Change game you playing to farmville... but watchout to not forget to put water on the plantation ... they might die and you need a more pve friendly game after that.
Make PvP consensual
- Thread starter Kebek
- Start date
- Status
Ehm did you expect something different? by going tremendously off-topic, asking for consensual PvP feature in a Full-PvP game
.Suggestion: Open new thread name it: "Suggestions to increase PvE content" or "Increase number of activities in guarded areas" and it could run much better than this.
This thread smelt very Troll fishy since the beginning.
Make better PVE content. I think people are pretty universally in favor of better PVE content if PVP isn't dumbed down in the process.
Ehm did you expect something different? by going tremendously off-topic, asking for consensual PvP feature in a Full-PvP game
Suggestion: Open new thread name it: "Suggestions to increase PvE content" or "Increase number of activities in guarded areas" and it could run much better than this.
This thread smelt very Troll fishy since the beginning.
Maybe it was. We will never know.
The biggest pve improvement would be a better AI. That was the biggest letdown in MO1 pve wise was just how dumb, glitchy and monotonous fighting mobs was.
Already it’s nice to see the new ai parrying and countering. It’s actually quite challenging atm. Hopefully they can give all ai more dynamic fighting styles.
Risk vs reward, better AI and fun engaging dungeons would be a start. Atm you need dungeons for items and so you camp the most travelled one for PvP since thats a reliable way to gain PvP in a game about PvP with very low amount of PvP.
Feedback to World of Warcraft: "Can you please make a version of the game where it's just me, and remove all the other players? I like computer RPGs and I'm annoyed when other people are killing the mobs I need to kill for my quests. I think a lot of players also like solo computer RPGs, so you'd broaden your audience if you had an option that had no other players there."
I don't like responses to "allow people who only want to PvE to do that" to be "Go play another game, you baby", but the point that I'm trying to make is that the danger of being attacked and killed is core to not only the game design, but the vision for the world they're trying to create. Without danger from player conflict, the world doesn't work and you are playing a different game. The game is based around player interaction (both positive and negative), if you are allowed to go gather/craft and level without that danger of being attacked, you have an extreme advantage that others don't, and in fact it completely removes huge interlocking systems build around defending towns from other players, needing to hire guards to protect caravans, needing to be careful where you gather components or guilds/players being able to claim and protect those areas.
It's an artifact of most every MMO coming before being focused on PvE, so I get the request, but it'd be similar to people being used to Doom, then they released Planetside and someone asks, "Can I have a version of the game where I'm only fighting computer controlled characters?" Not only would it make the game just not fun, as the core gameplay loop is 3 sides of players vying for territory, it's just trying to make the game into one that's already come before, when it's explicitly trying to do something new and innovative.
I don't like responses to "allow people who only want to PvE to do that" to be "Go play another game, you baby", but the point that I'm trying to make is that the danger of being attacked and killed is core to not only the game design, but the vision for the world they're trying to create. Without danger from player conflict, the world doesn't work and you are playing a different game. The game is based around player interaction (both positive and negative), if you are allowed to go gather/craft and level without that danger of being attacked, you have an extreme advantage that others don't, and in fact it completely removes huge interlocking systems build around defending towns from other players, needing to hire guards to protect caravans, needing to be careful where you gather components or guilds/players being able to claim and protect those areas.
It's an artifact of most every MMO coming before being focused on PvE, so I get the request, but it'd be similar to people being used to Doom, then they released Planetside and someone asks, "Can I have a version of the game where I'm only fighting computer controlled characters?" Not only would it make the game just not fun, as the core gameplay loop is 3 sides of players vying for territory, it's just trying to make the game into one that's already come before, when it's explicitly trying to do something new and innovative.
Agreed with others that this is a more specific question that probably deserves its own topic, but my suspicion is that if this game gets popular, there will be plenty of content that can be done with significantly reduced risk of "getting ganked", whether that's traveling/dungeon delving in larger groups, or simply doing content that is in more heavily populated/more protected zones. In Eve Online for example, areas have "security ratings" which indicate how quickly (or if at all) computer controlled protection will show up if you get attacked. Similarly, I've already seen guards roaming around (and even outside to some extent) towns.
Player guilds will also be able to hire guards, so it's not outside the realm of reason that certain areas of the game will become more heavily "protected", but consequently it will less likely that you'll be finding rare/interesting materials etc there as they will also likely be over-harvested and/or in safer places and closer to large towns. As people have mentioned, it seems the game is being designed that the more lucrative the reward, the more risk will need to be taken, both in terms of PvE content being more dangerous, but also further from "safe spaces".
That being said, if you want to join a large guild, only PvE in dungeons in groups and largely contain your gathering to areas your guild has claimed/protected, I could imagine your personal risk would be significantly reduced (as well as your ability to easily recover items in case you did die) if you were part of a larger organization. Solo will always be riskier.
Problem Hello Kitty online is OFFLINE now.
THats very sad
That was a great niche game for Hardcore PVP on the Edge players who search for exitement and a hardcore envirement of fluffy pink cats.
Consensual pvp destroys the core Idea of Mortal Online.
This game selling point is that it is trully hardcore. You can get murdered anywhere, you can get your stuff stolen anywhere, you can lose everything etc..
There are plenty of games where pvp is consensual. If you want a less hardcore experience, try Albion Online or Eve. Both have plenty of safe zones and you only agree to full loot hardcore pvp when you enter specific zones. Both games similar to MO 1 but way less "hardcore".
On a side note, if you think you dont have enough time to play this game, hardcore games are not for you. Maybe it's time you move to casual gaming. Hardcore gaming takes time.
This game selling point is that it is trully hardcore. You can get murdered anywhere, you can get your stuff stolen anywhere, you can lose everything etc..
There are plenty of games where pvp is consensual. If you want a less hardcore experience, try Albion Online or Eve. Both have plenty of safe zones and you only agree to full loot hardcore pvp when you enter specific zones. Both games similar to MO 1 but way less "hardcore".
On a side note, if you think you dont have enough time to play this game, hardcore games are not for you. Maybe it's time you move to casual gaming. Hardcore gaming takes time.
That's the only thing that would keep me from playing. I never played original MO, but I played UO since launch up until about 2015. Removing full loot pvp was the start of it going downhill for me.
you fail to get the whole mo concept and vision. We don't want more people if that is removing the core features we initially here for. If i see a guy outside and decide to kill him, i don't want artificial bullshit mecanic preventing me for doing so. What should prevent me for doing so is my own reputation ,his reputation, our respectives skills, some luck parameter (there is always some, being it a crash, a zerg roaming your way, the guy you attacking having reactive mates nearby etc ) All this would be completly off the table if a guy is on " Off pvp" he can then safely farm his materials, while i move away and see if bullshit thempark kiddos restrictions are enabled on the next individual i cross.
We rather stick a small player base rather than having 10 times more people and all thoses mecanics changed.What you envision as a success, i see it as a failure. Why not change the name of the game while we at it ? Why are you here in the first place ," catter to a larger audience blablabla " dude ,everything that is cathering to a larger audience is dogshit mainstream stuffs, they all similar, they all the same.
TLDR :Imagine i enter a restaurant specialised in making burgers ,and i tell them they could get a larger audience by also doing pizza.
gtfo
You don't get basic English. I said it was optional. That means it's not removing core features.
I'm so happy to see the community coming together to beat back the carebears.
Its not about what YOU offer - Surely you understand its what Star Vault offers, which the is product we buy.
If you dont like that product you buy a different product. NO ?
IMO, MO2 is an open world pvp survival game in effect, however, every guild will have players that focus more on the PVE side of things and that are protected from marauding bandits. There is building in the game and as such I presume, towns will be built and defended by guild members. In effect there is PVE for those wanting to do it BUT your probably going to have to join a guild. Think EVE nullsec - you want to mine in eve nullsec join a guild, and you will be protected to do so, the resources can be offered to the guild war effort if needed.
- Status