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

harneloot
PFO is, and always has been, an open world non-instanced territorial control sandbox game. Without open world PvP, what do you really have left in this game? Escalations, gathering and crafting + running simulator? I am perplexed why anyone would bother playing PFO for more than a few days without the whole basic premise of being able to slowly seize control of, and vie for, territory? I think having toons running around immune to PvP will completely change the whole central organizing principal of the game. Everyone who currently plays PFO and bothers to read these forums think for a second what this game would be like if all of us still left playing suddenly were immune to PvP…..is that a game you would want to keep playing? Maybe the answer is a resounding "YES!" and so I am the anachronism and need to adapt or go extinct, but I honestly don't think so. Without at least the *possibility* of danger (as BL puts it) is yet another round of Elite Dark Elves really that enticing?

There have to be other ways to balance PvP risks than what is being proposed. Maybe all shield hexes are Ultimate Security like TK or maybe they stay High Security but have Thornguards stationed all long them at intervals (RUN to the next Thornguard station!). Maybe all shield hexes nerf everyone down to only having T1 feats active? Maybe there are new alchemicals that give a temporary PvP immune flag (while also slowing you are some such other penalty). Craftable holdings that make the hex Ultimate Security and if a monster hex is ringed completely by them, then it to takes on that security level?

People running all around My Swamp doing whatever and I have no recourse but to gnash my teeth and watch? No thanks!
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Bringslite
Not intimating that I am fully on board with the idea, as is, but we do have to look at the reasons why the game isn't drawing more players. If I went to conventions and most everyone I talked to about PfO basically "got up and walked" when I admitted that PVP is part of the game and without 100% avoid-ability, I suppose that I would consider that some strong actionable feedback.

Then, since I want more people playing, I would seek to remedy that if I really wanted a more successful game.

This comment is my Ode to the "To Be Fair" principle.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
harneloot
People running all around My Swamp doing whatever and I have no recourse but to gnash my teeth and watch? No thanks!

I'm very much hoping to find a way for you to make a meaningful claim to the swamp, to defend that claim, and to incentivize others to flag up and challenge your claim. I just want to do so in a way that meets 2 very important goals:

  1. No player can be killed without explicitly and knowingly agreeing to the risk of PvP at that particular time.
  2. Players who don't agree to PvP don't reasonably feel like they're missing out on so much gameplay that they're not really playing the game.

Fortunately, the more we talk through this, the more convinced I am that we can find a way to do that. Maybe you have to hold the majority of hexes around the swamp to get the right to set some kind of security setting for it. Maybe you can put down a flag claiming the swamp, and that flag is active as long as you're around to defend it. I think it would be okay for you to be able to temporarily block non-PvP players from specific activities in specific places, provided that doing so involves a good mix of difficulty (so it's hard to block too much of the world off at once) and meaningful choice (so lots of other groups are incentivized to keep most of the world open to non-PvP players). That's why I threw the word "reasonably" into the second goal. It may not be reasonable to tell non-PvP players that they can't gather any T3 mats without flagging for PvP, but it's pretty reasonable to say there's a couple hexes they can't gather them in right now. As always, we just need to find the right balance.
NightmareSr
Have there really been new or potential players worried about PvP? Or is it just the way the out-dated guide reads, and the screen flash text when entering a low security hex?
I spent my first few weeks in the game running around the entire map. I was scared at first and on my toes, mostly cause of having the security text pop up each time I entered a new hex and the map having icons of castles and lions. Also in part to all that I read about PvP. Long story short I made it through the entire map with only seeing one other player, who was busy with a mule. Is there really that much PvP happening and I have just avoided it?
I will say I did get a little surprise from a swamp dweller after awhile of travelling all over, but he just laughed at my young character in T1 gear.
Maybe the PvP concerns of new players would be less from more clarity and updates to how it really works? I might be completely wrong, but seems like opting out of anything in a true sandbox games sort of ruins the idea of a sandbox doesn't it?
Can I "Opt-out" of being attacked by ninjas until I am in T3 gear? smile
- Wandering gatherer (NightmareSr#2669 on discord)
Smitty
Have said to myself for quite a long while - you guys need to pick a direction for PFO.
Opt in of PvP is a direction.. ( and one you have been headed in for the last few years) not that I like that direction, but if you feel like this will bring in people in enough numbers that will allow the game to survive- go for it.

Because the way PvP has been adjusted to this point has ruled out most of the player base that would be interested in PFO anyway.
Examples of why people interested in PvP don’t want to play this..
Territory fights –
limited time 3 days a week , defender can defend for as little as an hour-
at a time of defenders choosing – and really is only at risk of losing something if the holding is vulnerable – ( so in actuality if they want to defend they only have to do so once a week..).
.
feuds can be dodge by just changing companies- so a PvP group cant target group of people they want to fight unless - the targeted groups wants to fight.
.
You pretty much already have opt in PvP - ( in the sense of territory control) – So unless you are willing to go back a long way along the PvP spectrum you are not going to bring in many PvP players anyway.


So this opt in PvP thread says you are wanting to turn off the only token/carrot you gave pro PvP players over the last few years- escalation hexes being low security and rep hits in medium…… and make things official by saying that this is an opt in PvP game..


In regards to how to salvage PvP as a play style
ST - SWG gear loss post was interesting.. and wanted to throw this out there.. as an idea
Opting in to PvP leaves gear loss as it is.. and loss of inventory should be like 10%.
Not opting in to PvP - ( having you husk protected - and you inventory protected) - means that when you die to PvE stuff - your gear should take at least double if not triple ( or more) durability loss. And inventory should be affected with a 50% chance of destruction.. I don’t see that as a penalty- but more as a consequence of wanting to protect your stuff – from ever being at risk.. (really a high level character dying to PvE ? our escalations arent that challenging .. if I can protect my stuff and kill the best loot producing critters without risk - when I screw up it should hurt more..)

Just an idea…
Bringslite
NightmareSr
Have there really been new or potential players worried about PvP? Or is it just the way the out-dated guide reads, and the screen flash text when entering a low security hex? Yes there are a decent % concerned about PVP. Maybe a combo of in game systems, reputation and our well meaning verbal cautions cause more worries. A significant % of players detest any combat PVP.
I spent my first few weeks in the game running around the entire map. I was scared at first and on my toes, mostly cause of having the security text pop up each time I entered a new hex and the map having icons of castles and lions. Also in part to all that I read about PvP. Long story short I made it through the entire map with only seeing one other player, who was busy with a mule. Is there really that much PvP happening and I have just avoided it? There is VERY little random encounter PVP currently. You've missed nothing.
I will say I did get a little surprise from a swamp dweller after awhile of travelling all over, but he just laughed at my young character in T1 gear.
Maybe the PvP concerns of new players would be less from more clarity and updates to how it really works? I might be completely wrong, but seems like opting out of anything in a true sandbox games sort of ruins the idea of a sandbox doesn't it? Probably a good idea. IMO, yeah the game will work less well without having to take risks of PVP.
Can I "Opt-out" of being attacked by ninjas until I am in T3 gear? smile
IMO-(you can confirm this by googling Pathfinder Online and reading articles about it and especially the reader comments)

THe reluctance of many players that are against PVP to play PfO was around from the time that PfO was nothing but a collection of blogs by Ryan Dancey. For those "out there" who don't play PfO but remember hearing about it, the belief (around the internetz) is that the game is all about PVP and that PVP is very active and common in-game. I have seen many commenters that believe it is a full loot PVP game. While those that enjoy PVP and have tried PfO have not found a very enjoyable experience trying it out, because @ Smitty is right that the PVP system is terrible for PVPers.

Two opposing playstyle sets of game-play, one perhaps over developed and one perhaps seriously under supported/overhyped. has made public opinion a real mess. Maybe moving (as it looks they are) firmly to one philosophy will help them get a larger market share of players. I hope so.

Bottom line is that more players running around will put life into the game short term. Much PR work will be needed to turn what the Internetz thinks PfO is though.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bringslite
@ Bob

Will The Flag system mean any major changes to the Hex Security system? As in will Sec become irrelevant, as is, or will those that are accepting of PVP lose those territory control settings?
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
harneloot
NightmareSr
I might be completely wrong, but seems like opting out of anything in a true sandbox games sort of ruins the idea of a sandbox doesn't it?
Can I "Opt-out" of being attacked by ninjas until I am in T3 gear? smile

Couldn't agree more.
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Bob
Bringslite
Will The Flag system mean any major changes to the Hex Security system? As in will Sec become irrelevant, as is, or will those that are accepting of PVP lose those territory control settings?

As we're currently thinking of it, flagging for PvP isn't saying "I'm up for PvP with anyone, come at me!" It's more like "I'm willing to risk PvP according to all the other PvP rules and restrictions in effect." If we simply layer that over the game as is, the Hex Security system would largely continue working, it just would only apply to characters who'd opted in to PvP.

Whether or not that's satisfactory by itself depends a lot on why people are choosing their particular security settings. If you choose Low primarily because you want people to be able to fight there without rep hits if they want to, then this is fine. Those who want to fight just also have to flag for PvP, which clearly they want to do. If you're setting to Low because you want to prevent non-allies from gathering there, then maybe you'd like an additional setting to say that non-allies can't gather there unless they flag for PvP. Or maybe you want to set an automatic tithe paid by gatherers, that they can avoid paying by flagging for PvP. There's also the question of whether you don't want people to gather there because you want to keep them from getting the resource at all, or because you just don't want them degrading the raw mats in your favorite gathering area. There are a lot of variants for why people choose certain settings, and we're open to additional features that help balance those reasons against the desire to let non-PvP players enjoy the game to a reasonably complete degree.
Bringslite
Bob
Bringslite
Will The Flag system mean any major changes to the Hex Security system? As in will Sec become irrelevant, as is, or will those that are accepting of PVP lose those territory control settings?

As we're currently thinking of it, flagging for PvP isn't saying "I'm up for PvP with anyone, come at me!" It's more like "I'm willing to risk PvP according to all the other PvP rules and restrictions in effect." If we simply layer that over the game as is, the Hex Security system would largely continue working, it just would only apply to characters who'd opted in to PvP.

Whether or not that's satisfactory by itself depends a lot on why people are choosing their particular security settings. If you choose Low primarily because you want people to be able to fight there without rep hits if they want to, then this is fine. Those who want to fight just also have to flag for PvP, which clearly they want to do. If you're setting to Low because you want to prevent non-allies from gathering there, then maybe you'd like an additional setting to say that non-allies can't gather there unless they flag for PvP. Or maybe you want to set an automatic tithe paid by gatherers, that they can avoid paying by flagging for PvP. There's also the question of whether you don't want people to gather there because you want to keep them from getting the resource at all, or because you just don't want them degrading the raw mats in your favorite gathering area. There are a lot of variants for why people choose certain settings, and we're open to additional features that help balance those reasons against the desire to let non-PvP players enjoy the game to a reasonably complete degree.
I like this answer and I really like the ideas that you are sparking for additional settings. They are intriguing as can be. Maybe they are a good compromise for lesser control over territory through "different" controls! smile
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post