Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
PvP - official informations?
H1ghlander
Member Posts: 2
Are there any informations about PvP?
- open pvp, full loot?
- safe zones?
- flag system ?
- battlegrounds? instances? or everything open?
Comments
I try answer from the little information we got so far.
There will not be any non-consensual PvP, you will have to consent.
You flag by admitting to PvP.
There seem to be no loot from PvP.
No open PvP.
Only guild PvP. You need to join a PvP guild.
Safe zones both in cities and btw cities.
There seem to be a incoming thread from developers on PvP so wether what i wrote above is 100% correct or not will be answered then.
so basically safe like every other MMO in existence, those carebears always win, I like 97 Ultima Online & I've come to realize that type of game will never be made for me again..only in terms of a different genre..that being the survival zombie games ...sigghhh
Most everything above is incorrect! Just wait for the public posting of the basic framework for PvP next week.
Well the combat system should be perfected 1st. You can setup ways to PvP all you want, but if the Card Trick Combat sucks, which it probably will, then you won't want to PvP.
I would have set the combat system up 1st, get it to play well , then talk about ways of implementing it into PvE or PvP.
And to talk about PvP 10 months in was probably a bad idea, stringing people along and then...boom !! this is our thinking after 10 months of crowd funding lol.
You are wrong.
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/pvp-death-current-thinking-megapost.8247/
- Flag by joining a PvP quest or a PvP guild at war
- Insurance is in the game so as long as you have money in your bank you loose nothing (no loot)
- Combat system is a card game the randomly give you some cards you have to look at and choose one of those cards (skill) that the game decided for you to use
No, my post still stands as it refutes most of what was said above.
"There will not be any non-consensual PvP, you will have to consent." -- TRUE, PvP is only consensual but everyone knew that from Day 1 of the Kickstarter.
"You flag by admitting to PvP." -- TRUE, as it is a consensual PvP system, you have to flag yourself as PvP in some way. Again, that was known since Day 1.
"There seem to be no loot from PvP." -- FALSE. You do get loot from PvP. The current idea is to use a ransom system where you will loot gold or a body part or gear. Sucks, as I'd rather have full loot or something more penalizing, so we'll see how this turns out, as again...it's their current thinking.
"No open PvP." -- FALSE. There is open PvP. You can attack any other PvP player anywhere and everywhere in the game, at any time for any reason. Receiving a blessing from the Oracle is one way to get PvP flagged. So is joining a PvP guild. Or joining any party that is led by someone that is PvP. It's not that hard. And once you're PvP solo or in a group or in a guild, you can attack any other PvP anywhere in the game. That's the definition of "open PvP".
"Only guild PvP. You need to join a PvP guild." -- FALSE. Guild PvP is only one of many ways to do PvP. There is a blessing of the Oracle where you become PvP. There is group/party PvP, where you can become PvP simply by joining any group where the party leader is PvP. There is dueling which is just a temporary PvP just for the duration of the fight. And there may be other ways in the future. So it's not only just guild PvP.
"Safe zones both in cities and btw cities. " -- FALSE. If you are flagged PvP, you can attack any other PvP anywhere in the game. There are no safe zones for PvP.
So as I said, most of the post was incorrect, and that remains true.
So basically, if you want to PvP, you need to go all in. Otherwise, you are safe to play the PvE side of the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Yes, currently that's how it's designed. But there is also the virtue / story aspect to PvP that they are not willing to talk about. Such as this whole light / dark theme and how that plays into PvP. It's likely that there will be "mixed" areas where you are safe if you stay in the light but if you venture beyond the well-lit road and into the dark forest, you will be open to attack. This will probably be a quest or story-based zone so it's not everywhere. But again, they're not talking about these aspects since it involves the story of how you as an avatar affect the world, which they're keeping a secret.
Since money in the bank will make sure noone looses any items make it a no loot game. That is a insurance game. Remember UO when all had their gear insured. That was one of the major reasons UO felucca died and now SotA developers introduce same system.
This should have been explained at kickstarter so less old UO PvP players got tricked to invest. PvP design, loot and death rules are important for the hardcore PvP crowd.
Nowhere could anyone read at kickstarter that a cardgame was the combat system. Nowhere can anyone read that insurance was gonna be in the game.
I am sure alot of hardcore PvP players feel they have been tricked by the SotA developers, intentionally or not dont matter. Avoiding to explain everything when the game was at kickstarter level sure is smart but also a as i see it a deceptive way to lure players to invest in their game. That this carebear PvP game was their intentions wasnt at all presented at kickstarter level. That was presented some days ago.
Apparently you don't understand what Open PvP is. Open PvP is when there are no restrictions on it. If a player can disable PvP entirely that is actually the opposite of Open PvP!
And, there is a PvP safe zone throughout the entire game by simply not enabling it.
Too many kids raised on WoW are totally clueless.
Raised on WoW? Is that the best you can do?
You're referring to consensual vs. non-consensual and calling that "open". Sure, that's your definition. In the context of SotA, open implies anytime, anywhere on the map without provocation or any reason, which is what most players feared wouldn't be the case but fortunately the devs have allowed it, even in towns.
Agree.
There are so many that dont understand what open PvP means. SotA PvP is definetly not open PvP.
SotA PvP is definitely not non-consensual PvP, but it is Open PvP as you can attack any PvP player anywhere at anytime for any reason across the entire game world.
I would actually prefer non-consensual PvP but we know that will never happen, unless they make it based on some lore or story aspect of the game.
And thankfully, Garriott is not making another cookie-cutter MMORPG. It will be a game changer and will be spoken of fondly in 15 years, just as people do so now of UO, which he and Starr created.
Yeah right, you wish. Just cause Garriott and Starr is in the develop team dont make it that old UO game. Both of them are PvE oriented. Add Chris Spears that is even more into PvE and you got a PvP game only for the casual PvP gamer.
It was Raph Koster that was the lead designer for UO and isnt developing SotA.
UO was a legendary game with a freedom never seen before or after. Old UO before Age of Shadows had the best PvP system ever created, SotA PvP with it's insurance, no open PvP (can change to PvE in 5 minutes, loads of restrictions) and a random, luckbased combat system is a joke.
And ask yourself why most that reply to this compromise PvP thread are against the proposal developers delivered. That dont tell me that developers and players are on the same page. There are only a few loud mouthed PvE players that like this PvP system.
How many players they already lost is anybodies guess but if nothing changes dramatically then SOtA will become a huge fiasco.
How many like to pay 550$ for a house? Do you believe such a feature will create a game that people talk about in 15 years to come? Really?
I think what they're attempting is game-changing, across not just combat but in all aspects of the game and its development process too. Whether or not they succeed in implementing that vision is another story. I do agree that I would prefer a more punishing PvP game, but these are just the initial steps. There's nothing to say that they won't allow it in the future. They're fully aware of all the arguments but have chosen the current path for the time being.
As for combat, I too am in the speculative side and am cautious about it as well. It's simply way out there, audacious and very different. We'll see if they can pull it off and at least they're open to working with the community of backers on it. But if they can pull it off with whatever changes necessary based on the feedback, it will be another genre defining moment.
SotA developers have claimed they listen to their community and that just about everything said during kickstarter could change before release.
SotA developers only listen to the PvE players. That is what the PvP "compromise" tell us. Everything in this compromise stink PvE and every suggestion that would have made SotA more PvP hardcore was rejected by developers. So dont expect anything different in the future.
Why should they suddenly make a u-turn and start listen to the majority of their community when they havent done it so far?
A vast majority of SotA pledgers wanted full loot, and what did we get? Developers implemented insurance that is game breaking for so many players. SotA developers claim they listen but they dont.
Richard Garriott called this game a spiritual successor to UO and managed to draw so many hardcore PvP players into a game that is way more carebear then WoW -
http://i.imgur.com/e5BgsFm.png
UO veteran (dating back from pre T2a till a while after Trammel) and pledger as well.
Really disappointed from where the whole thing goes at the moment.As people mentioned in this post it goes to the usual WoW PvE recipie and just a remix of Lineage 2 PvP (at the best case scenario).
Waiting for the official release with the hope that old UO players absence will make them re-think some roleplaying factors.
My best bets for something like UO are Albion Online and Life is Feudal which the PvP system is full open and loot as well and they are centered around player fueled items economy and guild wars for resources.Check them they seem real decent tries and they need all the support they can get.After all old school rpg gameplay is very difficult these days with WoW clones everywhere(and sadly SoTA goes full march to be just like that)
I think it's a bit early to claim anything about the risk/reward/openness of their proposed pvp system. There are a lot of ways they can change things. First, they can make it so pvp-only players only see other pvp-only players so it feels just like any open pvp game. That's how their selective multiplayer could work, it would be essentially like being on an open pvp server.
The risk/reward so far 1 item? We can see about getting that changed and trying full loot options as we see how itemization in this game works. back in the UO days you lost a full suit of GM equipment? no big deal, easy to replace. It also wasn't worth all that much, you were hoping to get a good score, like a rare, a key to a house, they were carrying something they shouldn't be, that sort of thing. In this game if equipment is more difficult and time consuming to replace you might not want to risk it all.
They've listened to player feedback frequently already and if people want those options I have faith they'll deliver on them, but for now I assume they have good reasons for how they have designed it.
Seems like a lot of misunderstood information about the current plan for PvP in Shroud of the Avatar... here are the concepts that our Executive Producer has recently laid out:
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/pvp-death-current-thinking-megapost.8247/
There is loot from pvp and there is a form of open pvp that you can opt into... also guild wars and other cool things... This post has information about some death plans as well. Great read!
When will we get a UO style game with WoW dated graphics... Please see "Shroud of the Avatar"
There is no misunderstanding.
Since you can pay for all you would have lost with ingame money (insurance) there is no loot for the winner as long as the opponent have money in his bank.
What developers so far decided on PvP and death can be read in the proposed PvP system. That is what we know so far and can discuss.
Sure things can change but nothing say it will go more hardcore.
If the game is gear based then it wont go full loot. UO had easily replacable gear and full loot worked like a charm.
Developers designed the game to please the PvE players, just about nothing the hardcore PvP players from old UO wanted is in the game.
Some money i dont consider loot. Loot is something that slow down your opponent. He have to restock everything to become good in the field again.
Money loot is insurance just as Age of Shadows in UO was insurance. Age of Shadows killed off felucca and that is what SotA developers want to implement in their game and that say alot about how far into carebearism Richard Garriott have gone.
He created UO which to me today seem to be something he see as a mistake from his side, he dont seem to like that old game he created since SotA is nowhere close old UO. Makes you wonder who in the developer team for UO stood for the hardcore PvP parts?