need to decide if you want to allow open world free for all PVP. If you do then just accept greifing as a fact. If not, then...
If you are adding in features just to deter people from something like griefing just so you can have the option in "open world" for realisms sake then you are wasting massive amounts of resources and still leaving gaps that people can and will exploit to their advantage. There are no advantages, other than "realism", to providing the option to murder someone else at any location in your game if you are creating a seemingly endless array of consequences just to deter them from doing it in the first place.
It is very important to understand that this is not real life. There is no morality and you cannot invoke any penalty big enough to fully deter the player from performing these negative actions. If you want to limit or prevent griefing then you simply cannot allow it.
Add in laws that players must follow in certain areas that don't allow them to attack others. Have dedicated areas, times, reasons, for people to attack others; E.G. Faction v Faction areas, PVE only areas, PVP only areas, etc that restrict, not limit, but completely restrict players to following these exact rules.
When a player is inside the pvp allowed areas they are fair game for anyone. Then you can still have your alignments, your faction standings or whatever you want to deter the actions, but leaving it entirely up to the players if they want to
Any other stupid questions idiot?
PvP players accept the unfairness, thrive on it, and figure out how to overcome it. That is what "Player VS Player" means.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
"You're playing wrong and enjoying the wrong things so I will design a game to force you to play properly."
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo