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.

Whither Forever War?

PFOFIREFIGHTER
You present a false choice as though a PvP sandbox TOOLBOX or expensive dev generated content were the only options. Sandbox does not mean PvP. The PvP should have just been one component not the focus and I believe it eventually would have developed that way but some griefers need to see the world burn.

Gotta say you guys are really doing a great job. Looks like you are taking the game down on your way out.
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
PFOFIREFIGHTER
You present a false choice as though a PvP sandbox TOOLBOX or expensive dev generated content were the only options. Sandbox does not mean PvP. The PvP should have just been one component not the focus and I believe it eventually would have developed that way but some griefers need to see the world burn.

Gotta say you guys are really doing a great job. Looks like you are taking the game down on your way out.

This game is not being brought down by any player action. No player action marketed thing game so poorly. No player action made the decision of the business model that was so widely rejected. No player action refused to call PFO is an beta state. No player action developed this game out of any sensible sequence (how do you work on end game features when new player experience sucked in a near universally held view point?). No player action decided to start EE at least 6 months too soon.
Aragon (CN) a settlement founded on the principles of the River Freedoms: Say What You Will; Oath Breakers Die; Walk Any Road, Float Any River; Courts are for Kings; Slavery is an Abomination; Have What You Hold.

Settlement Focus: Fighter and Rogue Training
Game Play: Escalations / Refining / Crafting / Defensive PVP
Yrme
Bringslite
@ Midnight
I don't think that the problem is that EoX wants to PVP. I think that the problem is that EoX is able to PVP for 23/7/365 against the same general target and so it will.

I think the problem is that any large group can PvP 23/7/365 against a specific target. Golgotha was fairly tempered in their action; a different group could have been much worse. The mechanics don't prevent it, so it will happen.

Midnight
The real problem is that you (and others) see that as a problem and I (and others) don't. Thus leaving anyone hoping to entertain us all in a difficult position.

But I'll remind you that low budget sandboxes depend on conflict between players for content…

I agree that is a problem. The devs warned us through the blogs that there would have to be a balance; an ecological imbalance could happen if the game was all predators all of the time. The game does need conflict and the easiest way is PvP. According to the devs, there were always supposed to be limits on PvP built into the game: Reputation; deliberately limited company size; advantages for alignments that didn't allow a lot of killing of non-reds; and a cascade of lasting consequences that affected individuals, companies, and settlements. I think the territorial war feud system just bypassed most of their concepts for limiting PvP.

Let's remember though, that the game's troubles didn't start with the launch of EE9 or 10. The financial situation was already there; we just didn't know.

What keeps non-PvPers away? What keeps PvPers away?
At some point, crowdforging suggestions seem to be like fan fiction. Some good, some bad, some repetitious and predictable. But maybe there are some gems out there.
Midnight
PFOFIREFIGHTER
You present a false choice as though a PvP sandbox TOOLBOX or expensive dev generated content were the only options. Sandbox does not mean PvP. The PvP should have just been one component not the focus and I believe it eventually would have developed that way but some griefers need to see the world burn.

Gotta say you guys are really doing a great job. Looks like you are taking the game down on your way out.

Obvious troll is…

obvious.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Brighthaven Leader
See, I think the problem is that its no where near the sweet spot.

One side likes it how it is, and the other side wants changes. Until the polar ends are partially unsatisfied and the middle is fine, then we aren't where we should be.
Brighthaven is a Neutral Good settlement focused on defending its citizens and its allies from negative fringe based PvP (Player Killing and Griefing) while striving to become a large and shining beacon for Good. Whether you wish to benefit from this protection or you love PvP and wish to assist in providing this protection, Brighthaven aims to be the home and support center for you!
Decius
Cheatle for TEO
See, I think the problem is that its no where near the sweet spot.

One side likes it how it is, and the other side wants changes. Until the polar ends are partially unsatisfied and the middle is fine, then we aren't where we should be.
It's not as simple as one spectrum, and even if it was the optimum isn't always near the middle.

We need many changes on many axes to find a good outcome. More people choosing to PvP is vital; more ability for a group to decline to PvP is vital; consequences for losing are vital; avoiding a positive feedback loop is vital; some of thE vital requirements conflict.
Midnight
Yrme
Bringslite
@ Midnight
I don't think that the problem is that EoX wants to PVP. I think that the problem is that EoX is able to PVP for 23/7/365 against the same general target and so it will.

I think the problem is that any large group can PvP 23/7/365 against a specific target. Golgotha was fairly tempered in their action; a different group could have been much worse. The mechanics don't prevent it, so it will happen.

Midnight
The real problem is that you (and others) see that as a problem and I (and others) don't. Thus leaving anyone hoping to entertain us all in a difficult position.

But I'll remind you that low budget sandboxes depend on conflict between players for content…

I agree that is a problem. The devs warned us through the blogs that there would have to be a balance; an ecological imbalance could happen if the game was all predators all of the time. The game does need conflict and the easiest way is PvP. According to the devs, there were always supposed to be limits on PvP built into the game: Reputation; deliberately limited company size; advantages for alignments that didn't allow a lot of killing of non-reds; and a cascade of lasting consequences that affected individuals, companies, and settlements. I think the territorial war feud system just bypassed most of their concepts for limiting PvP.

Let's remember though, that the game's troubles didn't start with the launch of EE9 or 10. The financial situation was already there; we just didn't know.

What keeps non-PvPers away? What keeps PvPers away?

What is keeping both sides away is an unfinished game that is charging $15 a month when there are plenty of finished (or closer to finished) games competing against PFO. Let's not kid ourselves… whether Yrme or Midnight decides to stay is really really small potatoes in the big picture of why this game isn't attracting and retaining folks.

Which is another reason I'm skeptical of those suggesting that everything will be fine if I just stop PvP. It's like telling someone on the Titanic to put out their cigar.

In trying to preserve this pathetically small population, anyone who gets asked to make sacrifices has to consider whether that sacrifice is actually worthwhile.

I imagine a lot of people will be making decisions about where to spend their time and money after today's council meeting GW is holding with settlement leaders.

I am very very pessimistic, today, because (apparently) the game is at a point where any side that doesn't get their way can kill the game by simply unsubscribing. The worst part is they all KNOW it. The way I imagine today's meeting isn't a pretty picture.

But hey, maybe we get a patch and some ogres to kill, today. smile
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
Tyv Blodvaerd of Aragon
Cheatle for TEO
See, I think the problem is that its no where near the sweet spot.

One side likes it how it is, and the other side wants changes. Until the polar ends are partially unsatisfied and the middle is fine, then we aren't where we should be.
I agree with Cheatle here. The only way I can think of getting there is a form of consensual PVP and real rewards for winning and real consequences for losing. There should never be a punishment for engaging in PVP (with a exceptions, ie. true griefing) and never a high cost to engage.

You have to look at several games that have / had good elements of PVP and see what they had in common and what can be brought from several to PFO.

1. Faction based PVP, that can even be triggered by Faction Based PVE
2. Zone Based PVP, Rule Sets, and Tiered Resources
3. Voluntary PVP Flagging
4. Player Looting - Full loot preferably

The three entry points of PVP above are all consensual. Therefore there is no need for a Reputation System. There is no PVP outside of those entry points, so PVP can be fully avoided but there is a cost of not having the same access to advantages (ie direct access to high tiered resources, or not having access to Faction based features, etc.).

This I believe will partially unsatisfying to the polar ends of the PVE - PVP spectrum (Griefers can't Grief; Care Bears don't benefit as much due to their risk aversion).

Aragon (CN) a settlement founded on the principles of the River Freedoms: Say What You Will; Oath Breakers Die; Walk Any Road, Float Any River; Courts are for Kings; Slavery is an Abomination; Have What You Hold.

Settlement Focus: Fighter and Rogue Training
Game Play: Escalations / Refining / Crafting / Defensive PVP
Edam
Midnight
What is keeping both sides away is an unfinished game that is charging $15 a month when there are plenty of finished (or closer to finished) games competing against PFO.

I do not agree with this.

Possibly Gologotha, because they were amazingly succesfull at getting virtually all the PvPers joining the game to flock to them (and as an unfortunate side effect gave themselves no-one to fight) has a lot of people who play or want to play other games.

For many of the members of my settlement, including quite a few that have left, PFO is the only game they play and in some cases the only MMO they have ever played. In my own case the only other game I play at all is EVE.
Midnight
Cheatle for TEO
See, I think the problem is that its no where near the sweet spot.

One side likes it how it is, and the other side wants changes. Until the polar ends are partially unsatisfied and the middle is fine, then we aren't where we should be.

While I like how it is, I'm also used to how it is from playing other sandboxes.

If you antagonize someone in Eve-Online you might face 10 years of payback. If you constantly antagonize someone in Eve you will face 10 years of constant payback.

An enemy that can just flip you off and laugh because they are somehow immune to attack isn't realistic or reasonable.
He who wrestles with us strengthens our nerves and sharpens our skill. Our antagonist is our helper.
-Edmund Burke
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post