Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Will it be full open-world PVP?
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
Hopefully there is a stronger application of PVP then in EQ. I know many PVE players don't want anything to do with it, but if there were systems in place, they might actually learn to love it like us PVPers do.
Full loot won't happen and is not fun for most. But a death here or there isn't going to destroy the game, I always think of it as if I died fighting a mob, I just accept it and go back to whatever I was doing. Running around without any chance of dying is not too exciting for me.
To make it a bit safer, have city guards kill players that attack others or toss them in jail for X amount of time. Even fine them or debuff them so that they have something to reflect on their evil actions. Debuffs like no merchants will trade with them.
Some sort of bounty system would be great. Player driven and NPC as well. Pay a guard to pass on to his pals that the next time big bad pvper comes to town, they capture him.
Have personal houses in safe areas or only attackable while your online, guards available here as well. Guild buildings/towns in more PVPish areas but come with great rewards that make it worth the risk.
Have pvp hot spots to help the PVPers find each other and add in NPCs/Mobs with high rewarding quests/drops to encourage everyone to take a risk.
There are always good players willing to fight the evil players. I remember in the early days of DAoC on the FFA servers where an "evil" guild would come to a zone and start wiping everyone at camp sites and another "good" guild would come in and handle them. Was always a lot of fun, even if I had to die in the process. It brings more depth to the community and in turn fun.
To prevent everyone from paying off the guards to hunt down people we don't like, maybe we have to be killed in cold blood without fighting back for the system to accept our bounty. So I couldn't try to kill someone, lose, and then try to get the guards to finish the job.
There needs to be rewards/penalties in place that makes it worth killing someone but at the same time, not ganking every person in sight.
Like if player X kills player Y who is engaged with a mob, they get some sort of debuff while receiving a little reward, but if player Z kills X, he's given a buff and rewarded very well for ridding the area of the bad guy.
We could earn special titles and achievements for doing good/evil as well, letting others know who we are before grouping, trading, helping, killing etc. If you dislike gankers, you could deny them crafting services for example or if one good guy saw another being attacked he could help, but if it was a guy with a bad rep, just let him die.
This can really add to RP and getting people into their characters and the type of persona they want to have. Much more depth then everyone getting along all happily all the time (minus all the jerks in chat ranting about whatever).
While I doubt EQN will be full open-world PVP, I hope there are elements incorporated and different server rulesets. Just wish PVE players would get over the fear/stigma of PVP and dying to others.
Your basically talking about a PvP system setup similar to the way things were back in the early Ultima Online days. I could enjoy a system like that. After so many PK's a player could not go into town for anything without getting placed in jail or being killed by guards depending on how much murder they committed. Sounds like a way to prevent players from running around in groups killing everyone that looked like easy prey.
I'm guessing they will have PVP and PVE servers like most MMOs. Since they will want to make the game appeal to every body.
"Sandbox" does not mean the game has to have free for all ganking. It just means you make your own story and do (almost) what you want to progress.
I've been gaming for so long I forget what game had which features. I believe EQ2 had a minor alignment system and EQ's was more faction based (been a long while).
Going way back to D&D and later to a MUD I played, I hope they allow some sort of detailed alignment system.
This is just copied from the MUD's site:
I'm pleased to see so many folks coming up with ideas for how open-world PVP could work and be fun without driving players away. Though I'd like the PVP justice system to be fairly simple without a lot of different conditions and artificial controls.
The alignment system of Ultima Online was pretty cool. But I wonder if it would be as much of a deterrent as we think. I'm expecting EverQuest Next to have a ton of player-made cities with all of the conveniences of the dev-created ones. So as a murderer, I might be fine as long as I find a city where murderers are tolerated.
I think it would be important for murderers to face greater risks than law-abiding citizens but am not sure how. It may hinge on having a few dev-made cities with strong guard protection and some conveniences you can't get elsewhere.
If we do get open-world PVP, I want to see the zone where you can build housing outside the dev-created cities. I want there to be that element of risk that makes true sandboxes so compelling.
Clarification on what I meant by "open-world PVP".
You can attack anyone, anywhere. There may be different obstacles and consequences for attacking people in different parts of the world, but there is no artificial game mechanic preventing you from doing it because that clashes with the spirit of a sandbox game.
We should also be able to destroy any player-made buildings. That seems important and heavily implied by SOE. "You'll be able to destroy vast portions of the world--almost all of it." (paraphrasing.) If this includes destroying player-made parts of the world, it IS open-world PVP. The only thing that's missing is the ability to kill the player who is trying to tear down my tower.
I hadn't thought of full loot. I would like it and think it fits with sandbox, but admit it raises the stakes in PVP to the point where the fun factor may take a hit.
Saying PvP kills MMOs is pretty silly. I could easily say MMOs without PvP suck, and always have.
Obviously EQ pvp didn't kill the game, because they went from 1 to 4 PvP servers (rz, sz, tz, vz)
EQ PvP was amazing in so many ways, its a shame you didn't try it out. To this day, I haven't played another "PvP MMO" that I enjoyed as much as EQ on Rallos Zek. It wasn't full loot, only 1 item + coin, but the EQ system was so perfect for the addition of pvp. There were factions built into the storyline, so it was perfect for Roleplay.
EQ really became sort of a sandpark type of game with the addition of PvP, because it allowed for so much other than just pve progression. Certain "evil guilds" would work out of areas like innothule swamp, and attempt to gank players coming and going from Guk. It was like their life's purpose. Other pk guilds would form raids on dungeons. It was a blast, because it made going into evil territory and dungeons all the more dangerous and fun.
It also established a system of order with real diplomacy and justice that hasn't existed in any other game I've played (including EQ PvE servers). Anyone who random PKd was had a reputation as such, and they were never allowed in civilized guilds. They were ostracized, and as long as they were playing that character, they almost never had a chance to join the raiding guilds or alliances. Inviting a player that was known for being an RPK would cause other guilds to war you, often until that player was removed from the guild. Not only that, but the system of order pvp established also prevented a lot of people, especially those in reputable guilds, from doing shady things like ninja-looting and kill stealing. Those were horrible issues on PvE servers, that you had no way of resolving, but the PVP servers did.
The last reason PvP was so important, especially in a game like Everquest, was to help resolve all the numerous contested content issues. I saw early on, that PvE on Tarew Marr was going to be a horrible cockblock. Our rival guilds would show up at the portal to plane of fear while we were gathering, and it pretty much shut down our chance for raiding that weekend. Often other guilds would be shady and try to sneak past you during raids, and GMs would come in with partial knowledge of situations and make horrible biased decisions. After many such incidents, I decided I'd go to Rallos zek where we could just solve the problems ourselves. THAT is what made pvp servers so great, because players couldn't act like jerks without repercussions... and it sucked dying in Everquest, especially on pvp servers with people standing on your bind point waiting to kill you again.
www.daneslaw.com
@GamerKurisu
Awaiting Darkfall Unholy Wars
Well, planetside 2 doesn't have one server.
They will need multiple servers for sure, even if its only a few. Most likely, they will have a more hardcore pvp server, as I don't see them alienating either crowd.
Special thanks to ice-vortex for making me realize something... in yellow below:
Battlegrounds in WoW are PVP areas. He's saying this is part of what keeps people engaged between expansions - "but imagine the entire wrold as part of the interaction." In other words, the whole world will essentially be a battleground where players can create and destroy content.
Even assuming they can fit everyone on the same server, historically the EQ franchise has had servers with different rules. So they may have a PvE, FFA PvP, Team PvP, and a RP mega server. The RP server may take a hit, depending on the tools in the game, but I think at minimum their will be a PvP server and a PvE server. I am not with the camp that SoE will launch the game being FFA PvP for all.
OK I imagined it, I may not sleep tonight but I imagined it. Sounds like the way to destroy a good IP and ruin the franchise forever.
How long will it take to destroy something? How long to gather the resources and build it? I am betting the ratio of time will be 1:30 or more. The end result, a smoldering ruin as the PvE players leave the game and head for something more fun.
Why this thread and why can't people let it die well before it reaches 7-8 pages?
We have no idea really about the PvP....do we?
it is a myth that the most success can be had simply by catering to the playstyle of the largest group of people.
with any product really.
i see a lot of people who don't seem to understand this.
From another thread:
Since we expect that SOE are launching Everquest using their "Free to Play your Way" model this seems relevant to me.
Interesting read and it support my theory about PvPers and MMOs (it's pretty much what the guy says actually). As for Everquest Next, it will be F2P, that's like the only thing confirmed about the game.
What if there is nothing more fun? What if all of the debates and design iterations SOE went through to come up with the "holy grail" MMO paid off? And what if PVP is one of the pillars Georgeson referred to at PAX East 2013?
What if this game is SO good, in so many ways, that it buries the competition - but has a open world FFA or forced faction-based PVP?
I noticed this on IGN today...
Virtual Selection: The Rise of the Survival Game
How games about being vulnerable became the fittest genre of them all.
http://ca.ign.com/articles/2013/07/05/virtual-selection-the-rise-of-the-survival-game
It's an interesting read... suggests PVP could become more and more in-demand in MMOs.