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

Suggestion: Change of the way PvP is enabled

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Anira Cuilwen, Jul 29, 2012.

  1. Anira Cuilwen

    Anira Cuilwen Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    3
    Hi,

    this is just a thought that came to mind by a completely different discussion.

    What if it would be possible to set a character or a account based flag on login where you can choose whether you want to participate in PvP in non-PvP areas.

    Like you login your character and a gump pops out asking if you want to take part in PvP in non-PvP areas.
    Basically making it possible to enable a charater/account for general Fel based PvP rules on Trammel and other "safe" areas.

    Could also have a PvP cooldown similar to the logout timeout. Say you cannot disable the PvP tag for 2 hours (just an example) after your last encounter.

    Yeah, firing ideas out day it seems :D
     
  2. Winker

    Winker Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299
    Likes Received:
    624
    we have fel for PvP, it works for me :gun:
     
  3. Zyon Rockler

    Zyon Rockler Guest

    Join A guild.
     
  4. Anira Cuilwen

    Anira Cuilwen Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2010
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    3
    Hihihi, that is not the point of this thread guys. I admit I should have added some more background info on the "why". Yet this is just an idea which been raised from a different discussion.
    It is so absolutely not about altering any existing PvP. It is just about adding another option for it. You guys don't need to change your habbits at all. So if you cannot add anything constructive just consider not posting okies?
     
  5. Winker

    Winker Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    2,299
    Likes Received:
    624
    It was constructive, your just reading it in a negative way
     
  6. virtualhabitat

    virtualhabitat Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    642
    I am happy with the variety of PvP/non-PvP choices already provided to me on the moongate menu.
     
    DJAd likes this.
  7. Vexxed

    Vexxed Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,581
    Likes Received:
    351
    The BEST part about PvP is that it's NON-consensual....... Heck I can't even remember the last time I was involved in PvP where I was fighting someone who'd choose to die vs just simply running away. Even if the guy attacked me all of a sudden if I'm possibly going to win it becomes NON-consensual for him heh.
     
  8. cazador

    cazador Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    3,776
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    Simply...NO! Stay in tram if you "choose" not to die to another player..or go to fel if you "choose" to engage in PvP pretty self explanatory tbh


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  9. weins201

    weins201 Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    1,686
    Likes Received:
    266
    As started there are two choices mentioned for PvP, go thru moon gate to fel, or join a guild where they kill each other, and now there is even a 3rd - arenas.

    no more choices need to be added.
     
  10. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Well I guess I'm in the minority here, but I don't see any reason why there shouldn't be open pvp in tram, if the person agrees to it. They should just expand factions to be able to fight in tram (they can't right? My shard doens't have tram, so im just going off memory) cause like it or not, tram is where people hang out.
     
    CovenantX likes this.
  11. cazador

    cazador Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2010
    Messages:
    3,776
    Likes Received:
    1,526
    I'd love it to be open pvp..but unfortunately those days are gone :( we are stuck with tram..one day we will all go to siege and these threads will stop :)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
    kelmo likes this.
  12. mspossi

    mspossi Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2010
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    64
    Hello, I think your information is outdated, I've seen TBs and COMs fighting side by side in several spwans ... or it only happens on my shard?:gun:
     
    #12 mspossi, Aug 6, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2012
  13. Flutter

    Flutter Always Present
    Stratics Veteran Alumni Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    21,553
    Likes Received:
    3,840
    No.
    The flag for PvP is going through the evil red gate.
     
  14. gunneroforgin

    gunneroforgin Slightly Crazed
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    30
    I feel that if you have a switch to engage PVp then you will have people trying to goad into a fight. this is why there is no switch.
     
  15. Redxpanda

    Redxpanda Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    986
    Likes Received:
    116
    This was suggested before...There are many who don't want it to ever happen. Some for the right reasons & some for the wrong reasons.
     
  16. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    And the reason for that is because most people don't like PvP. Why Fel is a ghost town compared to Tram.

    You need to PvP? Go to Fel, join a guild that gets it's jollies killing each other, or make the Siege people dang happy and go there.

    It's all Fel rules on Siege. Few sheep to kill there though. You might wind up feeding the Wolves instead. ;)
     
    #16 Tanivar, Aug 6, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2012
  17. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    Been many suggestions on this topic and for one reason or another it's never happened. But posts like the one above mine by closeminded people who think all PvPers are griefing scumbags who murder children in RL are probably part of the reason. Even though they would still not have to PvP, I guess even having to watch 2 people who want to fight each other for fun is still to much for them.

    I personally think they should just remove that broken/boring Faction system. Bring back Order and Chaos and allow fighting everywhere.
     
  18. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    Likely because it's sole purpose is to work along the path of letting PKers into Tram where the targets they miss from pre-UO:Ren days are staying. I imagine the people at EA cringe at the thought of even so much as leaning a mere millameter towards anything that might even vaguely inspire a repeat of the Exodus that forced Trammel to be created. :gee:

    Wanting PvP outside of Fel with a two hour cooldown once they convince someone to flip that switch says a lot. They want the entertainment of griefing the someone for two whole hours or the amusement of forcing "that whimpy Trammie" to log out for a whole two hours until the timer runs out. A little hard to miss... :rolleyes:

    I imagine they want access to Trammies because the PvPers in Fel dirtnap their Pking hides if they get desperate enough for a kill and try a PvPer.


    No, I don't think "...PvPers are griefing scumbags who murder children in RL....". Most PvPers are decent people who like a challenge. Don't insult PvPers by comparing them to PKers.





     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  19. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Don't know what you are getting all bent out of shape about. It wouldn't effect people who didn't want to pvp in the slightest, other than it might give them something to look at every now and again as a fight passed by them. And I already play siege. Have been for 13 years, and I don't pvp. I just don't see why anyone would care if they opened up the area people could CHOOSE to pvp in.
     
    Driven Insane likes this.
  20. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    I'm more amused than bent out of shape. :)

    They have a place people can choose to PvP in. It's called Felucca.
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  21. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    I'm aware, but people can hide from faction combat in tram. Tram is a better place to farm monsters. And again, this change would have 0 effect on you or how you play.

    Honestly I would have infinitely preferred a pvp switch to the land split so this wouldn't even be something we need to talk about.
     
    Woodsman likes this.
  22. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    Hello, earth calling Tanivar..... I hate to tell you this, but the PKer's are already in Tram. With 7 chars I'm sure they have at least 1 blue there. No doubt that evil PK who killed you 14 years ago has been keeping his account active and paying for it for the last 13 years just waiting for EA to change their minds and let him kill you again.

    Or are you just making crap up like most people who oppose allowing PvP on all facets and wrongly claiming that nonconsentual PKing would be allowed in Tram, which clearly no one here is saying?
     
  23. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    I never understand why whenever this subject comes up a bunch of people start crying and moaning about something that will not effect them 1 bit.

    -You don't have to PvP.
    -No one wants you to PvP, unless you want to.
    -PvPers pay the same monthly fee as non-PvPers and should be able to play their chars on all the facets.
     
  24. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    I am not sure why PvPers actually want more land opened up to PvP?

    Is fel so crowded? Wouldn't more land make it harder to find PvPers to fight in a random manner?

    Oh, and I laughed when I saw this argument:
    Just change PvP to PvM...I guess anyone agreeing to this is up for all Champ Spawns being open to PvM toggled players?
     
    Doubleplay, Surgeries and Lord Frodo like this.
  25. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    Rotfl! <g>

    Touchy subject with you? :)

    Yep... Touchy subject. :)

    No I am not making "crap up like most people who oppose allowing PvP on all facets and wrongly claiming that nonconsentual PKing would be allowed in Tram, which clearly no one here is saying?". Many years of experience with people make it clear, you give an inch, and they will see how far they can get, blaming those who are 'wronging them' for limiting what they can get away with, and claiming that the opposition they get is all lies, etc, etc.

    Pk's get what you suggest, then would try to get another little change, get that, then go for another little change, loosening the restrictions on their other-player-griefing fun more and more. At what point would people once again say "screw it", and another pre-Tram Exodus begins?

    People play a game to have fun, not be fun for others.

    You want to PvP? UO has provided Fel and Siege which is populated with other PvPers who like to PvP. You don't need access to non-PvP Trammies. Trammies who want to PvP just go to Fel when they are in the mood for PvP. Yes, I understand PKers would like access to more Trammies though. Those PvPers in Fel and Siege are just to tough aren't they?
     
  26. Lord Frodo

    Lord Frodo Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,838
    Likes Received:
    2,324
    If you are going to say this
    -PvPers pay the same monthly fee as non-PvPers and should be able to play their chars on all the facets. -
    Then you also need to say this
    Non-PvPers pay the same monthly fee as PvPers and should be able to play their chars on all the facets.

    Just put in the switch for all lands.
     
    Surgeries likes this.
  27. Surgeries

    Surgeries Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2004
    Messages:
    6,107
    Likes Received:
    92
    Precisely...then we all can have the same choice and we can all visit all the facets we would like and play the game the way we choose.

    But as long as the moongate is the switch, then Reds that want to come to Tram must come to grips with the fact they already "flipped their switch" to PVP in Tram to "I Don't Want to Go to Tram Because I Exceeded My Murder Counts to Do So".

    Once a facet wide switch is put in, and all can choose PVP on all facets with that switch, then I say Reds can come to Tram...maybe. :p
     
  28. Lady CaT

    Lady CaT Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    498
    Likes Received:
    407
    UO is a world built to accomodate many different play styles for a variety of different reasons. Some reasons are known, some probably aren't. Each area of the world has different rules to enter or participate to accomodate those styles. We are each given an account when we sign up for UO and several character slots to decide what content we wish to participate in. If you choose to make all red characters because you REALLY enjoy PvP then don't sit and whine when you can't get to an EM event in Trammel because you didn't think to build a character to access the content. Likewise, if you fill your slots with all non-PvP characters don't sit and whine that your characters can't compete at spawns for powerscrolls. Everyone who signs up for UO has the same empty starting account to pick and choose what characters to build to enjoy the various content available in the expansive UO world. Not only that you have the ability to change those characters with the use of Soulstones and training. If you can't access certain areas is it really the developers fault? Or is it the person behind the keyboards fault?

    We all have personal changes we would like to see added to benefit OUR particular characters and play styles. But remember YOU or I aren't the only one out there in the world. And the developers of UO have taken a wide range of playstyles, likes and dislikes into account.
     
    Lord Frodo, Tanivar and LordDrago like this.
  29. Woodsman

    Woodsman Guest

    Me too. We could have had a new land (not Malas) instead of Trammel. I don't like the look of Felucca either, dead trees, etc. just remind you that the facet is dead in most areas.

    I wish they hadn't gotten rid of Supreem, I know he was doing the Arena stuff, but he had said something else about revisiting PvP.
     
  30. Doubleplay

    Doubleplay Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    150
    This is an excellent point. I am for toggled PVP everywhere if non-PVP players can have access to the champ spawns. PVP people want access to Tram, then fair is fair, let non PVP into Fel. If this is accomplished through a toggle, then the toggle should last for at least 24 hours, and include all characters on an account.
     
  31. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    Non-PvP players can do fel champ spawns and anything else in fel safe from being Pked? I could easily deal with this in trade for what the Poster above wanted. :)
     
  32. Driven Insane

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2012
    Messages:
    581
    Likes Received:
    228
    I don't want anything. It's fine the way it is.

    The thick skinned, skilled players can go to Fel and do champs, and also go to Tram.

    The whiny, no skill players can come on here and post about adding a PvP switch so they can go to Fel.
     
  33. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Don't get me started on those trees. Siege is dead trees everywhere, and its super annoying. Ruins xmas trees. I know you can fix it in the ini but its still annoying.
     
  34. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Why? Why would a trade off of you getting something that gives you a great advantage, equal to something that gives no one anything except more room to pvp in, that will have no effect on you or anyone who doesn't pvp in any single solitary way??

    People aren't asking to TAKE anything from you or put you at ANY kind of disadvantage! Do you hate pvpers that much?
     
    #34 Uvtha, Aug 7, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2012
  35. Tanivar

    Tanivar Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    May 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,594
    Likes Received:
    1,467
    About what I suspected. They're talking all get-no-give. We suggest something to give us a benefit in trade for the benefit they want and they give the flavor responses above.
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  36. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    The "trade off" are suggesting is akin to "May I walk through your yard to get my ball? Ok, if you let me burn your house down in return.".

    Explain this to me: What are YOU losing with this idea. How does this idea impact you? In what way do you feel that this idea infringes on tram players to the degree that they need some kind of compensation?

    All I see is either flat out bias, or simply being argumentative. And again, I don't pvp at all, so don't claim that I just want what I want and don't care about the impact. The change wouldn't effect me at all, just like it wouldn't effect you. I just believe that everyone should have a better experience if it's possible, even if, god forbid, I don't share their playstyle.
     
    #36 Uvtha, Aug 8, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2012
  37. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    I just thought it was a good and simple idea that hurt no one. It has nothing to do with what -I- want for myself, personally. I'm only pvm, and care more about decorating my house than anything else. I just realize that the better the game is for everyone, the better it is for everyone.

    I just don't get why people are against the idea from a technical standpoint. Its like why would I a tamer, care if fishing got a boost? It doesn't effect me, but its good for others, so that's a good idea. It all just seems like "we don't want pvp here because there is no pvp here." I just don't get it.
     
  38. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    LOL. You say you don't want anything even though YOU stated:
    then when your argument about PvPers paying the same as non PvPers and is reversed to say that non PvPers pay the same as PvPers, the non PvPers are called whiny no skilled players?

    Pot, meet kettle.

    So, it appears your argument again cuts both ways


    I don't want anything. It's fine the way it is.

    All players can go to Fel and do champs, and also go to Tram...after all, we do have access to seven character slots.

    The whiny, no self-control players with seven red characters can come here and post about adding a PvP switch so they can go to Trammel


    I say just leave it the way it is and play the game however you like to play. Any limited access to the game is, essentially limits we players impose upon ourselves.
     
    #38 LordDrago, Aug 8, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2012
  39. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    There is a trade off in regards to resources...

    (One example)
    For the most part, powerscrolls are a Fel resource that Trammel only players must buy or trade for.
    For the most part, imbuing ingredients are Trammel resources that Felucca players must either buy or trade for.

    People who enjoy a good fight for the sake of the battle (PvPers) would not be affected by blues completing champ spawns while not being attackable.
    People who just enjoy killing other players for the sake of killing or griefing (PKers) would be affected.

    Again, I say, nobody is limited in this game to Trammel or Felucca, accept by ourselves. We have seven character slots. If you choose to fill them with red characters, that is your choice. If you choose to have them all blue and not PvP, also your choice. To say that someone is being denied access to any part of this game is a lie.
     
    #39 LordDrago, Aug 8, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2012
  40. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Heh... its funny. Fel gets exactly 2 things: Champ spawns, and Double resources. The whole rest of the game is for tram. Tram has a VAST upside here. And not only is the "trade off" lop sided, you are suggesting that fel players give away one of the two things they have, for such a simple request that has no effect on your game play.

    But you see how lopsided the trade off is right? There is ONE resource to pvp over. In the whole game. Just one. And you are suggesting that its an equal trade off to remove that ONE resource, in exchange for allowing people who want to pvp in a non fel facet the ability to do so if they so choose. That is in no way equal. You can't just make one suggestion and say boom that's a fair trade off. This is NOT a fair trade off. No fel player would take that trade, they would be stupid of they did.

    But why is that restriction valuable? I don't see the value in it. Anyway, I don't recall anyone mentioning red players coming to tram (not that I think that's a bad idea at all), just allowing people who want to pvp in tram ruleset be able to pvp if they feel like it, with other people who also feel like it. Factions especially, because people could get into factions just for the armor then hide in tram to avoid fights.

    This reminds me of the posts that people would start about asking for more stable slots and then people saying "no, you have to make choices", and it made absolutely no sense, because adding stable slots ONLY had potential positive effects on the game, and would have ZERO effect on non tamers. It was just "things have to be the way they are because thing are the way they are." argument. Just like this idea.

    The simple fact that there are choices currently in the game that one can or must make does not mean that they are all good ranges of choice, or that there are not better options out there.
     
  41. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    But why are those limits valuable is the question. Why should I NEED to make multiple characters so that one can pvp, and the other can hunt monsters? Why would it be a bad thing if I wanted to do both with one character, and was able to do so anywhere in the game, all without infringing on the already very well established game play of others? Where is the downside?

    Who would be harmed by allowing pvping on any facet among consenting individuals? Who would be harmed by allowing reds into any facet?

    I think on the contrary if the populations mingled more often in game there would be much less strife and play style xenophobia and people would stop seeing the game as functionally two separate games: Fel and Tram, and rather as a unified game with different aspects that intercede.
     
  42. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    Pne could argue that this is because any business caters to its customers, There is more to Trammel as that is where most of its customers are. Thats why you do not see a large selection of pickled pigs feet at the supermarket but 20 different kinds of pasta sauce.

    Of course the "trade-off" aspect, I believe, is due to long held feelings regarding PKers and griefing pre-facet split, anf the natural propensity for we humans to not want to give up anything for nothing in return. Are sompf these feelings misplaced? Sure. However, they can be somewhat justified, and are assuredly propogated by name calling, eyc. in the game and on these boards.

    If you live in Trammel, you are a whiner, lazy, inept, too stupid to "play the game the way it was intended"
    Given these attitudes, is it so crazy for non-PvPers to decide that they want no part of PvPers in Trammel? Even if people not using this language or holding these beliefs are incuded in the generalization. It is just human nature.


    I still wonder why a PvPer would want a Toggle. Spreading out PvP will make it more difficult have random PvP encounters as the PvPers will be spread out over a greater area. Is it to have access to imbuing ingredients? Just a further extension of wanting what you dont have?

    Nothing I have heard makes a compelling argument to change the "toggles" we already have
     
  43. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    So just add the toggle and let everyone play the way they want. Go to trammel and hunt other PvPers if you like....or go to a champ spawn and fight the champ the way you want, be it fearing a raid or in a more relaxing manner.

    If the idea is to let people play however they want, wherever they want, then the toggle idea would work if it worked everywhere. My bet though, is that the ideas proposed are more along the line of:

    We need the toggle because PvP should not be restricred to one facet (plus a couple of areas)...but there should be a restriction on non-PvP areas.
     
  44. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Not arguing that. Just saying that there ARE people who play the fel style, and they should not just be shucked so that tram players have everything, especially for such a small change to benefit pvpers.

    As I was saying, I think that a lot of this would be lessened if the two groups mingled more and realized they were playing the same game. I know that siege is one of the nicest commnities in the game, and always has been, I think in part that is because there is no artifical division between pvpers and non pvpers.

    I do agree that the spreading out could be a factor. Other than that, it just allows the freedom to hunt wherever you want, but still be have the potential for spontaneous fights to break out. That and as I said stopping people from hiding faction armor in non pvp settings.
     
  45. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    Although I know that there are many factors, the population of Siege might make for an argument that many people just do not want to mingle.

    Hell...when I am on Siege, I rarely see anyone.
     
  46. LordDrago

    LordDrago Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,500
    Likes Received:
    393
    TBH, change it or don't, I don't think I would be bothered either way...

    then again, I didn't come up with the Sampire, or Whammy, or any other crazy templates either, so I could effect me in some way I have not thought of.

    I just don't like people making an argument along the lines of "I should not be limited in my playing just because of my playstyle....but someone else shoulld be limited because of theirs"

    If you want a toggle, go ahead and have a toggle...but it should toggle everywhere for everyone.
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  47. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    I don't think its important, nor do I think it will happen. It just sounded like a potentially nice harmless idea.

    Its just that a toggle for pvp outside of fel would hurt no one, while a toggle for NO pvp in fel would hurt fel a great deal. That the only reason, the comparison in effect is not at all equal.

    Especially because if you are not red, and I think many pvpers are not, you can already go and hunt monsters wherver, so as long as no reds were allowed out of fel, then there would really be no difference from how things are today.

    At minimum I think allowing factions and guild wars to work any facet that the players are already allowed makes sense. The players already being in those facets after all.[/quote]
     
    #47 Uvtha, Aug 8, 2012
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2012
  48. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,528
    Likes Received:
    2,914
    Well, the population is way down. The shard has always been lower than regular shards, and pops are down game wide, so... siege is at all time lows. It was great like...5 years ago? Somewheres round there. Lots of people out and about, reds blues mixing and having a good time. I have had lots of fun times as a non pvper with reds. Especially the reds who went red protecting innocent people from hiding behind being blue.

    But I think the non pvpers on siege are a larger voice than the pvpers even.
     
  49. Doubleplay

    Doubleplay Lore Keeper
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Messages:
    754
    Likes Received:
    150
    Perhaps it is just a generational thing, and probably unjustifiable in today's world, but I simply cannot endure the trash talking and immature bickering that goes along with some pvp'rs. I know that those I am talking about see their actions and insults as normal human behavior. I don't, and cannot imagine feeling comfortable with that going on around me. If pvp could be separated from said behavior, I would be very happy to revert to a non-tram game. Siege is almost there, but the single character and economic restrictions reduce its allure.
     
    Lord Frodo likes this.
  50. Tjalle

    Tjalle Grand Inquisitor
    Professional Stratics Veteran Campaign Supporter Gilfane

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    4,851
    Likes Received:
    1,310
    Economic restrictions?