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.

Flag for PvP

Bob
Prospective players regularly ask us whether or not the game involves PvP, and then back off no matter how rare we say it is, so we want to provide them an option to easily guarantee they won’t be forced to PvP, while still maintaining the PvP that’s so central to the territorial control aspect of Pathfinder Online.

  • Players can’t attack or be attacked by other players unless they explicitly choose to participate in PvP.
  • Players that don’t choose to participate in PvP generally have the possessions they hold directly (equipped or in their inventory) protected from other players, but can’t protect their mules or territory without flagging for PvP.
  • We’ll also be looking at additional ways to offer more territorial conflict PvP opportunities, like making territorial control more valuable and making holding vaults more vulnerable.

Thoughts/Concerns/Questions?
harneloot
So, is there no downside at all to remaining invulnerable to PvP? Players can go anywhere on the map and remain invulnerable? Can anyone *raise and lower* their PvP flags at any time, for any reason?

I've stuck with PFO a long time, but this may be the deal breaker for me. Maybe it will be a more successful game because of this proposed change, but, if so, it will not be a game I will spend time playing any longer.
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Azure_Zero
Bob, If PVP gets a switch it should come with a MAJOR cavat for those that OP out of the PVP like;
NO support for training above level 10 as ALL feats they own capped as if they were level 10 and No higher levels at all, they are Stuck at most with T2 gear, can only craft T1 and T2 gear, all crafting time is 1 and a half times longer, holdings of NON-PVP companies are also capped at +2, Everything is thrice as expensive if one opts out of PVP, etc.

Now with the above drawbacks, you could set PVP-free as ON for default, but once switched OFF, it is stuck at OFF.

If that PVP switch comes in without a real drawback or set of drawbacks you'll lose a chunk of the currently loyal player base.
Bringslite
This will be really tough, as laid out so far, to keep balanced and fair to ALL players. The important things to remember:
1. It seems like this is open to discussion and seems like we are all smart enough to figure it out without jumping to conclusions before it is plugged in.
2. The goal is to increase the player base substantially. That is significantly important!
3. Any split system like this is worthless if the benefits or disadvantages are too great/harsh when choosing whichever option to roll with.

Right now, as presented (bare bones), it seems a bit too easy. I would like answers to questions but choose to wait and see what others (if any) have to say.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bringslite
I'd love to hear from avid PVP players. What is important about open PVP?

Is it being able to attack ANY player whether they are also looking to PVP randomly, whether they are strong or weak, whether they are "built" for it or not?

Is it about fighting challenging players that know they are challenging and so flag up?

What is more important to you?
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Kenton Stone
Bringslite
I'd love to hear from avid PVP players. What is important about open PVP?
I do not believe "open PVP" is necessary in the game. That having been said PVP is necessary in this game. Any Territorial control and capture game needs conflict and a way to resolve it. Also some people just like challenging others as opposed to scripted PVE monsters. I don't go looking for PVP often but have enjoyed every fight whether I won or lost, the ferocity and variety offered by a real person far exceeds any PVE battle.
"You have what you hold" while a bit of a cliche, is a important tenant of a volatile area in any world. Defense of land and resources is vital to survival.
There are areas of the map that are set to low security for a reason, there are rare resources found only there and the escalations spawn there, If you are unwilling to risk anything you should gain nothing.
We just "recently" got the ability to set security on hexes we control. Now that is being tossed out as now there will be a new "class" of scavenger able to move indiscriminately around the map with no ability to stop them from doing as they please in territory you "control".

I could go on but I will stop here.

Bringslite
Is it being able to attack ANY player whether they are also looking to PVP randomly, whether they are strong or weak, whether they are "built" for it or not?
Is it about fighting challenging players that know they are challenging and so flag up?
What is more important to you?
Do you always speculate on how someone is going to answer a question you ask them?

Lets face it banditry is never going to be a thing in this game. No effort has been made to make it viable or profitable.
The alliance is the most aggressive group in the game right now. I drive that, believe it or not I intend to win this game. I Intend to control every City and Hex in this game. Right now vast areas of the map are still up for capture from defunct groups. When I have all of those, I will be coming for Yours. You will have to choose whether it is worth fighting for or surrender it with no conflict.
This is what I enjoy about PVP, do I frighten you enough to make you surrender what you have or will you scoff and meet me in battle to keep what you have.
If you are unwilling to risk PVP at any level you should not have access to any T3 Mats, Enchanting Mats, or Victory markers. If you want them you will have to trade for them or buy them.

I have lots more to rant about but this will do for now.
Bringslite
@ Kenton

First, as I did say and it is laid out so far, I don't think it is a great solution. The plain plan that is laid out above, that is. I agree with you.

Second, rereading my questions for PVPers, they do look a bit loaded. If I read you correctly, they do not apply to you since you are about the territory game. Anyone opting out of PVP won't be a factor in the game that you currently play. They'll just possibly lose accesses, vaults, support and stuff like that. EXCEPT in the supply chain side of things for your enemies.

That is part of why I say that the idea for flagging is too simple a fix and not a fair fix for such a game.

Maybe Bob can elaborate on these few issues? Stuff like utterly safe gathering to craft gear and consumables for territory PVPers, etc…

Edit: I'll add in that I feel if you want a game revolving around some PVP, the security settings solution that they have now is a really good start to entice more (never all) players that are PVP averse. Just educate prospective players better about it AND make PVP more rewarding. Then you will have more players from both spectrums more satisfied and willing to try it.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
harneloot
So, is there no downside at all to remaining invulnerable to PvP?

We're open to adding more consequences for choosing to PvP or not to PvP, though as always we'd prefer to lean toward incentives to choose PvP instead of penalties for not choosing PvP. Ideally, those consequences would flow somewhat naturally from being willing or unwilling to fight. For example, if you're not flagged for PvP, someone can just grab your mule and walk off with it. You also wouldn't be able to defend or capture territory from other players (you couldn't fight them, and your presence wouldn't count toward capture points), though you could defend against monster invasions. If we can come up with other meaningful consequences that feel right, we can add the easier ones with the initial feature release and then add more over time.

harneloot
Players can go anywhere on the map and remain invulnerable?

We do want non-PvP players to be able to explore much of the world, but that does obviously raise some issues with force projection and other territorial control concerns. Part of what we want to crowdforge here is which such concerns are the most important, so we can implement appropriate limitations for those on the early side.

harneloot
Can anyone *raise and lower* their PvP flags at any time, for any reason?

On a simple level, we were at least planning to put in some delays/timers on flagging and unflagging, so you can't just switch immediately. We can also put other restrictions on, and were specifically planning on saying that the timer to unflag resets every moment you're in combat mode.

Bob
Azure_Zero
Bob, If PVP gets a switch it should come with a MAJOR cavat for those that OP out of the PVP like;
NO support for training above level 10 as ALL feats they own capped as if they were level 10 and No higher levels at all, they are Stuck at most with T2 gear, can only craft T1 and T2 gear, all crafting time is 1 and a half times longer, holdings of NON-PVP companies are also capped at +2, Everything is thrice as expensive if one opts out of PVP, etc.

The trick is to find consequences that don't make non-PvP players feel like we're pretty much forcing them to eventually choose PvP, since knowing that day's coming keeps them from even starting to play. Blocking them off from gameplay that doesn't necessarily feel connected to PvP will probably make them feel that PvP isn't really a choice. However, blocking them off from gameplay with clear PvP connections, or making that gameplay more difficult for them, should be acceptable since that isn't the aspect they're most interested in anyway.

Ideally, some of the players who initially intend to avoid PvP will eventually choose to participate in it on at least some occasions, and the end result will be a greater total number of PvP players than we get without that option available.
Bringslite
Bob
Azure_Zero
Bob, If PVP gets a switch it should come with a MAJOR cavat for those that OP out of the PVP like;
NO support for training above level 10 as ALL feats they own capped as if they were level 10 and No higher levels at all, they are Stuck at most with T2 gear, can only craft T1 and T2 gear, all crafting time is 1 and a half times longer, holdings of NON-PVP companies are also capped at +2, Everything is thrice as expensive if one opts out of PVP, etc.

The trick is to find consequences that don't make non-PvP players feel like we're pretty much forcing them to eventually choose PvP, since knowing that day's coming keeps them from even starting to play. Blocking them off from gameplay that doesn't necessarily feel connected to PvP will probably make them feel that PvP isn't really a choice. However, blocking them off from gameplay with clear PvP connections, or making that gameplay more difficult for them, should be acceptable since that isn't the aspect they're most interested in anyway.

Ideally, some of the players who initially intend to avoid PvP will eventually choose to participate in it on at least some occasions, and the end result will be a greater total number of PvP players than we get without that option available.

I agree.

I would essentially aim at positive benefits for "opting in" to PVP rather than severe penalties for "opting out". Like anything you have to balance it so that it is a bit better for us to play the game as ideally intended than to discourage one of your targeted segments completely.

Why waste the time making it so if doing so gains essentially… nothing.

However, I have not seen anything about this that would either encourage new PVP fan players or incentivize it. Just frustrating interactions in the future. Why not trust your Security Settings mechanic, educate possible new players better about it, encourage more fun PVP(loot-n-stuff))<which reread shows you are somewhat, my bad> to get some of those people as well? No one wants Kill Fest but no one wants Care Bear Sanctuary either. You can't really have all from both sides of this old dilemma. Just a better measure from both.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post