Page 4 of 5
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:25 pm
by ladattas
turjake wrote:If Nevrax only wants to cater the minority as the new content goes - server emulator...
Right....So you want an OP without risk for the reward? Why not delete the OP content altogether then? I mean, OPs were about continuing the story arc regarding the Karavan-Kami War that is heating up. You can't exclude a significant portion of the story and the consequences of that story without breaking the game. If you don't want to PVP then try a single player game. Even when you're not fighting another PC, the fact that you are fighting critters that other PCs could get to as well, you have just excluded that other PC, thus fighting them indirectly anyways. In this view, you just don't like direct conflict, and I feel you on that issue, I don't PVP 90% of the time, but when I do PVP, I don't complain about losing or having to deal with a challenge of 'uphill battles.' And so on. The problem that really bothers me is that the fact that PVP is purely consentual in this game, and that doesn't gell for me. If there's a war about, you side with one side of the conflict, then you ought to feel the wrath of the opposing side at all times except in your side's own domain[excluding the OPs under battle]. If folks would just accept that reality, then maybe, just maybe, things would get better for them. I use to hate PVP, but now, I like it. It adds another level of challenge for me. You would be surprised the tactics many PCs come up with that could never be scripted for, or predicted in some function/algorithm-set of an AI. And that's why I think it's rather specious to claim that Nevrax is catering to any one group considering the vast majority of the content is PVE. Does that mean Nevrax is catering to 'care bears' ? No, it just means the game is orientated toward PVE with PVP added part of the story arc. Then again, I could just be an evil 'sociopath' since I love to fight other PCs.
-- Bridget
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 3:34 pm
by raven41
I can't speak for all but i know a few who agree with me ...If PvP had been here from the start it would be a very different game ..Noone would be arguing about it ...I know a few who have said they don't like war being shoved down there throut it reminds them tomuch of war irl..wich is what they are trying to get away from[edit] just woke up was in a bad mood so rest of post removed
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 5:17 pm
by ladattas
I totally agree on that part, but I think it was in the cards when I got the stress-test invite almost two years ago. The story smacked of a war, homin vs kitin, and a war between two 'divine' powers, kami and karavan. So, I have to say, those that don't wanna PVP, they can keep the flag off and enjoy the game. ^__^
-- Bridget
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 6:32 pm
by aardnebb
ladattas wrote:Right....So you want an OP without risk for the reward? ..
I think the issue is basically it is "PvP ONLY" content. So you have to love PvP, or at least be willing to take part in it, to directly aquire the _huge_ advantage of crystals, or mats required for gear that is entirely superior to anything else available.
Or you trade or rely on the good graces of those that hold them to aquire the goods indirectly.
What so many of us are asking for is not reward without risk, but reward with a _different_ risk. PvP is not the game. PvP is an "optional extra" for the part of the community that enjoys it. Why should non-PvPers be penalised for a part of the game they don't enjoy?
PvP is consentual... but no major non-PvP "content" has been introduced for some time. We did have the Invasion of Pyr (which if I recall correctly _everyone_ who mentioned it loved it... the only people dissapointed were the ones that missed it cos they had other commitments), but that was a 1-off event.
For the record: I enjoy PvP... sometimes. Now our OP is being sold off I am only commited to PvP as part of The Samsara's alliances and any contracts I specifically agree to. So I will probably enjoy it a lot more _because_ I dont feel pressured into it.
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:12 pm
by geezas
aardnebb wrote: <snip>
What so many of us are asking for is not reward without risk, but reward with a _different_ risk. <snip>
one more here for more options in outposts
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:25 pm
by acridiel
*gets out some marshmallows to roast over the almost rekindled flames and leans back sighing*
Allright you kids, go on and play...
Acridiel
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:35 pm
by jamela
aardnebb wrote:I think the issue is basically it is "PvP ONLY" content. So you have to love PvP, or at least be willing to take part in it, to directly aquire the _huge_ advantage of crystals, or mats required for gear that is entirely superior to anything else available.
How much do you really want that stuff, honestly? Competitive play demands the best possible, because it's all about the win, not so much about how you do anything.
aardnebb wrote:Or you trade or rely on the good graces of those that hold them to aquire the goods indirectly.
Sounds like a nice way to acquire those goods. The imbalance is that you probably don't have access to anything that they don't.
I don't want an alternative to PvP for the outposts that we have. I would like to be able to pick flowers, though
And I'd like to be able to build an outpost, develop it and maintain it. With no benefit at all as long as I could make it look better than the ruined sites we already have lying about the place. The first building I'd make would be a shelter for the wandering hawkers to stand beneath and keep dry while they wait hours and days and weeks for customers.
Bring The Ring!
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 7:57 pm
by phradok
jamela wrote: And I'd like to be able to build an outpost, develop it and maintain it. With no benefit at all as long as I could make it look better than the ruined sites we already have lying about the place. The first building I'd make would be a shelter for the wandering hawkers to stand beneath and keep dry while they wait hours and days and weeks for customers.
[Or how about being able to bulid a small house? That we could store things in? But then I suppose all of Atys would soon become one giant city. We would then spend hours in traffic and there would be no places left to dig. I guess all the lost mektoubs on the streets of Yrkanis are already bad enough....Oh well]
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:01 pm
by katriell
phradok wrote:[Or how about being able to bulid a small house? That we could store things in? But then I suppose all of Atys would soon become one giant city. We would then spend hours in traffic and there would be no places left to dig. I guess all the lost mektoubs on the streets of Yrkanis are already bad enough....Oh well]
Arispotle is a mix of Europeans and Americans, and others...imagine the traffic confusion.
Re: Dev Suggestion: Alternative to PvP
Posted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 8:04 pm
by jamela
Your post, Phradok, makes me think of things I have heard about SWG, with unrestricted building permits. I am thinking along the lines of developing the existing outpost sites, such as Rising Border Post, with no ownership attached. Anyone allowed to contribute and develop the site until it becomes a fluorishing town, say, even if it serves no benefit to a player. Even if it meant just throwing a bundle of dappers to a NPC and the building quality then improved overnight.