im not against pvp, im against not having a safe area and zone. i have also talked about a ‘‘blood count’’ system that worked as you said (both ideas are heavily influenced by SAO) which means you would get less penalty for killing a red player or maybe a ‘‘enforcer’’ standing increased, something like that.
but i do enjoy how everybody call people who kill other people on pvp servers for ‘‘dicks’’ and ‘‘trolls’’
should it be shown that they are dangerous and have killed before? hell yeah, should you allow people to destroy everything within those guilds beacons? no.
If they do add pvp it is most likely going to be specific worlds, normal worlds pvp wont be a thing and certainly not forced pvp, they know that its a big turnoff for some people, i think it was also in one of the surveys… so if you go to a pvp world you should also be prepared that you might get killed or that some guild are living only off killing people on that pvp world
only 7% wanted all worlds to be, 47% for pvp and pve worlds, 35% for pure pve and only opting into pvp (imagine wow)
so i think pvp is not going to be a main focus for them, and its certainly not going to be forced on people, i personally do hope we get pvp worlds though, because its kinda cool to live in an area like that, for RP players. and would add a bit more tension to the game and exploring
EDIT: Wow had toggle able pvp, meaning that on alliance ground a horde player cant attack you unless you attack him first, on neutral neither can iniate, and on horde ground, alliance players cannot attack you unless you attack them first. so if you died in a city in wow, then you either
I also quite like this idea, so player killer/PvP player could join together into PvP guilds since everyone is red anyway and those PvP guilds could fight it out. A really good way to seperate PvP and Pve players without limiting the game for any of those groups.
But this flagging concept has to be way more complex than you described.
For example what if i just like to do 5v5/FFA fights with my guildmates on weekends? This way i would also get quite a lot of player kills without harming anyone.
Or if 2 big PvE/traiding guilds join together to hunt down a bunch of “red players” or to get rid of a pesky “red beacon” near their trading route? (you mentioned something in this regard in your post but didnt quite explain it)
Still one of the best ideas I´ve read this far.
you suspiciously skipped the post i made about there being seperate pvp and pve worlds, meaning that its not going to be like pve players will suffer, since they will stay out of pvp worlds.
atm im illustrating the idea but in a way the FFA thing could work as a thing is set pvp areas so arena example but i also had a thing if a green player kills a green player he will get ranked to orange but if green kills a red player he gets no penalty and can sty green but would be come blue as a Enforcer.
already now there are pvp options for beacon. it is basically as you said, an FFA zone, i also think duels should be a thing that can be allowed in beacons, or just plain, all out pvp. if you are in that beaconed zone i dont think you should get tagged as dangerous
I don’t think beacons should be in the final product. I think machine or player created mobs should defend the base. Traps sentrys and other means of base defense. Tht way it keeps players on their toes and needing to repair and modify. The same ideas can be implimented on the assault side. Siege engines bombs digging tunnels ect. Also having many races with dif abilities can help determine ur primary role in both offense and def. I had an idea for a stealthy race which I posted on oorts fb page
also beacons are going to be there, its a main feature that is neccesary since it is an mmorpg, however, it is very barebones atm, and it will change in development to become more detailed, or immersive or whatever is needed
all of this is an entirely different scale of overkill than what i am used to xD
Hmm, this could work if there are plenty of red players or if the player density keeps low(not talking about total player numbers but rather the [player/m²], otherwise it could turn into a non-stop red player slaughter.
Opposite faction cannot attack you in your capitol (and in zones owned by your faction), but they still can kill you if you enter the fight yourself somehow, either by dealing damage directly to the opposing faction, or by healing people who are already in combat with them.
I don’t think PvP is bad, I’m mostly a PvE player but, honestly I don’t think PvPers are what some people are thinking, like putting PvPers in the same boat as griefers.
PvPer’s will do what they can to kill or capture their target, use the land as a tool to get them. If it makes it easier to get to them then they can bust through the wall and try to do what they can, maybe have beacon that players cannot break down at all but say the flag is on the very top (if there is a capture the flag pvp) people can defend their flag, I think that would be fun as well. There is just so many ways PvP can go.
If you don’t want to participate they can make players a green glow to the pvper showing they are a friendly and arent attackable, (though if friendly is getting in the way there should be a countermeasure so people don’t troll pvpers that way either).
But if a friendly is in a pvp combat zone there should be a window or warning saying, you have 10 seconds to turn back or you will be flagged for pvp combat, 10 seconds or the first hit you do will be flagging you, and you cannot unflag until you die or pvp round is over, objective complete.
I’m open and I’d like seeing stuff like this cause it gives variety and so people can do different things and makes the world more alive with stuff like this.
I would like to have the worlds divided into pve, pvp and gvg. May be there may be a possibility to set the own beacon to pvp (for arenas for example)but normally they should stay as pve only, even on pvp or gvg worlds.
The systems suggested for flagging to pvp and vise versa sound good, but I would like to have it ruled by the worlds, not each player himself on every world. Also it would be easier implemented
And if you make a rift to a random new world you could be asked to chose from a list (pvp, pve, gvg, random) so that you don’t hit on a pvp world accidently if you don’t want to do pvp.
that’s a step back tp the topic. gvg means guild vs guild and includes sieging. If you want to do pvp but also want your beacons save, stay away … May be gvg doensn’t matter till a really high tier, so may be this option only shows up on late game.
Thats doesn’t matter at ALL in an Poll… for a real poll you only have one for and one against… everything else has nothing to do in there and has nothing to do with the poll:
poll
noun
1.
a sampling or collection of opinions on a subject, taken from either a selected or a random group of persons, as for the purpose of analysis.
I think thats exactly what this poll does, regardless of the numbers of possible answers.
It’s about doing or not doing it… all the other options depending on really doing it they are compleetly senseless. its only an attempt to convince people for clicking on yes. And a lot of people who are not sure about this rather click yes if there are so many yes options.
