1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Creating A Jail. Player justice.

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Guest, Apr 18, 2008.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.
     
  2. Guest

    Guest Guest

    We already have a jail like that.

    Page a GM and tell him to blow it out his ass and you'll get to stay for a while.
     
  3. how would you justify pvp at spawns when everyone complains they cant get back in time to even finish them because everyone keeps dying and going to jail. [​IMG]
     
  4. pallas

    pallas Guest

    I think the lack of real consequences is the reason there was so much lawlessness when UO was released, and one of the reasons we were handed Tram.
     
  5. <blockquote><hr>

    I think the lack of real consequences is the reason there was so much lawlessness when UO was released, and one of the reasons we were handed Tram.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    A real consequence shouldn't stop people who pay the same price to play the same game from playing it.

    10 minutes is over kill, let alone an hour? or a day?

    Im no longer a pvp'er but even I see the major flaws it presents the game. If your main character is a red and you always aggress, thats 10mins+ (per death?)that you'd be spending in a jail doing nothing until you get back out, and play until you die again (as an aggressor).

    It even makes it harder for reds to play because 9/10 times they're the aggressors anyway or else they wouldn't be red.

    a game consequence shouldn't be something that prevents you from playing, but something that interupts your game play such as stat loss etc.
     
  6. <blockquote><hr>

    There is no more loot in PvP.

    [/ QUOTE ]sure there is. Siege.
    <blockquote><hr>

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    [/ QUOTE ]Again, Siege- most pvpers are in factions, thats a 20 min wait.
     
  7. pallas

    pallas Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    I think the lack of real consequences is the reason there was so much lawlessness when UO was released, and one of the reasons we were handed Tram.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    A real consequence shouldn't stop people who pay the same price to play the same game from playing it.

    10 minutes is over kill, let alone an hour? or a day?

    Im no longer a pvp'er but even I see the major flaws it presents the game. If your main character is a red and you always aggress, thats 10mins+ (per death?)that you'd be spending in a jail doing nothing until you get back out, and play until you die again (as an aggressor).

    It even makes it harder for reds to play because 9/10 times they're the aggressors anyway or else they wouldn't be red.

    a game consequence shouldn't be something that prevents you from playing, but something that interupts your game play such as stat loss etc.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I'm not saying a 'jail' is the right way to go, merely pointing out that without real consequences to things like PK's you go the way of why we have Trammel.

    You can argue it til you are blue in the face honey but them's the facts.
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    We already have a jail like that.

    Page a GM and tell him to blow it out his ass and you'll get to stay for a while.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Yeah but thats an aggressor being aggressive toward himself.

    But your right thats been solved.
     
  9. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    how would you justify pvp at spawns when everyone complains they cant get back in time to even finish them because everyone keeps dying and going to jail. [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    you wouldnt go to jail at those spawns less you start killing players. Attack monsters is a non jailable action.
     
  10. To be honest, reds are excluded enough in this game as it is. Go hide in the guardzone you newb! Felluca is there for a reason, and thats fighting!
     
  11. pallas

    pallas Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    To be honest, reds are excluded enough in this game as it is. Go hide in the guardzone you newb! Felluca is there for a reason, and thats fighting!

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Quotes like that are from people who don't realize what UO was like before the split, and why Felucca will _never_ be populated.

    Newb indeed. /rolls eyes
     
  12. Karthcove

    Karthcove Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nah, just make insurance rates a multiple of the murders committed (red, grey, blue - whoever).
     
  13. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    I think the lack of real consequences is the reason there was so much lawlessness when UO was released, and one of the reasons we were handed Tram.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    A real consequence shouldn't stop people who pay the same price to play the same game from playing it.

    10 minutes is over kill, let alone an hour? or a day?

    Im no longer a pvp'er but even I see the major flaws it presents the game. If your main character is a red and you always aggress, thats 10mins+ (per death?)that you'd be spending in a jail doing nothing until you get back out, and play until you die again (as an aggressor).

    It even makes it harder for reds to play because 9/10 times they're the aggressors anyway or else they wouldn't be red.

    a game consequence shouldn't be something that prevents you from playing, but something that interupts your game play such as stat loss etc.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Well 10 minutes isnt that big of deal because in jail you could work on your trade skills.

    Thats why i dont like posting details cause people focus on them.

    The same arguement would occur... I cant play. I am a paying customer too. If you give me 30 minutes of stat loss... I cant play how I want.

    Remember this is punishment.

    Perhaps jail isnt the right term. Say 15 minute penalty where you cant attack players but can monster bash.

    I dont really care.

    What I am talking about mostly is a system that addresses aggressors.

    Stat Loss is a good option.
    Jail is a good option.
    Turning a player YELLOW and making him a nonaggressor works too.

    Any other thoughts.
     
  14. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    There is no more loot in PvP.

    [/ QUOTE ]sure there is. Siege.
    <blockquote><hr>

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    [/ QUOTE ]Again, Siege- most pvpers are in factions, thats a 20 min wait.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    No offense but the Siege statement is bit old.
    1. 1 characture.
    2. limited housing.
    3. slow characture building.
    4. limited population for the OTHER things I do mostly. Merchant.
    5. Why should I go to a sep. shard just for PvP.


    I like the other shards because I can access all the game offers. Seige might satisfy looting.

    But come on. What do they really have?
    I cant see going to seige to PvP the 1% of time I wander into Fel.
     
  15. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    To be honest, reds are excluded enough in this game as it is. Go hide in the guardzone you newb! Felluca is there for a reason, and thats fighting!

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I dont follow your point? Oh a name caller. Ouch.


    What does you name calling have to do with a justice system? What no thoughts. I figured.
     
  16. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nah, just make insurance rates a multiple of the murders committed (red, grey, blue - whoever).

    [/ QUOTE ]

    You know thats not a bad idea. If we have to have insurance. Why not do as you suggest. Insurance should be based on risk. Good idea.
     
  17. <blockquote><hr>


    No offense but the Siege statement is bit old.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    well, no offense but the "whine about wanting something that already exists in game on the Siege Perilous shard" is getting a bit old too.
     
  18. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>


    No offense but the Siege statement is bit old.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    well, no offense but the "whine about wanting something that already exists in game on the Siege Perilous shard" is getting a bit old too.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    So can you explain why I should go to seige from atlantic. What will I find there? Some GM loot on the reds. Why should I go to a shard with 1 characture? Please. If your serious about siege. Elaborate on my questions.

    In case you missed it this is about a player justice system. Not siege.

    Though Id be for sending any reds killed on my shard to siege.
     
  19. Stigmatas

    Stigmatas Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nah, just make insurance rates a multiple of the murders committed (red, grey, blue - whoever).

    [/ QUOTE ]

    You know thats not a bad idea. If we have to have insurance. Why not do as you suggest. Insurance should be based on risk. Good idea.

    [/ QUOTE ]


    I saw that too. That's a great idea. Wipe all murder's as of now, then every time you kill someone, your insurance rates go up as a multiple of your murder count. Add in statloss again. Ouchies lol.

    Those are the kinds of ideas I like about realm justice.
     
  20. pallas

    pallas Guest

    Agreed, its not a bad idea.

    Though with inflation I would want to see the costs _really_ hit the murderer as they rack up counts.
     
  21. Stigmatas

    Stigmatas Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    Though Id be for sending any reds killed on my shard to siege.

    [/ QUOTE ]


    LOL!

    Banish them to the abyss so to say? hehe
     
  22. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I recall an old time poster here making a suggestion here about that type of thing...I think he called it Angel Island.

    I wonder how that turned out?...la
     
  23. Guest

    Guest Guest

    These posts normally get posted shortly after being killed in game. So who killed you to want to punish them for their act against you?...la
     
  24. Nixon[I-C]

    Nixon[I-C] Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Messages:
    1,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    I saw that too. That's a great idea. Wipe all murder's as of now, then every time you kill someone, your insurance rates go up as a multiple of your murder count. Add in statloss again. Ouchies lol.

    Those are the kinds of ideas I like about realm justice.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    You can see yourself that adding a statloss system again etc, would be painful, why anyone would want to go back to that system which was horrific is beyond me. Let's face it, the people who don't go to Felucca, still won't go there with a statloss system. So the only people that will ever suffer with statloss, or any kind of bull 'justice' system are the people that actually play there at the minute.

    We haven't seen a decrease in the number of players in Felucca since statloss was reduced, nor any increase.

    In all honesty, I just wish they made PvP shards and PvM shards, forget intergration. That way, we get all the focus we want without negatively affecting your PvM, and vice versa.
     
  25. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Agreed...la
     
  26. Surgeries

    Surgeries Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    6,107
    Likes Received:
    92
    <blockquote><hr>

    I'm not saying a 'jail' is the right way to go, merely pointing out that without real consequences to things like PK's you go the way of why we have Trammel.

    You can argue it til you are blue in the face honey but them's the facts.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    *Chokes*

    OMG...we actually AGREE, pallas!!??

    *Notes it on Calendar*

    Wowsers.

    *Runs off to buy Lottery Tickets*

    [​IMG]
     
  27. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>


    No offense but the Siege statement is bit old.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    well, no offense but the "whine about wanting something that already exists in game on the Siege Perilous shard" is getting a bit old too.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    If Siege is what they wanted it wouldn't be necessary to say "come to Siege" with every insurance sucks or this sucks about tram post. Siege is not a fel based only production shard. It's not a pre AoS shard. When you guys chime in for every instance of someone complaining about what they actually want it just makes you look desperate. I have no problem with Siege but a fel only shard without Siege rules would have more subs than any current shard. It would also not have the atmosphere of Siege. It wouldn't even be close. Siege is not what they want.
     
  28. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Siege is not a fel based only production shard.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Seeing that there is no way to get away from the Fel ruleset while playing Siege, I'd say this statement is incorrect...la
     
  29. Der Rock

    Der Rock Guest

    the best Player justice,i would like to see is..

    selfjustice,
    like....
    every chaeter chop his head fullpower in the monitor in front of him.
    uhhhhh i would like that [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  30. ... So a murderer gets caught and then only spends ten minutes in jail....?? Sounds like RL! [​IMG]
     
  31. My opinion is that reds should have 10min statloss when killed. Yes, I do have red character. If there was statloss for reds too I would be factions, but now I can kill anyone I want, not just faction players and I get zero punishment for it. Ye ye I cant go to trammel... Well I also have 5 blue characters on my account so no problem.

    Edit: Also I think faction loss should be lowered to 10 mins.
     
  32. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Well I also have 5 blue characters on my account so no problem.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Another great reason to play Siege. Either you deal with being red, or you have to pay for another account to be able to play on the red/blue fence...la
     
  33. Stigmatas

    Stigmatas Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    In all honesty, I just wish they made PvP shards and PvM shards, forget intergration. That way, we get all the focus we want without negatively affecting your PvM, and vice versa.

    [/ QUOTE ]


    Yea, I think it would be the way to go. WoW's done it, EQ, etc. They learned from UO's mistakes it seems. I can't imagine the balancing nightmare it must be for the devs to try and fix things within the bounds of both systems. It's certainly the easy way out.

    I've suggested they segregate pvm and pvp shards for years now, but I have one problem with it. The people who like both play styles. I like the idea of being able to pvm, then "switch" over to Fel and go do that.

    It's got me to thinking. Maybe segregation is not the right way to go. I think you could have your cake and eat it too, if only they could change the way damage is done on the Felucca ruleset. You could treat the entire whole of the other side of the moongate as a completely diffferent shard.
     
  34. Stigmatas

    Stigmatas Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Agreed...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    It don't work....la

    Karma.

    Trammel.
     
  35. Nixon[I-C]

    Nixon[I-C] Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Messages:
    1,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Adding statloss to Felucca add's what exactly.

    People are more likely to log out, or idle, rather than come back and fight.

    Yes there is a problem with people being instantly able to get back into fights thanks to LRC, but this could have been addressed by harder stat caps on suits.
     
  36. <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Well I also have 5 blue characters on my account so no problem.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Another great reason to play Siege. Either you deal with being red, or you have to pay for another account to be able to play on the red/blue fence...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Not everyone lives in US you know. I dont enjoy playing with 3x ping compared to others. I have character on siege, but when Im online there's like zero other players online (my timezone is +2 GMT) so it's not so much fun...
     
  37. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Agreed...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    It don't work....la

    Karma.

    Trammel.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Yeah, stay in Trammel, and you won't have to worry about those mean ole reds...la
     
  38. <blockquote><hr>

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Raven, be honest here now. If something like this was introduced, would YOU actually spend significantly more time in Fel than you do now? If yes, what would you do during the time you spend there?
     
  39. Nixon[I-C]

    Nixon[I-C] Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Messages:
    1,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>

    It don't work....la

    Karma.

    Trammel.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    It doesn't work, because people choose for it not to work. With Trammel they have the luxury of this choice.

    It does work, and it works to some degree every single day in Felucca. Someone ganks my guildmate 2vs1? I'll even the numbers and make it 2vs2, and we may/may not kill them - justice.
     
  40. Stigmatas

    Stigmatas Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2002
    Messages:
    2,898
    Likes Received:
    0
    It does nothing to curb antisocial behavior. So you kill them...and what? They die? They will go right back to doing what they do, killing innocents. The idea of player justice is limited to game mechanics. For a true role play experience, murderers should be punished in some way. By the "realm". By game mechanics.

    UO's murder system, with the exception of stat loss years ago, gives no real penalty for being evil. So, you get what we had pre-tram. Griefing, pking with no real penalty, and a lot of players quitting in disgust. Even if you do get a group together, and hunt down the evil players, there is no benefit in doing so. Unless you call trash talking a benefit. Sure you get the thrill of the hunt, but that's nothing but pvp in it's simplest form.

    Instead of creating a meaningful justice system in UO, they took the easiest route in creating Trammel. Not a bad move, just simplistic. There are many players who will never pvp for the simple fact they just don't like that playstyle, but even for the one's who do, there should be meaning in doing so. And penalties, real penalties for anti social behavior, even in Fel.

    I believe more people would come to Fel, if it weren't for the simple gank vs. gank, kill everything "just because" mentality of the population that now resides there.
     
  41. Guest

    Guest Guest

    You ***** and complain about the game being fair, and player killers being penalized. Why? Do you actually press that little button marked Felucca?

    I'm guessing here, but I'd have to say the times you have visited, you have been killed, and didn't like it, thus, since you were unable to go back and kill those players on your terms, you want the game to step in and help you.

    It's becoming much clearer now...la
     
  42. Nixon[I-C]

    Nixon[I-C] Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Messages:
    1,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    <blockquote><hr>


    UO's murder system, with the exception of stat loss years ago, gives no real penalty for being evil. So, you get what we had pre-tram. Griefing, pking with no real penalty, and a lot of players quitting in disgust. Even if you do get a group together, and hunt down the evil players, there is no benefit in doing so. Unless you call trash talking a benefit. Sure you get the thrill of the hunt, but that's nothing but pvp in it's simplest form.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Nothing but the thrill? Isn't that what playing a game is about at the end of the day? Winning, losing it's all part of the package at the end of the day. I like the fact I can have 'virtual' enemies. It's not everyone's cup of tea sure, but then you have Trammel, so why do people feel the need to try and damage Felucca? Personally I would have thought satisfaction of killing the smack talkers was enough, guess I was wrong. Having statloss doesn't curb smack talking. If your not killing them now, you won't kill them with statloss.

    <blockquote><hr>

    There are many players who will never pvp for the simple fact they just don't like that playstyle, but even for the one's who do, there should be meaning in doing so. And penalties, real penalties for anti social behavior, even in Fel.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't think you understand real PvPers mentalities if you think there is no meaning for us when we fight.

    <blockquote><hr>

    I believe more people would come to Fel, if it weren't for the simple gank vs. gank, kill everything "just because" mentality of the population that now resides there.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I don't. As I said, the population hasn't really changed when statloss was removed. All it did was shift the balance from O/C to Reds.
     
  43. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    These posts normally get posted shortly after being killed in game. So who killed you to want to punish them for their act against you?...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Who killed me. (hehe)
    Berserker, Fallen Angle, Gaggle wisps.

    I dont mind dieing. I know you mean PvP. No one. I havent died in Fel since the books of truth.

    This thought came out of the posting of Dev Dragon on a thread that is active. Players were mention social justice.
     
  44. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Agreed...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Sure thats fine for a group. Doesnt address the fact players can come rez in 5 seconds and be back doing the same thing.

    Getting back as a group is satisfying in its own.

    This post is about a game system.
     
  45. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    ... So a murderer gets caught and then only spends ten minutes in jail....?? Sounds like RL! [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]

    hehe.
     
  46. Raven, are you ducking my question? Would this kind of change get you to Fel and if yes, what would you be doing once you got there?

    [​IMG]
     
  47. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Personally I think getting a group of friends together and fighting back is a good enough justice system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Agreed...la

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Sure thats fine for a group. Doesnt address the fact players can come rez in 5 seconds and be back doing the same thing.

    Getting back as a group is satisfying in its own.

    This post is about a game system.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    So they rez back to life. Rez kill them, a pretty simple solution...if you played Siege, you'd actually have a chance to loot them. and if they do care about saving a little cash, they won't keep rezzing knowing they will die again and again...la
     
  48. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    Raven, are you ducking my question? Would this kind of change get you to Fel and if yes, what would you be doing once you got there?

    [​IMG]

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Are you kidding? It would make groups of blue converge all over fel if you could kill reds for a period of time they couldn't come back. It would, however be worthless if the time wasn't long enough to make a difference. I think any changes to actually deter reds would bring more blues to fel than go currently. Pffftt....the stupid books of truth did it and the rewards for that were lame ass.
     
  49. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    <blockquote><hr>

    Minus Hacks.
    Minus Insurance.
    Minus all the other PvP stuff.


    In the name of Law and Order. Why cant one option be when a red (or aggressor) is killed to claim "Ressurect in Jail" as a menu option for the victorious non-aggressor.

    My problem with PvP is Im not really interested in beating you for the sake of.
    I want your loot. There is no more loot in PvP.

    Then my problem is both of us can Rez and be back in the game in 5 seconds. Why even have death?

    There is no player justice system. I think you could incorporate a jail system. If a player chooses to go red, or is killed when gray. A blue player (if victorious) can select "ressurect in jail".

    If and agressor blue is killed. Same thing.


    How it would work is.
    Reds.
    Grays.
    Aggressor Blues.

    Could be tagged by the victorious BLUE (blue only) player to have the ghost sent to jail.

    Thats the gist.

    It would be a point accumulation that would send you to jail or something like that.

    Jail could be 10 minutes, 1 hour, 1 day. Whatever. I find if i give detail like that people get stuck on the numbers.

    Basically, this system would allow players to police aggression. It cant be abused. There is now a penalty for being an aggressor.


    You could even create a noteriety system for players that jail players.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Raven, be honest here now. If something like this was introduced, would YOU actually spend significantly more time in Fel than you do now? If yes, what would you do during the time you spend there?

    [/ QUOTE ]

    For me it would be interesting to challenge a spawn of power scrolls. Without justice/consequence. Everyones up a going way to fast.

    Seeing the same people up and insta corpse their body and back in the fight in what 30 seconds is silly.

    Thats all I am saying.

    Books of truth, I dealt with reds. I got all I needed. I dont care about dieing. Because...
    Insure everything.
    Sell stuff in Trammel to supply my insurance costs.
    Bag of send my rewards or insure.
    Rez, insta corpse
    Recall
    Recall
    and back at it.

    In 2 minutes.

    Now would I go to Fel more? Well in my OP, I dont really see the benefit of killing and getting nothing. So yes and no. Would I go just go? No

    But it might be fun to hook up with blue players and hunt reds to jail them. That, I would do.
     
  50. Guest

    Guest Guest

    <blockquote><hr>

    It does nothing to curb antisocial behavior. So you kill them...and what? They die? They will go right back to doing what they do, killing innocents. The idea of player justice is limited to game mechanics. For a true role play experience, murderers should be punished in some way. By the "realm". By game mechanics.

    UO's murder system, with the exception of stat loss years ago, gives no real penalty for being evil. So, you get what we had pre-tram. Griefing, pking with no real penalty, and a lot of players quitting in disgust. Even if you do get a group together, and hunt down the evil players, there is no benefit in doing so. Unless you call trash talking a benefit. Sure you get the thrill of the hunt, but that's nothing but pvp in it's simplest form.

    Instead of creating a meaningful justice system in UO, they took the easiest route in creating Trammel. Not a bad move, just simplistic. There are many players who will never pvp for the simple fact they just don't like that playstyle, but even for the one's who do, there should be meaning in doing so. And penalties, real penalties for anti social behavior, even in Fel.

    I believe more people would come to Fel, if it weren't for the simple gank vs. gank, kill everything "just because" mentality of the population that now resides there.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Exactly. I am with you. Perfectly stated.