On the topic of Felucca and PvP....

[FrejaSP]

The problem with fel is there is no risk for anti-social types. Allow me to illustrate. I go to fel with my lumberjack for the increased wood harvest. A pk spots me and attacks. No problems there; I love it. Let's say I win (seldom happens for me). I get a few gold pieces from insurance. Twenty minutes later he's back and we do it all again. When do I get to harvest wood? If I must spend all of my time fighting, where is the reward for me coming to fel. I think most tram players see through this and stay in tram.

Again I believe the problem is the split, if Devs had made some shards Trammel only code and some shard only Felucca code, the case would had looked different on the Felucca shards.
You would had been killed, yes, but after that, that PK would let you in peace for some hours, maybe until next day

Two simple solutions, either of which, over time, will build fel population.

1) Die in fel and that character may not log back in for 24 hours.

That do not make sense to me, as you could stay in Trammel zone and even when you don't get 2 x wood, you will get as much wood as in Felucca, as you don't use time to fight.
Why should the PK have his char banned for 24 hours, because you love to play with him instead of boring lumbering in Trammel zone?

2) Go grey and your insurance drops while you are grey.

That would be real risk vs. reward. For all pks every shard would be Siege.

A true PK do not go grey, he is red. Even when the idea is not all bad, I'm sure someone will find a way to make people to go grey and then killing them.

 

[Speaking the Truth]

All recent changes to Felucca have been at the instigation of pvpers, and every single one has met with complaints. I'm glad I'm not a dev because by now I'd be scratching my head and asking 'So what the hell DO they want?'. Pvp can't be fixed because the pvpers themselves can't agree on what's needed.

As an example, in a faction thread a while ago there were complaints about afk silver farmers. I asked 'what would happen if silver were cursed and couldn't be sent to the bank with a BoS?'. Several experienced faction players replied that this would be a step in the right direction. No one posted in opposition to the idea. The devs saw the idea, saw the acceptance of it, saw the lack of opposition to it and implemented it. It was met with abuse and complaints.

Something over half of the regular 'fix pvp' threads translate to 'nerf this template because the guy using it keeps killing me' which makes it very hard to identify the genuine balance issues. Also, unlike the pvpers, devs have to consider what effect requested adjustments will have on pvm.

I agree that pvpers didn't kill Felucca, neither did the devs of the time - it was the bullies that did that, those people who will never fight anyone of equal skill and instead prey only on the weak and helpless. Those who's idea of 'fun' is to deliberately ruin someone else's gaming experience. Newsflash - someone who's gaming experience is consistently and continuously ruined, stops playing.

Arenas were brought in to allow people to learn to pvp in relative safety, they're almost unused. Why aren't pvp guilds arranging tournaments in them and inviting people to come and learn? The devs can only do so much, it's up to the players to build on that.

Years ago, before AoS, a friend on Europa, Zole (if anyone remembers him?) used to run a 'fight night' on Yew prison roof each Friday night. I'm a hopeless pvper, and true trammie, but I used to go regularly, I never won a fight, but I had fun. I was with friends. Sometimes it got raided by rival guilds, the experienced pvpers would group together and drive them off. Why aren't current pvp guilds doing this?

I've pvp'd with other dexxers and agreed to call it a draw, because neither of us could get the upper hand. I've pvp'd with a mage who had wrestle and gotten as frustrated as hell because I couldn't keep a weapon in my hand long enough to hit him. But I didn't come on here demanding that that mage's skills be nerfed. Mostly I just died, because I simply don't think fast enough.

How silver is moved is the least of factions problems.

No what drove people away is that things that make pvp fun are taken away. First there was the specs change, then the 300 combat point change. Now you have a spell that has 3 spells wrapped in 1 with a quick enough casting time, and you have things like throwing weapons which hit almost as hard as specials for no mana. On top of all this you have a faction system which casual players can no longer participate in, and also can no longer play multiple shards. These are big reasons why fels population has taken a beating.

The problem with arenas are egos. I can't tell you how many times after I've fought a group of people and beat them with my smaller group. The last guy that dies seems to forget he out numbered you but his whole team died and then goes "nice gank". At this point I like to offer an 1v1 fight in the arena whatever rules they want to set. Rarely is it taken because they know they are just looking for an excuse as to why they died. Similar to when people claim scripts are running wild in pvp and you then realize said player doesn't know how to utilize all of UOA.

People don't like to take their licks and try to improve that's why fight nights don't happen anymore. They think someone is better and that's that. They don't go back to the drawing board and try to figure out what went wrong or what tactic they can come up with to best their opponent.

 

[FrejaSP]

One thing more, harder punishement of the PK's would not make more non PvP players go to Felucca, it would just make the last PvP'er leave UO.
On Siege we have very little punisment of our reds. We don't have alot reds now. When/if we get Faction replaced with Order/Chaos, I believe most PvP'ers will be blue and orance to enemies. The reds will mainly be red roleplayers.

We once had Devs listen to the non PvP'ers about how to fix the game and we ended up with stat loss for reds. It did not fix anything, it made the reds run in ganks and only kill someone they knew they could kill.
Before stat loss, many of the reds was willing to give you a fair chance to fight back and many of them would not attack crafters and newbies.

On Siege we still have a problem with items being hard to replace, special if you want good PvP gear. It's better now than it was after we got AoS but out crafters have hard getting enough imbuing resources as we have to few farmers and they can't afford to pay to much for the resources as they can't sell the armor if it get to expensive. Also it take far to long time to craft a suit with 5x70 resist and 2 mods, could be LRC and MR. Adding the resist is a pain.

 

[ShadowTrauma]

I have a problem with these for the fact that underdogs already have it difficult. So now if they are raiding with 2 vs 8 and one dies they have to go into stat while not in factions? In my experience any time a guild is doing a spawn they have the numbers. For whatever reason most people have said its not fair because they have to kill the champ and defend. I don't understand why they have to do both at the same time, they could kill the raiders then go back to finishing the champ...

...It doesn't happen often anymore, but some of the best fights/most fun I've ever had were non faction fights where it was just a non stop battle back and fourth, and I don't see a good reason to take that out.

I understand where your comming from, but I don't think we should use player numbers in this conversation too much. As you have rightly stated in other posts, the game is not (and I would argue cannot) be easily balanced around the constantly changing numbers of participants. It's unfortunate for sure, because like you I miss some of the large scale fights, smaller evenly matched skirmishes, or even the 1v1's that use to happen amongst all these battles. One of my fonder memories is from back on Catskills, when Buc's Den use to be one of the goto pvp spots (before AoS so that may be a big factor) there could be 20 people on screen all intertwined in various battles, a 2v2 by the healers hut, 3 blues chasing down a thief, 2 more blues chasing a red, and me and my competitor in a 1v1.

Also reds don't have access to virtues so if the take over a champ spawn for example, they are only getting 6 scrolls instead of 12.

Valid point, but not a swaying factor in my opinion. Reds do have some penalties for sure, however I don't think its enough to be of any real concern to them or the people they defeat. I would just ask you to step back and access the advantages the reds have when they come and steal a spawn from blue spawners; all the time and effort put into working the spawn, the loot they may be carrying, versus the minimal amount of insurance and consumable the reds will lose if defeated. The reds often have a significant pvp advantage to start.

Faction guild spawners is an entirely different topic, where I believe your reasoning has more merit, only becasue they obviously have consented to that style of pvp.

Siege is also a different situation, one where I do not have the experience to qualify me to even attempt suggesting a change. I will leave that to the Siege professionals.

 

[Berethrain]

I just want to quickly point out that a timer for getting rezzed is potentially more harsh "time" wise than a stat-loss option Logrus brought up earlier, which has already been met with concern to say the least. The way I see it is, at least during the stat-loss time players can get rezzed, restocked, and headed back, so time wise players can still be productive.

I would like to state that I would be in favor of an increased penalty or risk on pkers (or raiders), but only if we could come to a consensus that we all feel is fair. If you look at it objectively pkers/raiders risk very little indeed when they swoop in after all the work has been done (consider the time spent by the spawners as just one example), something I believe Logrus has been successful in pointing out.

Not really, and singling out pvpers/pks is biased. If you implement something it should be for everyone. A 5 minute delay in rezing really isn't any worse than a 10 minute stat loss. Though I don't thinhk I'd care to see either of these.

 

[Lightfoot]

Again I believe the problem is the split, if Devs had made some shards Trammel only code and some shard only Felucca code, the case would had looked different on the Felucca shards.
You would had been killed, yes, but after that, that PK would let you in peace for some hours, maybe until next day




That do not make sense to me, as you could stay in Trammel zone and even when you don't get 2 x wood, you will get as much wood as in Felucca, as you don't use time to fight.
Why should the PK have his char banned for 24 hours, because you love to play with him instead of boring lumbering in Trammel zone?



A true PK do not go grey, he is red. Even when the idea is not all bad, I'm sure someone will find a way to make people to go grey and then killing them.

1) You are saying that if there had been no split into two facets, the pk would have killed me once and then ignored me? Really? 'Cause that was never my experience back before the split.

2) He should be banned for 24 hours (or however long is decided) because he lost and died. That's his risk. Don't want to take the risk? Maybe fel is not the place for him to play. Don't fellucans always talk about risk vs. reward? Where is the pks risk in the current system? Didn't double resources get put in as a way of increasing the reward for playing in fel? Wasn't the idea to bring people back to fel so there would be someone to kill? All I'm asking is where is the trammy's reward? I can see the risk.

3) Insurance drops when you start a fight. Is that more clear?

 

[Berethrain]

Yes, like wow, D3, and most other MMO's the question with the whole "timer" to be ressed, is, since dieing is the only 100% effective gold-sink in the game... What the hell would they put a cool-down on it for?

by 100% effective gold-sink, I mean, you get absolutely no rewards beyond what you currently have, and there's always a price to pay with in-game currency upon death. (insurance/repairs)

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking or getting at.

 

[Picus at the office]

2) He should be banned for 24 hours (or however long is decided) because he lost and died. That's his risk. Don't want to take the risk? Maybe fel is not the place for him to play. Don't fellucans always talk about risk vs. reward? Where is the pks risk in the current system? Didn't double resources get put in as a way of increasing the reward for playing in fel? Wasn't the idea to bring people back to fel so there would be someone to kill? All I'm asking is where is the trammy's reward? I can see the risk.

This is insane and could only be fair if your lumberjacker was banned for 24 hours due to dieing in fel, absurd at best. You risked coming for the double resources.....

 

[CovenantX]

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking or getting at.

I'm against the idea of a cooldown timer on ressing, because Insurance/death is the only gold-sink that you don't get any rewards from.

 

[ShadowTrauma]

Not really, and singling out pvpers/pks is biased. If you implement something it should be for everyone. A 5 minute delay in rezing really isn't any worse than a 10 minute stat loss. Though I don't thinhk I'd care to see either of these.

I don't intend on singling out pvpers, I was attempting to point out an area of imbalance with the risk/reward system in Fel, I also agree with you that ideally the solution should work for everyone. It could just be a difference of opinion but I would take the 10 minute stat-loss (based on the severity) over a 5 minute delay in rezzing (depending on the circumstance of the death), but I understand your reasoning and once again agree with you. I don't think we have yet found a solution yet we would care to see implemented.

I think it is sad when people think of the game as one side or the other and blame the game for them not having fun. I currently have a house in Fel and rarely every see any one near the cities or out in the wild yet any time I try to do any of the champ spawns I have to leave as a large group shows up to kill any one there and take over. It is truly the PK'ers (not to be confused with PVP'ers) that keep people out of Fel and away from PVP. Why should some one work really hard on a champ spawn and almost have it finished just to have a group move in and take it from you when they can farm gold in Trammel and buy the items they were after on a player vendor?

Since I hinted at a difference in a PK'er and PVP'er let me explain why I think they are different.

PVP'er - A player that truly enjoys the challenge of finding a worthy opponent to fight in consensual combat. PVP'ers have also been known to help younger weaker players instead of just slaughtering them.
PK'er - A player that will kill or try to kill any other player regardless of what the other player has or is doing. Have been know to grief other players to no end and would just as soon rez you after killing you just so they can kill you again instead of talking to you.

We can blame what we want to on the dev's but they have only ever given the player base what we have asked for and let the players guide the direction of the game.

So if you serious PVP'ers want to see more population in Fel and have more people join your ranks how about you band together and work on stopping the griefing? I know non-PVP players could do the same thing but then again they aren't the ones asking for things to entice people over to PVP or Fel?

This poster has a view similar to my own, possibly why it seemed like I was singling out pvpers/pks to you, I consider them different playstyles. I actively pvp, was just on LS last night winning and losing, saying GF when it was a GF win or lose, keeping my mouth shut when heavily ganked (even though I was frustrated), its all part of the game currently, but like the poster I quoted said, we Fel players reap what we sow.

If anything is apparent from these discussions on pvp, it is that we encompass a very diverse playstlye, one which will be difficult to improve if we can't compromise. I still remain hopeful.

 

[Lightfoot]

This is insane and could only be fair if your lumberjacker was banned for 24 hours due to dieing in fel, absurd at best. You risked coming for the double resources.....

Yes, dying in fel costs a ban. Lumberjack or pk. The only difference is the lumberjack keeps his insurance up. The pk does not. That's his risk. Where is his risk currently?

Maybe being hyperbolic (insane? really?) is not the best way to make a point. We are trying to find a way to make fel a vibrant place again. Couldn't you put snarky on hold while we smack some ideas around?

I want to thank those who took the time to think and answer (espcially Freja whose thoughts I have always admired). I would not presume to suggest ideas for Siege. Siege is a special case populated by the best players. You guys can work out your own problems.

Now I bow out of the discussion while it is still relatively civil. Good luck!

 

[Speaking the Truth]

I understand where your comming from, but I don't think we should use player numbers in this conversation too much. As you have rightly stated in other posts, the game is not (and I would argue cannot) be easily balanced around the constantly changing numbers of participants. It's unfortunate for sure, because like you I miss some of the large scale fights, smaller evenly matched skirmishes, or even the 1v1's that use to happen amongst all these battles. One of my fonder memories is from back on Catskills, when Buc's Den use to be one of the goto pvp spots (before AoS so that may be a big factor) there could be 20 people on screen all intertwined in various battles, a 2v2 by the healers hut, 3 blues chasing down a thief, 2 more blues chasing a red, and me and my competitor in a 1v1.



Valid point, but not a swaying factor in my opinion. Reds do have some penalties for sure, however I don't think its enough to be of any real concern to them or the people they defeat. I would just ask you to step back and access the advantages the reds have when they come and steal a spawn from blue spawners; all the time and effort put into working the spawn, the loot they may be carrying, versus the minimal amount of insurance and consumable the reds will lose if defeated. The reds often have a significant pvp advantage to start.

Faction guild spawners is an entirely different topic, where I believe your reasoning has more merit, only becasue they obviously have consented to that style of pvp.

Siege is also a different situation, one where I do not have the experience to qualify me to even attempt suggesting a change. I will leave that to the Siege professionals.

Well on top of it, the replicas ect are based on how much spawn you killed. So if that person comes back and sits on the same server they can still get a reward, on top of the fact that the reds lose out on half of the scrolls.

My point though was some of the most fun fights I've had are ones that have gone back and fourth due to no stat loss. Where you res your guildmates and you're back in the fight.

I like factions because smaller groups can win because enough skill ect is taken off that for the most part if someone comes back in stat you know you can kill them very quickly. My biggest issue is when someone is in stat and hits a dismount x amount of times in a row. However that is getting off topic a bit.

I just don't feel it should be an all or nothing. If you want to participate in factions, you get stat loss. If you don't, then you can have those fights that go back and fourth and you're not punished for trying. I think this play style encourages pvp which is why it would be great if Order/Chaos came back. Just oranges to kill. No Towns, no scrolls, just mayhem.

Also I just want to note how that guy who looks like he never pvps says pvp for the sake of pvp is dead. If that were the case why is there quite a bit of action at yew gate more than any where else? Are people getting scrolls and replicas there that I'm not aware of? Those still left in pvp, DO pvp for the sake of pvp. Yew gate is a prime example of it. Also guilds that pop a spawn and leave the champ up for a prolonged period of time just for a fight. So those that claim otherwise, you are wrong.

 

[Speaking the Truth]

Yes, dying in fel costs a ban. Lumberjack or pk. The only difference is the lumberjack keeps his insurance up. The pk does not. That's his risk. Where is his risk currently?

Maybe being hyperbolic (insane? really?) is not the best way to make a point. We are trying to find a way to make fel a vibrant place again. Couldn't you put snarky on hold while we smack some ideas around?

I want to thank those who took the time to think and answer (espcially Freja whose thoughts I have always admired). I would not presume to suggest ideas for Siege. Siege is a special case populated by the best players. You guys can work out your own problems.

Now I bow out of the discussion while it is still relatively civil. Good luck!

I'd say the risk is being openly attacked anywhere. Then not being able to go to any other facet. Then no virtues. Then not being able to buy anything from vendors. Then not getting the same quests that give more powerful summons[Fey> imp. By far]. Then only being resed by red healers which can be a pain to find, and only chaos shrine. Then not being able to be cross healed or resed in quite a few places because your teammates will be guard whacked. I'm sure there are other things I'm not thinking of, these are what I came up with in 30 seconds.

I'm sorry but you're suggesting before a fight we go back to the stone age? So we have items we can't insure? Then what's the point of items? I'd just run with a group of scribe mages and sync on someone with a good suit so he loses everything as you're in a make shift suit.

I'm sorry but that is a bad idea, on top of which I gave you plenty reasons how reds already have more hardships.

 

[FrejaSP]

1) You are saying that if there had been no split into two facets, the pk would have killed me once and then ignored me? Really? 'Cause that was never my experience back before the split.

2) He should be banned for 24 hours (or however long is decided) because he lost and died. That's his risk. Don't want to take the risk? Maybe fel is not the place for him to play. Don't fellucans always talk about risk vs. reward? Where is the pks risk in the current system? Didn't double resources get put in as a way of increasing the reward for playing in fel? Wasn't the idea to bring people back to fel so there would be someone to kill? All I'm asking is where is the trammy's reward? I can see the risk.

3) Insurance drops when you start a fight. Is that more clear?

I don't think non PvP'ers should try to make rules for Felucca as you don't want any risk and sure not want to share some fun with their enemy.

You say "A pk spots me and attacks. No problems there; I love it" so you have fun, why should the one playing with you, then be punished of the game. You are in his land, stealing his logs. Dying is your risk for getting more logs

 

[CovenantX]

Yes, dying in fel costs a ban. Lumberjack or pk. The only difference is the lumberjack keeps his insurance up. The pk does not. That's his risk. Where is his risk currently?

The risk of the PK would be, Insurance same as the Lumberjack. But the PK would likely either be red (no virtues & freely attackable, without handing out murder counts) or Grey, (freely attackable without handing out counts, for 2 minutes after the last criminal action).

Just because someone has Lumber-jacking, or Mining on a template means they can't defend themselves? The character creation/diversity allows for virtually unlimited templates, to say a person is helpless because they're a Lumberjack or a miner is because of the person doing the LJing/Mining, doesn't want to create a character that has the ability to defend itself. (of course less diversity now then past times. ), but it still applies).

It's the players choice if they want to have Crafting skills that work With Resource gathering skills, or fighting/casting skills that allow them to fight off monsters/players.

 

[Lightfoot]

I'd say the risk is being openly attacked anywhere. Then not being able to go to any other facet. Then no virtues. Then not being able to buy anything from vendors. Then not getting the same quests that give more powerful summons[Fey> imp. By far]. Then only being resed by red healers which can be a pain to find, and only chaos shrine. Then not being able to be cross healed or resed in quite a few places because your teammates will be guard whacked. I'm sure there are other things I'm not thinking of, these are what I came up with in 30 seconds.

I'm sorry but you're suggesting before a fight we go back to the stone age? So we have items we can't insure? Then what's the point of items? I'd just run with a group of scribe mages and sync on someone with a good suit so he loses everything as you're in a make shift suit.

I'm sorry but that is a bad idea, on top of which I gave you plenty reasons how reds already have more hardships.

Can't resist.

Those aren't risks. They may be handicaps but they are not risks. No one said you can't insure items. You just can't keep insurance WHEN YOU MURDER SOMEONE. Why isn't that reasonable as a penalty for murder.

What do you care about elite items? Aren't fel players always saying it's about skill not items?

If you want to fight with elite items, well, that's what arenas are for.

Sorry, but what I am hearing is that you want to be able to kill innocents without penalty. I am willing to be murdered for your amusement IF you have some check on your anti-social behavior. Without such a check, you will be forever stuck playing in a world barely populated with trash-talking gankers, because that's what we have now.

You and I may enjoy the feeling of risk. But how will you convince others to repopulate our world? Any real suggestions?

 

[Speaking the Truth]

Can't resist.

Those aren't risks. They may be handicaps but they are not risks. No one said you can't insure items. You just can't keep insurance WHEN YOU MURDER SOMEONE. Why isn't that reasonable as a penalty for murder.

What do you care about elite items? Aren't fel players always saying it's about skill not items?

If you want to fight with elite items, well, that's what arenas are for.

Sorry, but what I am hearing is that you want to be able to kill innocents without penalty. I am willing to be murdered for your amusement IF you have some check on your anti-social behavior. Without such a check, you will be forever stuck playing in a world barely populated with trash-talking gankers, because that's what we have now.

You and I may enjoy the feeling of risk. But how will you convince others to repopulate our world? Any real suggestions?

So only reds lose their suits?

You want a place where everyone holds hands, sorry sport, not everyone wants that.

There are plenty of risk vs rewards already, and reds already have risks as I mentioned. You can try to relabel it a handicap but it doesn't take anything away from what I said, you didn't counter it at all, except with a terrible idea.

Arenas = elite items? Sorry but now, arenas have nothing to do with items. All they have to do with is a place you can 1v1 ect where someone can't run away.

Also I want to point out that people enjoy a challenge. A player will be your best bet for a challenge. Unlike an NPC it can change up its game plan in every aspect. If I have to play in a less populated place so be it. I won't however support an idea that you would hate. Do you realize you would get killed and be "banned" or whatever absurd concept you're trying to come up with. Your risk vs reward is right in front of you. You want double resources? You might have to risk fighting for it. No one is forcing you, reds already have the short end of the stick and what you're suggesting makes no sense. Unless you want to have when someone issues a murder count all their items drop, it would have to be a two way street. So you would lose your gear and then be banished to trammel.

There are people that are deathly afraid of fel and that won't change. You're bad suggestion is just a great way to kill fel and that's about it.

Don't worry though, I'm sure the next tram only content will come out soon and you go back to holding hands and singing kumbaya around a campfire or whatever your end goal is.

 

[Lightfoot]

I don't think non PvP'ers should try to make rules for Felucca as you don't want any risk and sure not want to share some fun with their enemy.

You say "A pk spots me and attacks. No problems there; I love it" so you have fun, why should the one playing with you, then be punished of the game. You are in his land, stealing his logs. Dying is your risk for getting more logs

Yes, HIS land. Don't you want it to be the lumberjack's land too? Dying and losing what he worked for (his logs in this instance) is the 'jack's risk. What is the pks?

Why should he be punished? Because he LOST! You seem to want no punishment for murderers, and wonder why no one will come play.

Since you do not know if I pvp, your first comment is irrelevant. Just so you know, I have 82 fully developed characters on 4 accounts on six different shards including Siege. Of these 21 play entirely in fel. I do champ spawns and have three reds. No factions though. I've been around since the start, just after beta.

I'm not trying to avoid risk. I just want all parties to be risking something. And I want more people in fel to fight also. How do you think we should achieve that end?

 

[Lythos-]

I know they're frustrating (the anti fel establishment) but we need to keep level heads to get anywhere.

 

[Lythos-]

Yes, HIS land. Don't you want it to be the lumberjack's land too? Dying and losing what he worked for (his logs in this instance) is the 'jack's risk. What is the pks?

Why should he be punished? Because he LOST! You seem to want no punishment for murderers, and wonder why no one will come play.

Since you do not know if I pvp, your first comment is irrelevant. Just so you know, I have 82 fully developed characters on 4 accounts on six different shards including Siege. Of these 21 play entirely in fel. I do champ spawns and have three reds. No factions though. I've been around since the start, just after beta.

I'm not trying to avoid risk. I just want all parties to be risking something. And I want more people in fel to fight also. How do you think we should achieve that end?

I don't know what to say toward you wanting to punish someone for winning. None of what's going through my head is good though. It's NOT a big deal to lose a couple hundred logs.

Everyone is punished for dying. It's called insurance loss. Want to increase insurance costs for reds go for it. Suits dropping or being banned for dying will start a revolution.

Most reds/pvpers lose a backpack full of potions/apples/bandies that cost a whole lot more than a few hundred logs. From your 82 developed characters you should know this already. I have 4 developed characters and no reds currently (canceled my other accounts)

 

[Gorbs]

Try to focus on ways to make the game enjoyable. Forcing players to not participate for a period of time is not enjoyable.

I'm not sure you can change Fel to make things perfect for all. I keep hoping for a return of order/chaos mechanic or something that easily allows players to get involved with consensual pvp without absurdities. I would ultimately like to see a pvp enabled zone where everyone entering must consent to pvp. I'd suggest starting with a small dungeon / zone where players join one of two sides. All players on your side are blue to you, unless they are in your guild (green). All players on the other side are orange. If you steal from your side or loot a corpse you turn criminal. Anyone can then freely attack you as normal. If you murder someone from your side you get an automatic stat loss period (despite not dying), or some other detriment that still allows for players to police themselves.

 

[Lythos-]

Try to focus on ways to make the game enjoyable. Forcing players to not participate for a period of time is not enjoyable.

I'm not sure you can change Fel to make things perfect for all. I keep hoping for a return of order/chaos mechanic or something that easily allows players to get involved with consensual pvp without absurdities. I would ultimately like to see a pvp enabled zone where everyone entering must consent to pvp. I'd suggest starting with a small dungeon / zone where players join one of two sides. All players on your side are blue to you, unless they are in your guild (green). All players on the other side are orange. If you steal from your side or loot a corpse you turn criminal. Anyone can then freely attack you as normal. If you murder someone from your side you get an automatic stat loss period (despite not dying), or some other detriment that still allows for players to police themselves.

Chaos/Order if in the original form would be fantastic.

The dungeon idea would be too much work im afraid. If a red were to join your side they would have to code him to turn blue inside there then you would have bene acts trying to heal others due to blues being in other guilds. You can already get this fighting over spawns anyway.

Good thoughts though but it's just too much work. I proposed special EMs being appointed to promote pvp on shards somewhere on one of these posts. I believe that would be the best thing right now until a better more permanent idea could be agreed upon.

 

[Picus at the office]

I have a few chars that I will "PK" on like a mad man cause it's fun(but I can't think of a time in the recent past where I could freely murder) while I have more that I will "PvP" with cause it's fun but I can't think of a single time in the last 10+ years where I have actually searched for some lumberjacker to kill. If I happen to be chasing some person through the woods and I stumble upon a script running I might, MIGHT, make note of it and come back to see if it was a script and kill the bot but otherwise why on earth would anyone bother to do such a thing?

 

[Surgeries]

Like i said before, if im role playing a PK I can only do it there are People to PK. I dont do it to interup your game play. If your in an area where i can attack you, then you desisded its worth the risk to be in that area. Horses for cources

*Blinks*

OK...I guess that means you understood my post? I guess?

 

[Mandrake of DF]

Over the years, I have seen many times posts about the lack of players on Siege, in Felucca and many attempts to revive PvP in Ultima Online but never have I read discussions about what I think is the core problem that is common to all these problems. To my opinion, it is unfair fights. I do not think that, when playing a game, a player enjoys loosing. It can happen, sure, but together with losing fights there should also be winning fights to keep players wanting to keep PvPing and thus play on Siege, in Felucca and bring life to those places. So, as I see it, the most crucial aspect of the problems lamented is "uneven fights". Ganking being one of the worst aspects of the problem. I think that if an effort was made to ensure that PvP fights were to be balanced, whether between individuals or groups, then more and more players would entertain this important aspect of Ultima Online and replenish the PvP areas of UO. In order to achieve that, though, the game would need a special PvP engine that assessed the "power" of characters both evaluating their total skills and their gear/weaponry and allow only a slight inbalance (say 10% plus or minus ?) between the attacker and the defender (be them 2 individuals or 2 groups). That is, to make an example, if player A wants to initiate an attack against player B, the PvP engine would make a weighted assessment of the power of player A and that of player B and only if the 2 totals come into the same range, plus or minus 10%, then the combat would be allowed. If player A was to be too strong as in respect to player B, the PvP engine would not allow the combat. This way, fights would be more open ended and ganking would no longer occur as well as having players most always winning and others most always losing fights. Having unbalanced fights is bad for the game because, at least I see it, those eventually always losing will get fed up and stop playing the game or at least stop PvPing, while those most always winning fights will eventually get bored of winning all the time and leave the game for lack of competition and boredom. So, ensuring that combat could occur only when the 2 fighting parties are moreless on an even power balance I think would help PvPing in Ultima Online. Of course, this means the need for resources to invest in such an important aspect of the game but I think it is the most important aspect to solve the problem because it goes to treat what I think is the root of the problems which affect PvP in Ultima Online.

I agree with most u say, - that abotu winning loosing is awesome. But another thing i experieced is the uneven benefits. For to fight in pvp you have to become faction members, to get artifacts cheap and with better mods. I DO NOT see how that benefit fell play at all.

If you can as a faction player farm silver and kills to get rank, then go buy it for slick and nothing - i have as a trammel player earn my ranks to be lucky to have one...or many other artifacts...but the worst thing - the faction player get lot better stats...giving a base gear that is uneven to whatever I can archive without going into factions. So - that means I have to say *Goodbye Alliance* or *Goodbye Guild* - i need better items, that we pay hard for to get.

Then they complain we dont go fight fell? Im not afraid of fell, i just awoid pvp - cuz it is so unfair. I live in fell, i hunt there and i grew up there. I just not agree where it goes. And for pvp - rewards? That will be misued so much, put up montly fights in arena - then they fight for a title for a month to keep.

For rest - find a way to balance it. Make it less item based and more skill based. Or best is that once u go to fell - you will not get more benefit than a gm leather suit will give u - and 2/6 fc fcr... - rest is up to your template.....

 

[Speaking the Truth]

I agree with most u say, - that abotu winning loosing is awesome. But another thing i experieced is the uneven benefits. For to fight in pvp you have to become faction members, to get artifacts cheap and with better mods. I DO NOT see how that benefit fell play at all.

If you can as a faction player farm silver and kills to get rank, then go buy it for slick and nothing - i have as a trammel player earn my ranks to be lucky to have one...or many other artifacts...but the worst thing - the faction player get lot better stats...giving a base gear that is uneven to whatever I can archive without going into factions. So - that means I have to say *Goodbye Alliance* or *Goodbye Guild* - i need better items, that we pay hard for to get.

Then they complain we dont go fight fell? Im not afraid of fell, i just awoid pvp - cuz it is so unfair. I live in fell, i hunt there and i grew up there. I just not agree where it goes. And for pvp - rewards? That will be misued so much, put up montly fights in arena - then they fight for a title for a month to keep.

For rest - find a way to balance it. Make it less item based and more skill based. Or best is that once u go to fell - you will not get more benefit than a gm leather suit will give u - and 2/6 fc fcr... - rest is up to your template.....

What?

 

[Good Grief]

Sorry, but what I am hearing is that you want to be able to kill innocents without penalty. I am willing to be murdered for your amusement IF you have some check on your anti-social behavior.

Sorry, but there are no innocents in Fel. Fel has been here for 15+ years and with the exception of some noobie who started playing yesterday, everyone else is by now fully aware how Fel differs from Tram. If that's not enough, you're given a warning whenever you enter a moongate explaining the fact that you can be attacked at any time due to the rules of that facet. At best you could argue that there's uninformed players who are killed, but after that 1st encounter they're no longer uninformed.

Also since the Fel facet is set up as PvP enabled, calling people who are simply playing by the rules anti-social is quite disrepectful and shows a severe bias on your opinions.

Finally, arguing for penalties for players PvPing in a PvPing enabled land is ridiculous. The simple fact is that you can freely mine or LJ in Tram all day and night, but you clearly choose to do those activites in Fel for the BONUS of double resources. So don't come on here and complain about those evil PK's needing to be stoned to death when you have the option to collect resources in Tram.

 

[FrejaSP]

Yes, HIS land. Don't you want it to be the lumberjack's land too? Dying and losing what he worked for (his logs in this instance) is the 'jack's risk. What is the pks?

The PK's risk is also dying and losing insurance money and stuff he can't insure. If he is on Siege, he risk to lose everything, so do the lumberjack. I really don't like Insurance, game would be better without.

Why should he be punished? Because he LOST! You seem to want no punishment for murderers, and wonder why no one will come play.

A murder on normal shards can't play other places in Fel on that char, he can't deal with npc vendors, he can be attacked everywhere, I don't think more punisment is needed.

Since you do not know if I pvp, your first comment is irrelevant. Just so you know, I have 82 fully developed characters on 4 accounts on six different shards including Siege. Of these 21 play entirely in fel. I do champ spawns and have three reds. No factions though. I've been around since the start, just after beta.

Who are your Siege chars?, that will tell alot about who you are. Are you just trolling here?

I'm not trying to avoid risk. I just want all parties to be risking something. And I want more people in fel to fight also. How do you think we should achieve that end?

I don't believe in carrots and I don't believe in justice made of the gamesystem.

NOW, WHERE IS MY DISLIKE LINK, I need it badly

 

[Winker]

*Blinks*

OK...I guess that means you understood my post? I guess?

I lost interest, I would need to re- read the thread again to rememebr if i agree or not. I have been reading so many threads that are realy all the same, I got lost in all the Bull, so i desided to move on.