History of PVP
|
Ragnak Posted Apr 5, 2011, 7:58 am |
I've seen it mention numerous times throughout many of the PVP threads and wanted to better understand something of the history of how PVP evolved in Dark-wind.
So, PVP was widespread throughout all of the area with only SS being deemed a safe spot. Can anyone relay the background as to why this was originally curtailed back to just being done Shanty. Is there anyone who may have been on the RC at the time, and if it was consulted, who can point out the gyst of why the change took place. |
||||
|
*Tinker* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:14 am |
I'll give it a shot, not sure dates are correct, this is all from memory, and a bad one :P
1) About 3+years ago, we had open PvP everywhere a) accidental encounters in SS b) intercepting squads on arrival 2) September 2008, Darthspanky a Marshal got pissed at a player and murdered him on a group scout he was also partaking in (on the same team). Same team targeting was removed 3)Dec 2008, a new player named Shark, started PvPing dirty in town events redding lot's of players, and intercepting people in SS a) SS deemed a PvP safe zone to protect new players, b) and incentives to be proper in town events put in place, like the DRM that sabotage your car if you are shooting on resigned cars, c) and implementation of town factions that also target you if they hate you. 4) November 2009, (Thanks Fleau) a) Pvp flag system, b) and later camp get a tweak to encourage PvP, c) Shanty opened up as an experiment in open PvP like it was before (no flag). d) impossible to intercept arrival squads e) spy on squad (1 gate at a time) 5) recently SCL, Squad Combat PvP League 6) Today, Open PvP south of GW 2 week trial |
||||
|
fleau Posted Apr 5, 2011, 10:08 am |
sorry, i said i was leaving the pvp section of the forum, but i can't resist.
It was november 2009
Does it was a counterbalance of e) spy on squads ? |
||||
|
*Longo* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 1:16 pm |
I believe SS was Pvp free, unless you were a pirate player and had a bounty. Then you could be targeted. |
||||
|
*goat starer* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 1:49 pm |
that's pretty much correct... most of the vets here grew up with completely open PVP without any problems. Shark was being dealt with effectively by the community. But a small (and i mean small) group of people ruined the game for everyone else. We have lost far more players because of the loss of PVP than we lost because of unwanted PVP. |
||||
|
JS Posted Apr 5, 2011, 2:05 pm |
Outstanding, then we should see a big increase, I hope it's true. Time will tell. | ||||
|
Kornkob The Dude Posted Apr 5, 2011, 2:38 pm |
So is this live yet or is it still on the horizon? | ||||
|
Ragnak Posted Apr 5, 2011, 3:35 pm |
Excellent. Thanks guys on the background!
Rags |
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 5, 2011, 3:40 pm |
Not quite yet. Next day or so is the recent word. |
||||
|
*Ninesticks* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 7:35 pm |
Slight correction, Darth didn't teamkill someone he paid another player a huge amount (1 million) in those days to tk the newer guy. Other player went out on scout with newer guy and shot him to pieces before driving off and leaving him to the AI.
There was lots of issues revolving around that event beyond the simple teamkilling. Darth being a marshal, the tker being a marshal, gloating in the lobby etc. |
||||
|
Kornkob The Dude Posted Apr 5, 2011, 7:45 pm |
Wow-- that's an even bigger dick move than a simple TK. | ||||
|
*goat starer* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 8:21 pm |
I miss darth |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 5, 2011, 8:36 pm |
One thing to remember is Darth did those things because he was bored. He was bored because there WAS no PvP, he tried to "create" PvP.
There is a big difference between him and Shark. I myself am fast finding myself in the "Darth" zone. Very frustrated, the end game of this IS PvP(and there are many forms of this - economic/political/and actual combat), you will all see someday and it will be too late. |
||||
|
Kornkob The Dude Posted Apr 5, 2011, 8:50 pm |
That's what griefers do--- they get bored with the game and decide to screw with people. |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:20 pm |
Or try to make the game better if they can. Keep in mind there are *many* ways to screw with people in this game. It was build from the ground up with PvP in mind. |
||||
|
Kornkob The Dude Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:22 pm |
I would argue that 'try and make it better if they can' is the opposite of griefing. | ||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:35 pm |
Isn't that what Joel is saying? | ||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:43 pm |
Well I would agree, but ALL of us pro PvP are pretty much lumped together here.
None the less , the temptation to fall to darkness is very tempting when you are on your last dregs in a game. Sam is one person - he does not really have time to satifiy the end game with content(though I know he DOES have interesting plans for that and it is admirable). A stable, fair(yes fair is perfectly alright with me), system of meaningful competition with camps that want to participate is all we Pro-PvP end game content people want. BL being open to PvP is part of that. I'm sorry we can't agree about that, but you are simply wrong. People can play in their own imaginary sandbox except, in BL FL and shanty. Pure PvE if they like. |
||||
|
Kornkob The Dude Posted Apr 5, 2011, 9:56 pm |
What is it that I'm wrong about? At this stage of the conversation what I thought we were talking about was Darth's behavior. And based on PT's post it looks like we were somewhat in agreement (and I misunderstood you).
(and actually I think that this PvP trial is probably a good thing--- is it possible you have me confused with someone else?) |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 5, 2011, 10:02 pm |
maybe I did. this trial is a good thing. | ||||
|
d0dger Posted Apr 5, 2011, 10:23 pm |
Item 3 on Tinkers list, sections b and c (in town event and faction consequences to post resign firing) happened much later then listed, but is otherwise correct.
Chronologically they happened sometime in 2010, after I started playing, and I believe after all the items listed in item #4. I know most/all of those were already in place when I started playing in Jan 2010. However section a) (SS is PVP free) was already in place when I started playing. |
||||
|
*sam* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 10:48 pm |
I just wanted to clarify two things...
1. Pushing forward a pro-pvp agenda is not anything to do with my "vision for the game". When I started work on the game, nearly 6 years ago, I envisioned lots of pvp. I have come a long way since then, and my approach for a long time has been to let the game develop according to how the community itself wants it to go. Maybe that's an ineffectual way to run things, but it's largely how it has been done. I have no "grand vision" that forces anything in a particular direction. My "grand vision" was merely to have a perma-death post-apocalyptic car wars mmo. 2. I really find it hard to believe that we have many (if any) griefers here. I know this is what anti-pvp people think is motivating this. Apart from Shark, and to a lesser extent Darth when he lost his cool, I don't recall any griefing whatsoever. I think people want pvp here not to grief those who don't want to do it, but rather to have a more dangerous world where it feels like a post-apocalypse rather than a country club. And they want to get involved in feuds with their enemies in such a way that it might actually be possible to catch them sometimes. They don't intend to bully other players - we're a more grown-up comunity than that. |
||||
|
*Longo* Posted Apr 5, 2011, 11:01 pm |
Just want to throw in an opinion here - I disagree that the end game of DW is PvP. I think that the end game lacks alot of things which make vets bored, but the answer isnt necessarily Pvp. Look at Latte - he got bored and started most of his gang over as an end game. He generated 50 million dollars to "buy" a church in SS. He isnt a Pvp player and still scouts alot and enjoys the game.
I think more end game can/should be developed. Im sure any new events/maps/ideas will more than keep the vets happy. Sure, there are some vets who want Pvp none the less, which is cool. But its not "The Endgame of DW." |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 5, 2011, 11:02 pm |
I spoke to you on this subject already but I just want to expound a couple points here- how is it any less of a Sunday drive when you are ambushing a player who doesn't want to PvP in PvP? Why would he be any more dangerous than somebody that actually _wants_ to PvP? Logic would suggest that a more capable PvP opponent would be the one ready for it and willing. If the victim felt confident with his or her PvP skills, he or she would have the PvP flag on.
So why would a PvP player want to attack a less prepared player? How will it start a feud if a less skilled player with a little bit of good equipment gets jumped in PvP and pretty much wiped out? He is in no position to retaliate, and even if he did, the other player is a better player and/or has a better gang. If they had a good enough gang to survive the losses and could hope to retaliate, they would have their PvP flag on. So why would a PvP player want to attack a less prepared player with no hope of getting him back? I'll let you answer that question. But there's a reason why non PvP players have the flag turned off. They either can't afford the losses, aren't that good of a player (casual), or don't want to be forced to play with somebody they don't want to play with. |
||||
|
*sam* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 12:01 am |
I know you're trying to be clever and pose a rhetorical question here, to which the only answer is that they're griefers. I know these players and they're not griefers. Can some of the pro-pvpers please answer this simple question: why do you want pvp if not simply so you can beat up on weak opposition? |
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 6, 2011, 12:14 am |
It's a rush the likes of which PvE never is. |
||||
|
*Tinker* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 12:21 am |
Because it's fun?
Challenging? Use your wits, don't have to pvp with your best people just to dominate others for dominating's sake.
and that |
||||
|
John Abaddon Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:03 am |
Let me put it very succinctly - when you all get around to tallying the people that left the game because they were forced into open PvP when they never wanted it, please make sure someone adds a vote for me. 
Been playing this game for almost a year...probably would have played longer if BL wasn't going to be nuked. I'm done with this game because of this tiresome B.S.... Cya all. |
||||
|
*Bastille* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:03 am |
So you are going to leave without anything actually happening? Isn't your over reaction jumping the gun a bit.
I hunt BL all the time, I can group scout there and do whatever I like, I have my flag off. People here respect my game play (well at least I think so) so I have nothing to worry about. For you to throw your arms in the air and walk out because you didn't get your lollies is a bit of a joke and one I find rather offensive to the community. If you have your flag off, and don't push any ones buttons in the game, Im sure no one will touch you in the PvP open towns. If you happen to shoot someone in a DR or take someones loot, then you might get hit in these towns even if you have your flag off. If you ask for trouble, you will find trouble regardless of your flag, if you stay cool, you'll always be cool, or at least thats how I see it, and I really don't think there is anything for anyone to worry about. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:08 am |
removed by marshal
personal attacks |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:08 am |
Bastiel- how about if you post in the forums with your ideas or suggestions? Does that make you fair game, too? I'm not challenging you directly or anything, you seem a fair guy- I'm more doubling up on my previous point about griefers finding an excuse to grief.
And I do really, seriously beg anybody who is pro PvP to tell my why you want to force people who don't want to PvP with you to do so- please at least answer that! Thank you! |
||||
|
*Bastille* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:11 am |
I make some wild and crazy suggestions at times. It has found me some fun on the odd occasion. I even chucked a dummy spit about skins of all things once, never effected me in game at all.
If I talk myself up unjustified I may find myself getting snogged up for no apparent reason. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 1:14 am |
I can only speak from my experience. Because I gave some good arguments, back then, for keeping the PvP optional in the game, Joel called me a "forum warrior" and since he couldn't PvP me in Somerset, he sent a scad of bounty hunters at me. I don't really feel like I deserved it, and as I said before, had he been able to force me into PvP, he would have, for totally personal and totally inappropriate reasons. | ||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 2:06 am |
You jump to conclusions. I do not recall setting bounty hunters upon you (they are useless - I have used them in the past and they never do anything worthwhile). So I might have. Checking my ####list - your name IS there. I have written down "called me nasty names in a deathrace". So If I called them on you - that was probably the reason. In any case I have passed on the few opportunities to join your FL glad events ( I recall one a couple months ago) and shoot your gangers. Because , well you aren't really worth that effort and I couldn't exactly remember why you annoyed me in that deathrace (you are doing a good job of annoying me here though - maybe you did piss me off in the forums and I forgot, i CAN happen I am Human). To answer this question (which is a good one): Can some of the pro-pvpers please answer this simple question: why do you want pvp if not simply so you can beat up on weak opposition? Let's create a word for this. Let's call it "Quan" "Immersion" "fantasy". That's why we all play these stupid fking games. Mine is not satisfied going out on scouts with my favorite people (and they will tell you I don't do that enough and it is true, but I will improve on that). Mine is only satisfied with all of us connected to the world together and being able to interact positively and more importantly negatively. It's that negative that brings out all the exciting stuff. You see, let's say I want to waste my time making your life hell Triad, ya because [insulting language removed by Sam]...lets say that since you think that. I agree that's a bad reason for vendetta, it's not good role playing , but sure it could happen. Then your friends don't like me right, maybe others don't like why I've got the hate on for you and things escalate until I go "wow that turd was totally not worth all this collateral damage, maybe I should just let some B.S on the forum slide." You know that, instead of we just sit on the forum and make the real wars here and get NO enjoyment out of it (though I will admit I'm hitting my stride, I've got nothing more to lose really). A better more realistic example and particular to this latest BL open PvP issue is brought up by Ninesticks. PvE players (certain ones - some of them might even be flagged and PvP open players), CULL ALL the NPCs to dogmeat on Friday after the reset. No good lewts for anyone else. This DOES piss people off. They might ask nicely - hey man do you have to scout like 15 times in a row in BL and killed everything...and the guy replies "STFU". Well you get my point that he might say "Sorry I will spread my scouts a bit more didn't think anyone minded". As I say, Barbarism creates politeness better than civilization any day. We are supposed to be in a fairly barbaric world - particularly south of Gateway and sure excluding sars/texan, why not. BL is the political capital of Evan and will be a key place as more stuff is added to Camp "interaction". (Sam can explain is that is still in the works or not). I can go on and on with examples of my version of the MMO experience. YES IT DOES require other people to have to DEAL WITH ME OMG what a crime in a social game right? I know! You guys can be your usual shutin or country club playing selfs in all those other towns(SS,ELMS,GATEWAY,TEXAN,SARS - FORFKSAKE it used to JUST BE SS) and I almost guarantee by the time you can safely scout in BL BY YOURSELF(think about how hard it is to hit a group scout - it is trust me not matter how bad you want it), you will not worry too much about it with open PvP, unless you act like a total prick to multiple people. |
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 6, 2011, 2:20 am |
Simply put, the most interesting and immersive experiences in this game are those that put players at odds with player. Hell, we're experiencing it right now in the forums, how many eyes are glued to this matter on both sides of the aisle?
When something is up at stake and another human is on the other side of the line, the matter becomes MUCH more interesting. If you can't feel that then you should go back to Mario Brothers, there's nothing to see, here. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 2:51 am |
Excellent, see, this is some of the information I wanted hear, at least we're getting down to the honest answer. It still doesn't answer part of my question, though- is it really more exciting to beat up my crappy little gang that I _know_ would suck in PvP? I guess I might be a little less predictable than the AI, but I still have trouble against the AI, so I don't see what you'd gain by PvPing _me_.
Onto this list of yours, Joel, I don't recall calling you a name in a Deathrace- I don't bloviate or toot my own horn in Deathraces, in fact, I'm usually one of those "carebears" that truces with all the human players. So you might be mistaken there- unless, I suppose, you did something underhanded like shooting gangers that had resigned and I called you a "jerk" or something from it. Either way, you _did_ bounty me back then, I recall it very clearly since it does _tell_ you who sends the bounties after you're done with them, so there's that. And believe me, you are one of the reasons I almost never join Gladiator events, jerkfaces that team kill. Why do I call it team kill? Because when all the creatures die, it says "Human Players Win"- that tells me the humans are one team, the creatures another. If that wasn't the case, why does the event end when there are no creatures left? Shouldn't it really end, then, when the last man is standing, if you are suggesting that it's free-for-all, I mean. Go ahead, argue that point, too. I'm glad that you are showing just _why_ I don't want to play with you- "bounty hunters are useless"- they didn't hurt me enough, or that you'd backstab me unawares in a gladiator event. _That_ is why I don't want to play with other people. Period. Guys like you. Somewhere else somebody mentioned that PvE as it was could just as easily be a single-player game, and that was meant to be an insult. Well the truth of the matter is that if this _were_ available as single-player game, or better yet, a game that can be played coop but privately on your own server, I would totally do that in a heart beat. I would lay my money right down and unsubscribe from the MMO part immediately. For the most part, I hate having to play with other people and hate MMOs because of that. So that's where I'm coming from. Now it sounds like one of the reasons people want PvP is because somebody is exploiting when the gang fame or whatever resets on Friday- now maybe _that_ is where this fix should start. Just like people screwing the markets by buying everything up as soon as it gets there, maybe the timing on the reset of gang fame needs to be fixed so that you could roll decent loot and/or a scary gang at any time in BadLands without people farming up the good stuff. PvPing them doesn't fix that, anyway, so maybe Sam needs to look there, in my opinion. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:03 am |
Joel-
Something else I just thought of- you mentioned that for you part of the thrill is interacting negatively with people. I call that "griefing" if I don't agree to it. And in your fanciful example where you make my life hell by attacking my gang, your conclusion is false- you suggest that you'd whup on me, which I don't argue with, but then you suggest that my friends would whup on you in return, making you think that maybe it wasn't worth it. Well, I hate to put it this way, but I don't think my friends would stand a chance against you, either- you would whup them, too. So now what's my recourse? So there's the flaw with that argument. If you aren't good at PvP, you have no recourse against those that are. At least in the mythical world of fully open PvP. |
||||
|
*Longo* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:13 am |
On a scale of 1-10, how is your 'Quan" this evening?
|
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:28 am |
PvP in this game is a MULTITUDE of things. People are focusing on their precious scouts and time being wasted. This is a significant but small part to it. Some other things that are basically PvP (as defined by ME competition and reactionary forces between players). No particular order 1. Selling for lower prices than someone else. 2. Buying stuff then putting it up at higher prices. 3. Market hoging/sniping 4. Culling NPCs before others can 5. Making a ton of money to by a sponsorship to make another ton of money to sell even more rare stuff to make another ton of money till everyone is in AWE. 6. Slaying people red in town events- to simple racing. 7. Intercepting squads 8. Attacking open PvP camps (or mutual fighting no open PvP camps - but it doesn't happen) 9. Letting a team mate on a group scout be closer to the enemy so he gets roasted instead of you. 10. Joining any town event and not truceing. 11. Auctioning items for cheaper than a current running auction. 12 Playing stink bid games at auction/reserve bids etc etc. 13. Dismembering another players reputation in the lobby or on forums (yes this is not "allowed" but still done, none-the-less). 14. Joining SCL 15. Creating an event for people to join for prizes and then killing them gleefully in that event. 16. Calling bounty hunters on someone(I mean that is probably what should get the bitching). 17. Joining someone's camp then turncoating on them sabotaging gangers and CR and MR and whatever you can. 18. 19.20.21 a multitude more if I care to stay up all night. So you see it is a complete ANATHEMA to me why intercepting these precious scout is SO HEINOUS a CRIME to engage in, when all these things we willingly or un-willingly have in this game. Perhaps it is, whackamole addicts are the worst on the planet. To answer your question Triad, how you can beat me. I WILL Answer it AFTER BL/FL are perm open PvP intercepts. Not before. I have bargained this. You will have at least my knowledge of all things PEEVEEPEE. Gangers you will see, are very secondary and equipment is nearly balanced. |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:29 am |
You just about got me in Paintball that was impressive. didn't see that coming. Edit: 6 i guess, I like them ped combat leagues. |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:37 am |
WHOOPS I missed this. I can't believe I wasted about 40min typing responses to you. Have a nice life sir. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:40 am |
I appreciate the time that went into all those numbered items Joel. Only one thing wrong with all of them, except for your siccing Bounty Hunters on people and, I suppose, people culling all the good NPC (which is, again, where I suggest the problem might lay).
I don't have to agree to _any_ of these 20 or so items and they can't be forced on me. I don't have to buy 1 thing on the Player Market if I don't want to. I don't have to group with anybody if I don't want to. I don't have to join anyone's event. I don't have to join SCL. I don't have to own a camp or let anyone join a camp I do own. But, now, if I want to go to Badlands, I _do_ have to submit to PvP. |
||||
|
Thin Izzy Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:43 am |
Frankly, this insistence on pushing people into PvP is at best shortsighted IMHO. Let me put this into perspective.
I, for one, am not interested in being stuffed into a "PvE ghetto", or having the additional inconvenience of being randomly forced into combat encounters against players I have no realistic hope of competing with tactically or statistically (in terms of in-game funds. equipment, and especially ganger training) should I choose to scout south of GW. And yes, I'm aware one can truce out (for a fee) - however, extortion (even with a token fee) is still extortion. Some of us just want to quietly do our own thing, y'know? Why is the casual PvE'er "not good enough for Badlands" (as someone put it in another thread) because they're not PvP'ing? Why is it that suddenly the casual gamer is handed a arbitrary disincentive to reside/scout in the lower half of the game map? With regards to PvP in general: I've already been there, seen that - in games both with and without the lossiness, and not all of us want to have to deal with sore winners, sore losers, dueling egoes, and those who get their jollies at the expense of the unwilling in general. While I'm reasonably sure that the majority of DW players don't grief or fall into the aforementioned behaviors (although it doesn't hurt to be proud of winning so long as one isn't an ass about it), open PvP has too much of an unfortunate tendancy to attract the badly behaved. Seriously - it's been my observation that if a system can be abused, it will be, by someone, eventually. That's the sad part of the whole thing, really. You (personally) may be honorable, but that's no guarantee against whoever else may come down the pipe. And all this doesn't even consider the time investment it takes to replace veteran gangers and/or equipment - especially when one plays casually. The "hardcore gamer" mindset is not practical (and/or desirable) for everyone. Your mileage (and that of others) may of course vary. 
Needless to say, I'm against forced PvP participation on principle; this recent change in its own way is just that. Nothing personal, Sam, but don't count on my sub. |
||||
|
*Bastille* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:47 am |
{wow, youi guys are quick, theres like 5 responses in the time it took me to think mine up, lol}
I think the PvP open in BL is a great way to deal with this, and kinda fits in to what I say above and most importantly, emersion. If you rub people up the wrong way, you have a chance of getting snogged now. So if you are making masses of profit and making it hard for other players to do the same without blowing out market prices, you can be intercepted. The worst result being you have to truce out and hand over some of that profit. Perfect, system works. If you are killing a gang which happens to belong to a friendly faction to a player, they can now do something about it. At the same rate, if you just want to PvE, I'm sure you'll be able to do it all day keeping in mind all that has been discused in this thread. Markets; Targets; non wilderness PvP interaction etc, braggin in the lobby (you're making nose about your actions, thats asking to be a target). Think of the pro PvP players here like they are the big wigs of that faction, and something to be feared, greatly. Even if PvP never happens its done its job in my mind and added some gritty flavour, make me need to sneak around dangerous areas to avoid the enemy. A little off topic this next bit, but I think some of it is relevant in light of market discussion and other loopholes, including the recetly debated, fun or exploit discussions. Games shouldn't be played by their mechanics or flaws in such. Emersion is the MOST important part of it. As Joel stated, its why we are here. The only thing stopping this in any game is player choice. It can never be stopped through changes in game mechanics, maybe refocused. I vary my attacks in PvE, not only to eliviate the stress on the town, but because I think about WHY my gang is going out everytime they do (ok, almost. Sometimes I just want to drive a new toy or gain rep in that town or similar) I know of many flaws in most games I play, and I chose NOT to break the game for myself by cheating the system. I could start up a D&D game with all skills and spells and level 1 million character, or.. I could chose to play the actual game. |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:48 am |
It's pretty simple Thin Izzy. You get a little nervous when you click that scout or travel button in BL/FL/Shanty and almost every time, that's all you get. Even if the evil Joel Autobahn hates your guts. | ||||
|
Jake Nikodemus Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:53 am |
I don't want to play with the likes of Joel either. He seems kinda crazy.
-Jake |
||||
|
Joel Autobaun Posted Apr 6, 2011, 3:59 am |
Certifiable. | ||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:01 am |
Yes, it's quite stimulating knowing that my game and my immersion could be interrupted by some clown with an axe to grind and a gang way better than mine, that's why I play!
Not. I already get nervous enough if I end up spawning the Manhunters or am faced with 2 to 1 odds. Why can't that be enough? Why do I have to be forced to worry about you, too, and guys like you, Joel? I'd happily hand over my money every month if I could simply play with my little group of friends and work my way south over time without every having to worry about some clown jumping me. Heck I'd pay more for that option. As to you offer to show me how to beat you when PvP becomes permanent in Badlands, I expect you to honor your oath to walk away when it _doesn't_. |
||||
|
Jake Nikodemus Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:10 am |
Of course Joel is right about two things, peeps nabbing the good stuff as soon as it rols out, and the added thrill of knowing that you might get jumped, mebbe for a good reason, mebbe just to create chaos.
-Jake 
I think certified is the word you were looking for Joel, fully and completely, certified. |
||||
|
Jake Nikodemus Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:14 am |
Hey howabout a fee for having the PVP flag optional ? Maybe triad would pay 10 bux a month for fulltime pvp flag option? How many would follow suit?
Jake 
|
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:36 am |
I use to be very much in the anti-PvP/pro-PvE/pro-choice boat. Then I got bored.
I didn't have the best gang in Evan, not even close, but I had some good gangers and most of the end-game loot that I had hoped to one day find. Then I got bored. All of a sudden one day I quit playing. I was on the Rules Council. I had a camp (which I sold for a pittance as I could tell I was on my way out). Then I shut down the game and didn't play another event for 18 months. Then one day I decided to give it a go, again, and to start my gang over from near-scratch. The change, this time, was that I was going to be more interested in PvP. I thought back on the most fun time that I had and absolutely none of it was PvE. Now, I'm not saying that everyone is going to feel this way, but for God's sake give it a chance, or at least stop fretting about it before it even happens. You have no idea how little this really will effect you and your gang. Now I'm hooked on this game, again. . . unhealthily so. triad: You've asked what attacking your gang would give the "big guy." As I know them, nobody who is on the forums extolling the virtues of PvP is looking for a free lunch from attacking the "little guy." It doesn't take the best gangers or the best loot to win a PvP match. Just a bit of loot and a solid strategy. Oh, and to whomever it was that mentioned that they have a hard time against the AI and don't feel prepared to face another live person. Don't worry. I get whipped around by the AI now and again, too. In fact, I lost a match to them just today and my boys are walking home as we speak. Remember, the AI will always have a massive advantage on you in terms of Combat Rating. Another player never will. |
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:49 am |
If you decide not to do any of the items that Joel listed you're doing just that choosing not to do them. Staying out of Badlands is also choosing to stay out of Badlands. Try it, triad. In fact, I will personally replace anything you lose to wilderness PvP interceptions over the next two weeks. (Assuming I have whatever it is that you might lose). Just send me the event ID so that I can have a look. Hopefully I didn't just paint a big target on your back. 
|
||||
|
Thin Izzy Posted Apr 6, 2011, 4:52 am |
Meh. People shouldn't have to pay to play, then pay again for basic functionality they should have had to begin with. Kinda comes back to the whole extortion thing. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 5:20 am |
Sure but how's that fair to me when there are things that spawn in the Badlands that don't spawn anywhere else? If everybody is so hot on having a zone where there's both good loot _and_ PvP, maybe there needs to be a parallel for each "good" town, one that's PvP, one that's not. Heck, you could do that all the way across the map.
As far as the offer to repay any losses, I appreciate the offer. However on the odd chance I actually _did_ win a PvP fight with somebody, I'd feel like crap if I killed a good ganger or destroyed a rare weapon. That's just not the kind of person I am. And I'm not ready to go to Badlands by myself, especially now. I couldn't afford to lose any of the gangers I would have to send, nevermind the equipment. When I go to Badlands, it will be with my little group of like-minded players, and none of them want to go anywhere near Badlands right now. The only place I'd even consider it would be stuff like the Faster Pussycat race where everybody pretty much knows their ganger is dead anyway, so nobody sends anybody valuable, and the gear is basically provided. And truth be told, I would probably be a sore loser, too. I hate it when I have to watch my car getting shot to hell in a scout that's gone south, even that makes me want to leave. I'm very loss-averse, and as a casual player, that's for a reason. I don't have the time to put in that it would take to rebuild my gang in either of the towns I scout from, I just don't have that much spare time available to me. Heck the only reason I've been able to participate in the forums so much today is because I took the day off for work so as not to lose the vacation day. And Jake- yeah, I'd pay extra a month to never have to worry about being forced into PvP again. Heck yeah. Although I suppose it would cost even more to be isolated away from rule changes implemented solely because of PvP (like the recent paint nerf)... but I'll take what I can get. |
||||
|
The Paranoid Tourist Posted Apr 6, 2011, 5:29 am |
Here's the thing on that, so would I. Thankfully these are battles to the resignation, not the death. It's easy to keep your gangers alive in a PvP battle, and typically people are willing to deal with you for your loot back, should you lose. Every risk that you take during PvP is your own, seriously. In that sense, and the fact that mechanic and first aid skills are maxed after PvP encounters, PvP may actually be safer than PvE. Harder, maybe? Probably, but safer. |
||||
|
triad4evr Posted Apr 6, 2011, 6:07 am |
I'm sorry, but that sounds far too sugar-coated for me, especially with all this talk of the "thrill" of PvP. One breach is all it takes to kill a good ganger _and_ destroy a good weapon, it's happened to me dozens of times. When do you resign? The first time you're hit? The second? And what happens when you end up at the mercy of some a$$hat? Then what? I'm sorry, no, it's nowhere near worth it to me to have the possibility of having a squad I sent out to hunt pirates end up at the mercy of an a$$hole. Would be different if I sent out a squad specifically to PvP- at least then I'd have some control of the risk. But you can't control when some jerk intercepts you, can you? And if PvP is mandatory, how do you avoid them?
I'm sorry, you're persuasive, but there is nothing to gain for me. Nothing. But plenty to lose if half the game world becomes shut to me when PvP becomes mandatory south of Gateway. Plus, I, no doubt, would attract the jerks because I've been so vehemently against forced PvP. I would imagine there are people chomping at the bit to screw me over for being a "forum warrior". |
||||
|
*Rezeak* reecestensel@hotmail.co.uk Posted Apr 6, 2011, 7:41 am |
Here's my suggestion.
How about we save all the screaming and crying until after, or at least during the trial. Because right now you're throwing your toys out of the pram for nothing. Nothing has happened. You haven't been griefed, you haven't been PvPd. It's a trial for god's sake, and you're yelling like it's the coming of the second apocalypse. |
||||
|
Ragnak Posted Apr 6, 2011, 7:57 am |
Just one point for clarification.
PVP encounters are supposed to reward both players with faster skill training correct? Isnt there also a tie in with PVP combat and camp benefits such as fame increase or MR boosts? This can be of interest to a number of players. |
||||
|
*Tinker* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 8:41 am |
Under an ideal system, when monitoring squads going out, It would really be cool (because this community is like that 'friendly') that we see some sort of info about their skill level so you can decide what skill of gangers to send after them if you like. I know this sounds nuts, but thought I would fling that out... *grabs coffee* |
||||
|
*Bastille* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 8:45 am |
there was a 'pocky clipse? |
||||
|
*sam* Posted Apr 6, 2011, 9:13 am |
As per the forum discussions on this matter, we will be trialling fully-open pvp in the towns south of, but not including, Gateway. This trial will run from April 6th until April 20th.
From April 20th we will hold a well-advertised vote, open to all subscribers, deciding whether to keep this proposed change or not. Majority wins. Should the change be voted down, I will certainly be bringing forward the 'dominant camps' idea instead, in at attempt to offer profitable, consensual pvp to camps. I know this open-pvp towns idea is highly controversial, but please know that this is only a trial. I wouldn't be running the trial if it weren't for the fact that there are sizeable arguments on both sides. We can rant all we like about the effects it may or may not have, and whether it will add or detract from the game, but we won't know if we don't try. Anti-Pvpers, you may be pleasantly surprised. Pro-Pvpers, you may be negatively surprised. My only agenda is to make the game more fun. [locked] |