Lord of the flies day

[solorni]

I like Piper's idea of turing PK on and off.

 

I also would like to suggest that it would be a day when you would not lose anything when you die. Pking for experience and fun only. It would make it better for us weak newbie folks who would most certainly get targeted first.

[Bharain]

Because it is my impression that we have very little PvP in the game.

 

This day won't solve the problems with PK, it'll just spread them to all the other maps.

 

From another thread, refering to going to PK maps:

not a lot of point going until you're top 200 (70ish ad) since all the "evil" PKers will have killed anyone worth fighting at a lower level

 

50s ad with decent P/C will at least buy you time to dis and tele/run like mad.

 

The a/d limits on this day will at least mean anyone prepared to fight will have time to dis/run away (albeit to a very limited safe area) but what happens to all those who aren't prepared? Let's say the day starts and an a/d 100/100+ player just happens to be mining some silver for HEs, the day changes and suddenly he can harvest 5-10 exc cloaks before the players around him can do anything about it. ttl has made some very good points about the other problems with this day so i'll not bother to repeat them.

 

That's because the long promised karma system never came

 

there is no downside to killing much weaker players, so that's what certain players do, ruining the fun of PvP for everybody else.

 

if they would at least suffer from bad karma like you wanted to implement it originally, they would maybe think twice to kill a harvester for the fun of it, or even worse 2 weaker players who train.

 

There you go, nail on the head

 

I've thought a lot about a karma system, the main problem I run into is how to prevent people fighting their friends over and over to raise their karma.

 

Another idea I had was to remove the floor on XP when fighting players so if someone is much weaker than you you'll lose XP from fighting them. Trouble with this is that losing XP for the one hit it takes you to kill someone isn't really much of a deterent :/

 

I'm not a fan of hard coded limits but if a karma system can't be implemented the only other thing i can think of is only allowing people to attack people up to X levels below them.

[TirunCollimdus]

Entropy you are the developer of the game and you want more pvp in the game. PvP training is very benfeficial given the experience involved. Most persons in the game I know of who are not non-fighting characters want to train PvP but they are afraid to do it because the elite PKers get most of their fun from pawning the weakest possible players. No one wants to put please kill me signs on their backs when they are doing pvp training. Actually having a game where it is fun to kill and be killed would require a game where your belongings are either not lost or easy to replace. No one I have ever met thinks it is fun to work for something over and over again just so that someone else can come up and take it away. If you find someone like that please introduce them to me because it will be my first encounter with a computer game masochist.

 

If you want pvp in the game then make it fair. Forcing unfair pvp into the game is just going to further reduce the playability of the game for nonPK players who already have more than enough to deal with considering the [/b]three special days that already count agains them. Putting the new metals in PK maps because you cannot find a fair way to implement pvp is not fair and it is not reasonable. It could prove interesting and I would say give it a try and put it to a vote afterwards since it would be really hard to guess how it will work out. I cannot code so I do not know how hard ideas that I can come up are to implement. If I did then I would give you a whole list of different ways to add pvp to the game.

 

How about a different type of rostogol stone that does not protect metal belongings? If they were cheap enough then you could have pvp with early players all of the time since even if they did get pawned by pkers they would not lose their stuff unless they were using metal weapons or armor. That sounds simple to me but it probably isn't. Don't force pvp if you cannot make it fair was your original position and I think it is the position of just about everyone playing. I hope you go back to it.

 

Tirun Collimdus PKers have no right to complain about their one day of peace compared to the three days that completely stop or massively inhibit manufacturing.

[LadyWolf]

it's not just 1 day off for pkers.

 

peace day, no fighting at all..

 

no drop day, no point in pking, or in killing monsters for drops...

 

no flee day, can't train cause you can't flee when xp stops and pk maps are mostly dead then cause if you attack someone it's REALLY to the death

 

 

so quit bitching, we got three days against us too...

Edited March 19, 2006 by LadyWolf

[TirunCollimdus]

 

so quit bitching, we got three days against us too...

 

 

Really do you now? Three days against you and three days against nonPKers although the non-drop day has an effect on nonPkers who do train on monsters too. The point is that you sound like you are trying to tell me that fair is fair. Three days against PKers. Three days against nonPKers. All I have been hearing is about how unfair peace day is all by itself. Thank you very much Ladywolf for being the one to freely admit that the three days each is fair and that there is no need to 'make up' for having peace day. I hope everyone takes the high road with you and stops all of this junk about peace day being a reason for LotF day. Now that we have all of that behind us we can get back to the real issue about how to fairly add more pvp into the game.

 

Tirun Collimdus See we can all get along.

[Torg]

Now that we have all of that behind us we can get back to the real issue about how to fairly add more pvp into the game.

lol.... if you talk to Ent (especially reading the other thread), I suspect you'll find his position is that its not meant to be fair, its meant to be dramatic. Some of the new ores are in PK maps to force people to rely on each other for support and help.

[Sheesh]

Now that we have all of that behind us we can get back to the real issue about how to fairly add more pvp into the game.

lol.... if you talk to Ent (especially reading the other thread), I suspect you'll find his position is that its not meant to be fair, its meant to be dramatic. Some of the new ores are in PK maps to force people to rely on each other for support and help.

 

Or, it may mean that no one will ever use these ores and thus the game stops evolving. PK'ers do not want to mine, they want to attack those that have things and thus sell them. Eventually, the miners will stay out of the PK areas and then the PK'ers will either have to pick up a pickaxe or live without these precious ores. Either way, it is a lose lose situation.

[Thorr]

Now that we have all of that behind us we can get back to the real issue about how to fairly add more pvp into the game.

lol.... if you talk to Ent (especially reading the other thread), I suspect you'll find his position is that its not meant to be fair, its meant to be dramatic. Some of the new ores are in PK maps to force people to rely on each other for support and help.

I think that Entropy just likes playing god and we are his guinea pigs that he experiments on to help satisfy his sadistic needs.

[Torg]

Or, it may mean that no one will ever use these ores and thus the game stops evolving. PK'ers do not want to mine, they want to attack those that have things and thus sell them. Eventually, the miners will stay out of the PK areas and then the PK'ers will either have to pick up a pickaxe or live without these precious ores. Either way, it is a lose lose situation.

That is certainly a concern.

 

I don't know why, but I like the idea of a group of people working together to protect each other and mine/produce things. It seems like a challange to me. Now this isn't to say that its going to work. It could quite easily be completely unbalanced and suck, but... I am interested in giving it a go.

[Bharain]

Putting the new metals in PK maps because you cannot find a fair way to implement pvp is not fair and it is not reasonable.

 

I actually like this idea, it would limit the supply to some extent and perhaps keep the market stable for these metals and things made from them.

[LadyWolf]

Now that we have all of that behind us we can get back to the real issue about how to fairly add more pvp into the game.

lol.... if you talk to Ent (especially reading the other thread), I suspect you'll find his position is that its not meant to be fair, its meant to be dramatic. Some of the new ores are in PK maps to force people to rely on each other for support and help.

 

Or, it may mean that no one will ever use these ores and thus the game stops evolving. PK'ers do not want to mine, they want to attack those that have things and thus sell them. Eventually, the miners will stay out of the PK areas and then the PK'ers will either have to pick up a pickaxe or live without these precious ores. Either way, it is a lose lose situation.

But if the pk'ers didnt sell the things they get in pk, and in turn, buy things on the market, then the economy would worsen.

 

We all feed off one another.

[TirunCollimdus]

The problem with the idea of groups going to mine with some being guards is that it simply creates an even bigger and richer target for the PKers. Miners group together for protection to get the ores and the PKers band together to get the larger haul. It starts an arms race and the end is where the game becomes completely two sided and totally divided. Everyhing would become with us or against us because every avaible person would be called on to help tip the balance of power.

 

If Entropy is conducting experiments on social interaction then this would be a great way to go about it. Somehow I think he has better things to do with his time than examine the resulting data. Ignoring fairness for his own entertainment value however would be a great way to bring a fast end to the game as it exists right now. No one is going to put up with being someone's entertainment or play thing. If a way can be made to add more pvp to the game without it just being a way to give elite PKers a larger source of income with no resulting increase to the difficulty of achieving that income then I am sure everyone would embrace it. Anything that does not do anything in the game except for boost PKer revenues would just look like favoritism, or an attempt to appease or sway that group coming at the expense of everyone else in the game. Not exactly the way to protect the most important asset of the game which is the community itself.

 

I would like to point out that feeding off each only works as long as neither groups are starving to death. PKers cannot feed off of miners who are starving because they cannot mine because the PKers are killing them while they mine.

 

Tirun Collimdus Abusing one group of players to benefit another is not going to make the game better.

Edited March 19, 2006 by TirunCollimdus

[Arnieman]

Here's a thought - BALANCED pvp.

 

As is now, why is there little pvp? Because a small handful of players do have a monopoly on what we know as PK - if you try to approach, you don't have much a chance. Cooldown wasn't popular - still is half ridiculous for many items - but most people have started working on this...

 

Right now, I believe there are three apporaches to fighting. Non-fighter, PKer, and nonPK-fighter. This day seeks to declare war on the nonPK-fighters, as people will either abandon fighting or nonPK, so as not to die.

 

As now, 120/120 a/d players can attack 20/20 players, get the drops, and end of story - is there any reason why there is little pvp?

[LadyWolf]

You just dont get it. NOT ALL PK'ERS ARE EVIL! Simple as that. If that were the case then how come i've had my death bag RETURNED after being pk'd? How come alot of the pk guilds won't pick on noobs or lower lvl fighters?

 

There are only a select few pk'ers that kill without descretion. Maybe if you took the time to actually get to know some of them you'd see that.

 

By feed off each other I meant Pk'ers pk and get goods. They sell on the market and then put the money back into the market. We need them like they need us.

 

You really think that the pk'ers are all going to band together and kill everyone else? Half the pk'ers can't stand one another.

 

As far as there is no way to approach the big pk'ers..I beg to differ. About 4 months ago my a/d was barely 30/30. A couple of the pk'ers over 100/100 a/d took me in and taught me and helped me train to get to the nearly 70/80 a/d I have today. It's all in how you approach them.

Edited March 19, 2006 by LadyWolf

[vwpro]

its only one day

 

Pkers need to live with Peace day and Day of not flee

 

so u live with this, or i suggest No Peace/flee/Flies day at all!

[Tordek]

Pkers need to live with Peace day and Day of not flee

 

Well, I wouldn't say Day of the brave is a negative day for pkers. The only thing you can't do is pvp train. Beside that you can train on monsters and pk as well. Most pkers even enjoy when no fleeing is possible ... at least when they are the stronger one in the fight.

[Sweettea]

And peace day doesnt only affect Pkers! Some of us other folks like to hunt animals for meat & furs. We also may want to PvP and train on whatever it is we train on. So Peace day affects us all and shouldnt be used as some kind of point for this day.

[Chryzopraz]

The problem with the idea of groups going to mine with some being guards is that it simply creates an even bigger and richer target for the PKers. Miners group together for protection to get the ores and the PKers band together to get the larger haul. It starts an arms race and the end is where the game becomes completely two sided and totally divided. Everyhing would become with us or against us because every avaible person would be called on to help tip the balance of power.

Why the group should contain miners or harvesters only?

A few harvesters should hire a few PKers for protection.

Then harvesters go to mine and PKers protect them from being attacked by someone else.

If the hired fighters are from the top, then probably they will succeed

 

Regards

 

Chryzopraz

[petersohn]

Or: evil pkers always lurk on the maps to hunt harvesters. Good pkers will lurk there to hunt evil pkers.

 

Advantages of this thing:

- The Pk maps won't be so empty.

- Some stuff will be harder to get, thus the prices will be higer.

 

Disadvantages:

- PK will have too much factor in the game.

 

I still don't like the idea. That would be better as it was the case with iron, that the material is either on a pk map and close to the storage, or on a non-pk map far from the storage. But there is a chance to get it from a non-pk map.

[Tigs]

The problem with the idea of groups going to mine with some being guards is that it simply creates an even bigger and richer target for the PKers. Miners group together for protection to get the ores and the PKers band together to get the larger haul. It starts an arms race and the end is where the game becomes completely two sided and totally divided. Everyhing would become with us or against us because every avaible person would be called on to help tip the balance of power.

Why the group should contain miners or harvesters only?

A few harvesters should hire a few PKers for protection.

Then harvesters go to mine and PKers protect them from being attacked by someone else.

If the hired fighters are from the top, then probably they will succeed

 

Regards

 

Chryzopraz

 

 

My thoughts exactly...this give a chance for people who don't PK see the positive side of *some* PK'ers. My first experience with a PK'er was someone who came in and killed all 3 of us training (one reason i have only pvp'd about 3 times in game). My second experience with a PK'er was about 3 seconds later. That PK'er asked what we lost, gave us some stuff to replace it, and went hunting the first!! NOT ALL PK'ers are ebul!!

 

The fact that the first thought was some *harvesters* would try to protect other harvesters reinforces my idea that the non-PvP in this game as it is now tend to discount the PvP *except* when taking their money. A little more interaction would not be a bad thing...

 

 

 

How about a %discount on items for those who guard the harvesters?? A mutual benefit alliance between some PK and non-PK guilds? As it is now, there is little reason for this....

 

just an idea...

 

Tigs

[ohmygod]

If PKers pk you on these days remember who they are and put in to place measures to ensure that they pay for it someday. You may have to wait for a few months so a memory like an elephants comes in handy.

 

Perhaps let others know who they are lots of little people can seirously mess up the rep of a big person....What goes around comes around.

 

Note:

Most pkers are hournable and if you talk to them nicely tend to leave you alone the next time. Don't shoot off at the mouth at em cause they definatly going to pk your ass again if they see you.

 

BTW i voted yes... If i can't beat em i gotta join em