Poll question reguarding PVP - - please leave feedback.
I say it depends wheter you lose items if you die.
And maybe the killed Player won't loose EXP or anything.
It can be a good thing beeing able to attack a player, expl. a looter thief or someone
who wants to nerve you and can't be stopped. But many Players would start killing weak other Players.
And personally I really don't like the Idea of Players out there in an enemy-infested Area
just waiting for the next innocent Player to stop by and loot him.
There's the enemies for attacking/aggressions and EXP/GP and not other
Players. I really like the Idea of quick-formed Teams to do an especcialy
hard Task. And would you want to join/create such a Team if you knew that
all the others could attack you or kill you in a weak moment?
And maybe the killed Player won't loose EXP or anything.
It can be a good thing beeing able to attack a player, expl. a looter thief or someone
who wants to nerve you and can't be stopped. But many Players would start killing weak other Players.
And personally I really don't like the Idea of Players out there in an enemy-infested Area
just waiting for the next innocent Player to stop by and loot him.
There's the enemies for attacking/aggressions and EXP/GP and not other
Players. I really like the Idea of quick-formed Teams to do an especcialy
hard Task. And would you want to join/create such a Team if you knew that
all the others could attack you or kill you in a weak moment?
-
_darkKnight_
- Peon
- Posts: 14
- Joined: 06 Jun 2005, 07:20
- Location: Brasil - São Paulo - SP
- Contact:
how about a league system? an arena where people can fight 1on1 and are ELO* rated. the fighters with the highest rating could get a special title or even some advantages outside of the arena.
*) the elo system is used for rating chess players and in some online gaming leagues. in the elo system you gain many points for defeating someone with more points than you and few points for defeating someone with fewer points. when you lose you lose many points when your enemy got fewer points than you and you loose few points when your enemy got more than you. for a more detailed description read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELO_rating_system
*) the elo system is used for rating chess players and in some online gaming leagues. in the elo system you gain many points for defeating someone with more points than you and few points for defeating someone with fewer points. when you lose you lose many points when your enemy got fewer points than you and you loose few points when your enemy got more than you. for a more detailed description read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELO_rating_system
-
PAPA FAILURE
- Peon
- Posts: 7
- Joined: 15 Nov 2005, 08:45
- Location: Arizona, United States
To start I think some of the earlier ideas work fine so I will just reiterate them and cast my vote.
Personally I hate pvp. I think that overall it causes far to many problems for the small bit that is gained from it. I could do completely without pvp.
Firstly, there are many people such as myself who do not enjoy pvp and an option to flat out not participate is a great one. How it is achieved, whether it be by a choice that prompts and is permanently remembered as yes or no, or a choice to activate and never go back, is not important only that if a player doesn't want pvp, they don't have to participate.
As a variant to the choosing whether to participate in a pvp I think another good way would to go about it is the same way a player to player trade takes place. As in if you want to pvp someone, you can simply right click(or some other keyboard button) on them and proposition them like you would a trade. If they decline then they don't have to worry about someone killing them, and if they accept after one player dies the pvp ends and must be re-initiated. Also during the pvp proposal the ability for both parties to see the level of the other would be a huge help.
Furthermore if it ever becomes a viable option to have multiple servers there could be pvp and non pvp dedicated servers.
(This next part may be disregarded if a player to player trade like approach is taken)
In addition to choosing I also feel that the pvp areas should be limited to very small places such as arenas.
Even if one chooses to participate in pvp it is a severe pain in the ass when trying to level up and having to worry about being attacked. If I am playing the game, leveling up, collecting items, and otherwise trying to enjoy myself, having to worry about being killed by someone or pestered away from my routine HUGELY detracts from my gaming experience.
In fact I think if pvp becomes mass enabled and unlimited, the original purpose of the game will go away and the focus will be on trying to stay away from pkers or becoming one.
In any event, any update in the news section about the status and specifics of pvp being turned on or off would be cool.
===============================================
"Be daring, be different, be impractical; be anything
that will assert integrity of purpose and imaginative
vision against the play-it-safers, the creatures of the
commonplace, the slaves of the ordinary."
Personally I hate pvp. I think that overall it causes far to many problems for the small bit that is gained from it. I could do completely without pvp.
Firstly, there are many people such as myself who do not enjoy pvp and an option to flat out not participate is a great one. How it is achieved, whether it be by a choice that prompts and is permanently remembered as yes or no, or a choice to activate and never go back, is not important only that if a player doesn't want pvp, they don't have to participate.
As a variant to the choosing whether to participate in a pvp I think another good way would to go about it is the same way a player to player trade takes place. As in if you want to pvp someone, you can simply right click(or some other keyboard button) on them and proposition them like you would a trade. If they decline then they don't have to worry about someone killing them, and if they accept after one player dies the pvp ends and must be re-initiated. Also during the pvp proposal the ability for both parties to see the level of the other would be a huge help.
Furthermore if it ever becomes a viable option to have multiple servers there could be pvp and non pvp dedicated servers.
(This next part may be disregarded if a player to player trade like approach is taken)
In addition to choosing I also feel that the pvp areas should be limited to very small places such as arenas.
Even if one chooses to participate in pvp it is a severe pain in the ass when trying to level up and having to worry about being attacked. If I am playing the game, leveling up, collecting items, and otherwise trying to enjoy myself, having to worry about being killed by someone or pestered away from my routine HUGELY detracts from my gaming experience.
In fact I think if pvp becomes mass enabled and unlimited, the original purpose of the game will go away and the focus will be on trying to stay away from pkers or becoming one.
In any event, any update in the news section about the status and specifics of pvp being turned on or off would be cool.
===============================================
"Be daring, be different, be impractical; be anything
that will assert integrity of purpose and imaginative
vision against the play-it-safers, the creatures of the
commonplace, the slaves of the ordinary."
whatever.-
ElvenProgrammer
- Founder
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: 13 Apr 2004, 19:11
- Location: Italy
- Contact:
I again want to express my opinion. Towns should be pvp-safe using guards and what else, as well as main roads between towns. And many other places such as sacred forests, outposts, seaports, ... If you go into a dark forest or a dungeon which you can access outside a town, well than it's your business. If I'm rich I won't go into the sherwood forest 
TMW Italian communityHi all
From previous experiences playing diverse mmorpgs , i think that people can be annoying even in safe areas, and not even GM/software control can fully prevent that from happening. For me, the only way to deal with them is a free trip to respawn point, let the players set their grudges themselves, so i vote for only towns being safe areas(but if i could i would vote for pvp everywhere, even in towns, no safe ground and with logout timer so annoying people could not escape logging out).
Sorry for broken english, not my native language.
From previous experiences playing diverse mmorpgs , i think that people can be annoying even in safe areas, and not even GM/software control can fully prevent that from happening. For me, the only way to deal with them is a free trip to respawn point, let the players set their grudges themselves, so i vote for only towns being safe areas(but if i could i would vote for pvp everywhere, even in towns, no safe ground and with logout timer so annoying people could not escape logging out).
Sorry for broken english, not my native language.
-
Modanung
- Grand Knight
- Posts: 1719
- Joined: 20 May 2005, 15:51
- Location: Groningen, The Netherlands
- Contact:
But wouldn't you agree free PvP allowes players to be even more very annoying?
If you're looking for 3D FOSS games be sure to check out LucKey Productions on itch.io
Not necessarilly, because then you at least would have a chance to pk.Modanung wrote:But wouldn't you agree free PvP allowes players to be even more very annoying?
If a lower lvl come killsteal or dropsteal me i can kill him , if a stronger pk comes i can try partying to kill him or move on , but at least i would have a chance to solve it myself. I can deal with pks , its thiefs and buggers protected by pvp restrictions that annoy me, but that is my personal view on the subject.
This is my ideia about pvp..=p
Pvp should be in all areas thats not a Protec zone,like temples,deposits,houses,churchs...all the other areas have PVP on!
For protection of begginers...u can create a beginer island or make like,just lvl 20 or over can atack or been atacked!
For controlate the pvp,symbol system do great,a symbol next the char:
-A red symbol means the char atacked someone unmarked,last 5 minuts!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!
-If u kill someone unmarked,u got like a grey symbol,can last 15 minuts!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!
-If u kill many unmarked like 10,u got like a black symbol,can last fell days!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!(could be a better punishment,like lose more exp if it dies)
-Wood have the "duel symbol"!Its like a party for duels,if u are inside u could atack anyone thats inside too,without punishment!(for death duels)
....i guess thats all my ideas now!plx say what u think about!
Pvp should be in all areas thats not a Protec zone,like temples,deposits,houses,churchs...all the other areas have PVP on!
For protection of begginers...u can create a beginer island or make like,just lvl 20 or over can atack or been atacked!
For controlate the pvp,symbol system do great,a symbol next the char:
-A red symbol means the char atacked someone unmarked,last 5 minuts!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!
-If u kill someone unmarked,u got like a grey symbol,can last 15 minuts!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!
-If u kill many unmarked like 10,u got like a black symbol,can last fell days!This char could been kiled by anyone,and wood be a justified dead!(could be a better punishment,like lose more exp if it dies)
-Wood have the "duel symbol"!Its like a party for duels,if u are inside u could atack anyone thats inside too,without punishment!(for death duels)
....i guess thats all my ideas now!plx say what u think about!