Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

10 days

Chidar
I'm done already - I was pwned by Decius & Thod ages ago.

However they may want to dive on this thread; https://goblinworks.com/forum/topic/1465/ and offer an opinion.
Decius
Chidar
Decius
Player(s) versus player(s), or PvP, is a type of multiplayer interactive conflict within a game between two or more live participants.

That seems to cover both killing random PC characters and the unreleased settlement warfare modules.
I agree with this 'conflict' - as an expression of a fight of some magnitude whether it is 1v1 or 100v100.

I don't agree that talking politics or company management has anything to do with it. Those strategic things may result in pvp, which is different than actually being pvp.

Are you saying that PvP is limited to characters that use attack abilities against each other?
Edam
Decius
Are you saying that PvP is limited to characters that use attack abilities against each other?

I would go so far as to say that characters actually attacking each other is only the lowest level of PvP in a game like PFO the way it is envisaged.

EVE is probably the best example here. Yes, the 1000s of players that deploy drones and hand over control of them to a single targeting player who then fires them all at a designated primary in one of the big SOV battles are engaging in PvP in some limited sense. But the real meaningful PvP is at the level of Fleet Captain level and up.

Just like EVE, I suspect the talk of "100s" of players involved in PFO battles will eventually be an understatement.

The real PvP will not be some person wandering around with a bow shooting at other players to get tears and gather Epeen (though in a small scale limited sense that is of course PvP) it will take place at Settlement and Alliance level.
Kitsune
Did I hear my name in this thread somewhere?

No?

Okay, never mind. *leaves*
Chidar
Edam
Decius
Are you saying that PvP is limited to characters that use attack abilities against each other?

I would go so far as to say that characters actually attacking each other is only the lowest level of PvP in a game like PFO the way it is envisaged.

EVE is probably the best example here. Yes, the 1000s of players that deploy drones and hand over control of them to a single targeting player who then fires them all at a designated primary in one of the big SOV battles are engaging in PvP in some limited sense. But the real meaningful PvP is at the level of Fleet Captain level and up.

Just like EVE, I suspect the talk of "100s" of players involved in PFO battles will eventually be an understatement.

The real PvP will not be some person wandering around with a bow shooting at other players to get tears and gather Epeen (though in a small scale limited sense that is of course PvP) it will take place at Settlement and Alliance level.

lol could go around this buoy time after time.

"But the real meaningful PvP is at the level of Fleet Captain level and up"
No the real meaningful pvp is the bloke killing your enemy (the tactical objective) not the guy who talks about it (the strategist). Without the guys able to do the killing for the 'organisers' you got nothing.

I am obviously old school and use pvp as its used in reference to fights, (refer to Thod's post) not as a general term to cover everything involving human v human conflict. For example, when in a fight you shout down your microphone 'pvp'. I doubt very much when in political discussion you say the same. Call me a purist!

"The real PvP will not be some person wandering around with a bow shooting at other players" i did not quote the rest its just demeaning to pvp'ers. You are joking right - if you believe this and publicize it to the pvp element of your company - watch them leave. Try keeping your holdings after that.

Player vs player was a term coined from combat, not from people talking politics, where other terms were coined like GvG and RvR in reference to more general elements of pvp like politics (as derivations of pvp). Which I consider more appropriate. However 'conflict' is now the acceptable derivation of the original pvp definition. As Thod says no one is wrong in their use of the term pvp as it now has a wider context.

I watched two guys playing cards against each other, and one said it was his preferred pvp, I nearly vomited. I am just old school.

Let's just call this thread over , shall we? Or we can bun fight this forever.
Thod-Theodum
Chidar
I don't believe you are new to pvp, you know how these games will go, settlements will stagnate, wars will be few and far between, you need non-consensual pvp to keep the game going. I get your point tho - perhaps yes I am here too early.

I hope you don't mind that I added a post to the PvP guide. I felt it was important to place your vision of PvP into the context. Or people will just have the wrong impresions.
I agree with you that settlements will stagnate - actually some do so already. Look at Dagedai - once a leading company in the landrush - currently being inconsequential. Well - maybe they manage to revive themselves - but it will be an uphill struggle.
I also agree that non-cosensual pvp will keep this game going. The reason I do politics - as I try to channel this into regions where my own settlement benefits from the PvP - which having a lot of PvE minded players might mean that the best non-sonsensual PvP for my members is fought by others and they stay specatators.
I hope what I wrote in the other thread might help you to find out if you are too early. That is a decision only you can do yourself. I regard any post of 'this game might not be for you' as demeaning and offensive. This includes if this is posted by PvPer or by PvEers.

Oh - and about know your enemy. This is actually my very first PvP game ever - defined by your definition of PvP. I can even go one step further - it is also my very first MMO game as well.
This doesn't mean I'm new to competive gaming. But to avoid you puking I won't call it PvP. I've been in a team that won the German Boardgame Championship a few times and dominated that scene for a few years. I've played competitive games for over 30 years - starting with Play-by-mail when it was still snail-mail and leading alliances in games with regional control like Feudalherren, IAC (It's a Crime), Muranien or Erresea - winning or dominating the game or at least the local environment.
Having no PvP and MMO background is a handicap. But I embrace the advantage that comes with it - I don't have to unlearn common perceptions 'how it should work' because it works that way in game x or y. It allows me to take a step back and analyze the game using my non-PvP / MMO background - or ask for help if I need someone more versed in PvP to gap my own ignorance.
So if I use some terms differently then because I'm not in this scene for long enough and haven't completely adapted to the vocabulary as it is used. But feel free to underestimate me at your own peril because of my background. Being regarded as fool can have it's own advantages.
Thod/Theodum are the OOC/IC leaders of the Emerald Lodge - a neutral settlement in the center of the mal that tries to the first to explore the Emerald Spire - should that part of the game ever become available. We have a strong in game and out of game relationship with the Pathfinder Society.
We welcome both hard core players as well as casual players with or without tabletop experience. We have a strong group in Europe and are slowly expanding into the US. We are predominately PvE as our neutral political stance means that we tend to use PvP only in self-defence. We are not anti-PVP - but expect limited PvP opportunity with us.
Caldeathe Baequiannia
Chidar
I watched two guys playing cards against each other, and one said it was his preferred pvp, I nearly vomited. I am just old school.
It doesn't get much more irony than that very often.

"Old School" Characteristic of a style, outlook, or method employed in a former era, remembered either as inferior to the current style, or alternately, remembered nostalgically as superior or preferable to the new style, the older denoting something that would be considered out of date or out of fashion to some, but as such, is considered by others as cool and hip
To reach me, email d20rpg@gmail.com
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post