Proposal: PvE Outposts

[aardnebb]

You don't get any op content. OP's are PvP content. They are one of the perks of taking part in PvP. If you don't take part in PvP you do not get to enjoy the perks of PvP.

I don't understand how you can say this wouldn't hurt PvP outposts? What would be the point of a PvP outpost if you could get the benefits of them without having to deal with PvP?

It's really simple. If you want the crystals from op's and don't want to take part in the PvP systems, find someone and buy them from them.

LOL, this from the guy who quotes "teh original concept" in his sig. Dont you remember the originally proposed outposts were supposed to include stuff like this?

PvP ONLY content is exclusive to a small subsection of the players. Heck, I was gonna post to the original poster that I think this is too harsh on the non-PvPers since they have to do more work to keep their OP than certain PvPers... After all, weekly battles and escalating costs instead of monthly battles at the same old cost?

PvP doesnt deserve "perks" exclusive to _just_ pvpers, since it makes the rest of the players (a majority no less), 2nd class citizens effectively. Unless you wish to propose Non-PvP perks of a different kind for everyone who avoids PvP...

[XoloX]

OP's are PvP content.

That's correct.
And it's the exact reason why concepts like these are being discussed or even appear after all and are fascinating and supported by "some" in the end. No need to talk about original concepts of outposting...

Why do some always seem to insist that PvP content and benefit has to be exclusive while PvE counterparts have to be for all and PvE supporters are always told to be tolerant and accepting enough? (I don't mean you now - what you said rather...)
And to answer your question: PvP OPs have a chance of being constantly owned/held by one guild, while PvE OPs will change their owner all the time following this concept.

[raynes]

That's correct.
And it's the exact reason why concepts like these are being discussed or even appear after all and are fascinating and supported by "some" in the end. No need to talk about original concepts of outposting...

Why do some always seem to insist that PvP content and benefit has to be exclusive while PvE counterparts have to be for all and PvE supporters are always told to be tolerant and accepting enough? (I don't mean you now - what you said rather...)
And to answer your question: PvP OPs have a chance of being constantly owned/held by one guild, while PvE OPs will change their owner all the time following this concept.

PvP is and should be centered around the ownership of game property. If one in game group does not like that another owns property, then they should be able to take it from them. What is being suggested is that some game property be given to players and those players never having to deal with people wanting to take it from them.

PvE content is and should be centered around other areas of the game. the Kitin Lair is a good example of what PvE content should be.

You really want PvE outposts? This is how you do it.

You have all the bandit tribes build outposts on the abondoned areas. In the major cities NPC's give missions to guilds to go and overtake the outpost. If successful the outpost then is owned by the race that owns the lands. They start to build a new city. Players are then notified when the bandits are trying to take back the outpost. If they are on top of things, the outpost remains under ownership of the race. If they defend it enough times (like 50 or 100) it becomes a new city with spawn points. If it goes back to the bandits, the cycle starts all over.

This way there is PvE outpost content, but the ownership remains under the control of NPC's, not players.

[aardnebb]

PvP is and should be centered around the ownership of game property. If one in game group does not like that another owns property, then they should be able to take it from them. What is being suggested is that some game property be given to players and those players never having to deal with people wanting to take it from them.

In your oppinion. But then, since you already have the PvP content, of course you dont want a break in the monopoly... Of course having to take it in the first place (just like the original OPs) and bandit attacks of escalating power arent a concern to you... just no way for you to barge in and nick the goodies spoils your day I suppose.

[raynes]

In your oppinion. But then, since you already have the PvP content, of course you dont want a break in the monopoly... Of course having to take it in the first place (just like the original OPs) and bandit attacks of escalating power arent a concern to you... just no way for you to barge in and nick the goodies spoils your day I suppose.

Break the monopoly on what? Outposts? Any player can take part in them. So there is no monopoly.

And you have PvE content. Tons of it all over the game in fact. I have no problems with them adding bandits attacks to the equation of op ownership. In fact I think that would be a great thing. However no OP should be put in a state where players do not have to fight other players over them.

[grimjim]

Break the monopoly on what? Outposts? Any player can take part in them. So there is no monopoly.

And you have PvE content. Tons of it all over the game in fact. I have no problems with them adding bandits attacks to the equation of op ownership. In fact I think that would be a great thing. However no OP should be put in a state where players do not have to fight other players over them.

Because...?

Variety is the spice of life.

[lewalton]

I was reading the posts and saw raynes in there..and was thinking where is grimjim....I knew if i kept reading I would find him too...heheheheh

[grimjim]

I was reading the posts and saw raynes in there..and was thinking where is grimjim....I knew if i kept reading I would find him too...heheheheh

All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing

[rothimar]

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction?

[aardnebb]

Break the monopoly on what? Outposts? Any player can take part in them. So there is no monopoly.

Any player who enjoys or is willing to put up with PvP without choice in the matter, 3am attacks on weeknights, unbalanced fights and all the other "fun" of PvP.

And you have PvE content. Tons of it all over the game in fact. I have no problems with them adding bandits attacks to the equation of op ownership. In fact I think that would be a great thing. However no OP should be put in a state where players do not have to fight other players over them.

Umm you have yet to give a reason why Outposts and their connected content should only be PvP content. Other thank "because I said so". Which, frankly, isn't a very convincing argument for anyone.

How would you feel if there was "PvE only" content. Lets call them... villages. They are happy little areas which players can interact with, defend from kitin attacks and build a community in. However, PvP characters, as they are known homin-killers are exiled from these villages. The villages have farmers and harvesters that produce elevation crystals and wonderful unique mats that arent available to the PvPers except through trade...