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

Bringslite
As for Tithes, I could get pretty strongly behind going to a box and collecting raw materials that pile up there from non allied characters who gathered nearby. smile

Even if it required an extension of the Territory Control game and I had to place and maintain and defend a holding in a particular hex to do it. Still not fond of Truck(mule) Driver Online the MMO, but more carrots make it seem better.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
harneloot
Maxen
The comments above about builds and flagging for PvP remind me that in this game, the players are the content. There is no GM or DM. There is no story line. This is a fantasy setting with risks for going out into the River Kingdoms. When I signed on to this game, it wasn’t in hopes of playing Pathfinder “The Game System” Online. I wanted to play in the world of Golarion where I could meet adventuring companions or meet enemies within the element of the unknown, because these companions and enemies have real people driving them. Not some predictable AI on the other end.

So, to be fair to players that are PvP adverse, yes, there should be a way to enjoy the game and feel like your getting your money’s worth, but not at the expense of the true nature of this game, which is an open sandbox with risk around every corner. If you have a non-combat build and you want to adventure and gather in an area that has premium items, you should buddy up with someone for protection. Fighters gotta eat too. Would your non-front line combat PC do anything different if it was a tabletop session?

I cite again my very first PvP experience ever. I was moving down to Hammerfall and as I entered the settlement, Doc attacked and killed me almost instantly. I said, “Wait, I’m a member of this settlement!”, naively thinking he was too. He whispered me and said “Nothing personal. I’ll just take a few of your items”. Sure I was shocked and a little upset, but I’m still here today.

Well said!

Even though I bark about it in General Chat, I do not engage in (or even really enjoy) PvP for PvPs sake. I only attack my enemies or those that (back when there was actually this thing called Scarcity in the game; Enchanting Mats notwithstanding) I feel are *stealing* from my claimed territory. As Maxen describes, this is what makes the game interesting & exciting to me and I have a seriously hard time imagining playing PFO if everyone was running around with a No-PvP flag up. That would be just some kind of multi-player co-op RPG (maybe that's what a Theme-Park MMO is?) or something but certainly wouldn't be an open world territorial control sandbox game set in the River Kingdoms.

Barely ANY PvP has happened in the game in the last two years or so - but the simple fact that it could happen is a major driver of much of the *content* (such as it is with so few players) that exists in PFO. Without that possibility, what is really left? An interestingly complex combat and advancement system with a fairly interesting gathering, refining, crafting system that will all be in the service of…..playing the recipe roulette game with AI mobs???

Maybe Factions & Alignment being really important & meaningful choices is the answer? I don't know…
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Bob
harneloot
I only attack my enemies or those that (back when there was actually this thing called Scarcity in the game; Enchanting Mats notwithstanding) I feel are *stealing* from my claimed territory.

Enemies: Yes, those you consider your enemies could unflag, and thus you couldn't attack them if you ran into them. The trick here is restricting those who would never flag for PvP enough that you think of them more as civilians on an opposing force than as true enemies, and providing enough incentives to those who are open to PvP to get them to stay flagged for PvP the bulk of the time. Also, you can still "hurt" the civilians who oppose you without directly fighting them, since hurting their side lowers their support, just indirectly.

Poachers: Would it be enough to have a mechanic for "claiming" territory (holdings already work for wilderness hexes, perhaps add something for monster hexes and such) such that only those flagged for PvP can gather in the area, and only they can challenge/remove your claim? Yes, those not flagged for PvP could wander through, but they couldn't "steal" from you.
Maxen
Bob
Poachers: Would it be enough to have a mechanic for "claiming" territory (holdings already work for wilderness hexes, perhaps add something for monster hexes and such) such that only those flagged for PvP can gather in the area, and only they can challenge/remove your claim? Yes, those not flagged for PvP could wander through, but they couldn't "steal" from you.

Per my earlier post, yes, this, but make the player make a choice about their activity. If they want to run through a claimed hex of an opposing faction or non-allied settlement hex unflagged, but also not harvest any resources or kill monsters, fine. But if they choose to harvest or kill, flag them as PvP eligible for 15 seconds. A minute. Whatever. Give the opposing faction or non-allied settlement members a chance to play the game the way they want to. To me, that’s called compromise.
Gross
Maxen
Bob
Poachers: Would it be enough to have a mechanic for "claiming" territory (holdings already work for wilderness hexes, perhaps add something for monster hexes and such) such that only those flagged for PvP can gather in the area, and only they can challenge/remove your claim? Yes, those not flagged for PvP could wander through, but they couldn't "steal" from you.

Per my earlier post, yes, this, but make the player make a choice about their activity. If they want to run through a claimed hex of an opposing faction or non-allied settlement hex unflagged, but also not harvest any resources or kill monsters, fine. But if they choose to harvest or kill, flag them as PvP eligible for 15 seconds. A minute. Whatever. Give the opposing faction or non-allied settlement members a chance to play the game the way they want to. To me, that’s called compromise.

Speaking as a non PVP gatherer owned, I think a 1 minute risk window would be better, its easy enough for me to stay alert enough that a 15 second PVP flag would not often expose me to risk, whereas a minute is so long that someone may have been in an adjacent hex and still wander in and see you flagged..
Mercenary monster hunter from Forgeholm
War priest of Angradd… patiently waiting on Goblinworks to deliver him (and greataxes, Dwarves need 2 handed axes).
harneloot
Any switching of your PvP flag should last until the next down-time at least.

No, they shouldn't be able to *wander through* either - you enter the hex, you get flagged for PvP. There should be no other rule for monster hexes than that. This should apply to any hex I set at low security and EVERY monster hex on the map (except for the monster hex near TK, and maybe the one near UC).
Xyzzy - gatherer, yeoman archer, swamp monster.
Bringslite
One thing that I am relatively certain about is that weak half measures are not going to work for bringing in a 100% PVP averse mass of players. Some more ways (non-flagging) to play and communicated knowledge of those ways might bring in a trickle of "not quite" adamantly PVP opposed players. That could likely be just because of advertising the game pretty much as is with a few changes. So, IMO, I wouldn't expect a huge flood of Anti-PVP players for the hard work involved in half-measuring the job.

You will probably get SOME to try though. Just because any increased visibility and new awareness of PfO always brings a trickle.

If there isn't a way to truly give Anti-PVP players a real measure of security and noncombat "100% access to the full game", whether through choice/incentive mechanics or drastic measures, I would not put too much time into it. I would suggest rather that you make the changes you can do easily and just be sure that prospective players can learn about it outside the game.
Edit: To be more clear, lay the choice on players to "flag Up" or suffer a Tithe of gathered or combat loot in certain hexes as you suggested. That leaves player hex "owners" the choice of controlling the hex and setting tithes for that stuff on non flagged players. It gives both sides something to choose, something to gain and costs both sides something. End result would be that non flagged could do and experience anything that flagged can through choice.

Take some of the sticks away from PVP at the same time, add some incentives/carrots that you can for the PVP types you want and get some of the best from that demographic as well.
Virtute et Armis
-Unknown
Bob
Maxen
But if they choose to harvest or kill, flag them as PvP eligible for 15 seconds. A minute. Whatever. Give the opposing faction or non-allied settlement members a chance to play the game the way they want to. To me, that’s called compromise.

That would be the compromise, and PvP-averse players should still understand it's a dynamic world where other players can do things that restrict their choices to some degree. The tiny nuance here is that the PvP-averse players in question aren't comfortable with the possibility of suddenly becoming eligible for PvP without realizing it's happening and being easily able to prevent it. Players easily start to tune out less-intrusive messages, so things like showing a warning at the beginning of gathering ("Gathering here will flag you for PvP, move away to remain unflagged."smile aren't enough. We'd either want to put up a standard error message when an unflagged person tries to gather ("You must flag for PvP to gather here."smile or a confirmation dialog making clear that this action will flag them for PvP.
Bob
harneloot
Any switching of your PvP flag should last until the next down-time at least.

We talked about having downtime reset the flags, and it could be done. One weird thing about it is that the game would probably play very differently as the day passed, since the closer you are to downtime, the less time your flag will last. We could also just do a really long timer (even 12-24 hours or more), which might even be easier to implement. The main thing to think about there is whether or not the long timer just pushes flagged players to switch to another character and wait out the timer. That wouldn't wind up increasing the number of available targets anyway, though perhaps it's a fair balancing choice to have to take that gatherer out of commission for a day. However, it's a pretty big advantage for the players who keep a stable of characters over the players just trying to run one character.

harneloot
No, they shouldn't be able to *wander through* either - you enter the hex, you get flagged for PvP. There should be no other rule for monster hexes than that. This should apply to any hex I set at low security and EVERY monster hex on the map (except for the monster hex near TK, and maybe the one near UC).

We could essentially put up the walls around those hexes for any player not flagged for PvP, and not let characters unflag while in those hexes. It would be a problem if too much of the world was blocked off, but if the cost of blocking them off is set such that only a reasonable portion is blocked off at any one time, it could work out well.

Blocking off all the monster hexes all the time for non-PvP players gets us right back to saying you can't really play the game unless you flag for PvP. Wilderness hexes can already be claimed with holdings, so there's a pretty obvious option there to say that holding owners can decide whether or not to block out non-PvP non-allies, with some cost attached to doing so. If needed, we could consider providing a mechanic by which the same can be done to monster hexes and the like, but probably on a more precarious basis. For example, we could make a craftable flag that can be placed in those hexes, and while it's up non-PvP non-allies can't enter the hex. However, unfriendly PvP characters could tear the flag down at any time (probably through a capture game with a reasonable delay), so that control could be quickly lost when you or your allies aren't around to actively defend it, though you could always place another flag later. I'm sure there are variants on that, or completely different possibilities, that would achieve the same end of making monster hexes available most of the time, but not when they're actively claimed to an appropriate degree.
Fiesta
harneloot
Any switching of your PvP flag should last until the next down-time at least.

No, they shouldn't be able to *wander through* either - you enter the hex, you get flagged for PvP. There should be no other rule for monster hexes than that. This should apply to any hex I set at low security and EVERY monster hex on the map (except for the monster hex near TK, and maybe the one near UC).

Thats ok I suppose as long as the converse is true and if someone enters my High security hex it sets them to non-PVP until the next downtime. Any other result would show a clear PVP bias.
 
You must be logged into an enrolled account to post