Why does SV hate PvPers?

[Tashka]

You want to kill everyone. Eventually there will be no population. No game. No one will log in. Players will hide behind walls and SV will lose money. This means no more MO2.

Wasn't happening before the change. Don't remember a single complaint during the beta. I was actually surpried by how few people actually PK in MO2, i was expecting an actual deathmatch, but it's nothing like that.

And this change only promotes murder.

 

[[CTX] Contractor]

@MacgyverTheDiver

You're one of those people that come around once in a while in a discussion that honestly just need to stop involving themselves. You've already demonstrated you don't know what you're talking about, and have the audacity to jump from thread to thread constantly replying to the same individuals and insulting them.

How about stay in-game and learn a bit before coming here to bring any kind of argument besides these incredibly lame double quotes to try and make someone look stupid when you legit don't even understand the basic fundamentals of some of the game mechanics being discussed.

Thanks.

 

[Cyrotek]

Wasn't happening before the change. Don't remember a single complaint during the beta. I was actually surpried by how few people actually PK in MO2, i was expecting an actual deathmatch, but it's nothing like that.

And this change only promotes murder.

Because there is less murder going on as long as people have other things to do. If people start to get bored they are going on random murder sprees or quit. I've seen that more than once.

The problem is as soon as this phase is reached people will probably leave in droves till only those are left that want it to be a deathmatch. Which is probably was SV is trying to prevent for obvious reasons.

 

[Gravballe]

I love how hardcore pvpers call it hardcore when they can grief noobs without proper consequence.

The reason mo1 failed was it turned out to be pvp death match without other content.

I hope they manage to turn mo2 more towards what uo was. Like Henrik said. You were never supposed to be able to kill everyone without consequence.

 

[Emdash]

I love how hardcore pvpers call it hardcore when they can grief noobs without proper consequence.

The reason mo1 failed was it turned out to be pvp death match without other content.

I hope they manage to turn mo2 more towards what uo was. Like Henrik said. You were never supposed to be able to kill everyone without consequence.

I will forever... and ever... reject this claim. Did you play MO1 pre TC? I think TC + exploits + bugs (not that it's so diff in MO2) + failures w/ servers (DDOS, steam launch) were why MO never worked. It also had pretty ass graphics and lag for the generation. Even the pve was more laggy than that.

My experience of MO1 being a death match does not match up with other peoples. There were actual dynamics of blue v red. I guess if you consider that death match, but it felt way more real than this. Maybe just a diff time in my life? But yea MO had a lot of infuriating problems that you had to learn how to get around like... getting your horse in the water without drowning, not getting stuck, there was a pretty long list.

But the world was smaller so you'd see people more, even if some of the people were trying to kill you. You see people now, too, but it's more just people coming back from having farmed or whatever, or bringing back mounts. MO1 WAS hardcore, but it was highly unpolished. The number of people who are on main server would prevent a lot more pvp than it did when there were like 500-800 people in game at most times, esp if the map was resized.

I'm tellin ya, and anyone is gonna get this post when they say MO failed cuuuz pvp... if they had MO2 as it is now with MO1 rules, it would be completely different than how MO1 turned out. Even pre haven, pre crim action tick box. Having 4000 people instead of 500 just changes a lot of things.

And there were consequences, they just didn't matter haha. If you were a red tho and you lost your guild, you had to find a new one pretty quick!

 

[Cyrotek]

I'm tellin ya, and anyone is gonna get this post when they say MO failed cuuuz pvp... if they had MO2 as it is now with MO1 rules, it would be completely different than how MO1 turned out. Even pre haven, pre crim action tick box. Having 4000 people instead of 500 just changes a lot of things.

Don't worry, if they don't push more severe consequences for greys and reds it will soon be at 500 players again. Just with a way too big and empty world.

 

[Emdash]

Don't worry, if they don't push more severe consequences for greys and reds it will soon be at 500 players again. Just with a way too big and empty world.

right now there are a bunch of people running around side by side, dudes sitting out there in plain sight with their mounts mining everywhere. That's not exactly good for the game either IMO. Eventually there will be guild wars, but WHEN? Right now it's just like a giant resource generation factory, and that's pretty damn boring.

Within a certain distance of town, it makes sense, but from what I've seen pvp is severely lacking if anything. It's way too far on the 'non pvp' side. If the game is gonna die, it's gonna be from people getting bored. It feels good to make it back to town w/ your stacks when there is actually a threat you won't.

 

[Cyrotek]

right now there are a bunch of people running around side by side, dudes sitting out there in plain sight with their mounts mining everywhere. That's not exactly good for the game either IMO.

Every time I tried that so far got me killed, even after riding 20 minutes into the middle of nowhere. At some point there was always some bored guy and seemingly there is no punishment for killing someone far away from a village.

Within a certain distance of town, it makes sense, but from what I've seen pvp is severely lacking if anything. It's way too far on the 'non pvp' side. If the game is gonna die, it's gonna be from people getting bored. It feels good to make it back to town w/ your stacks when there is actually a threat you won't.

I honestly believe more people quit over getting killed after running around for 50 minutes to get some basic ressources than stay in the game because they made it into town without dying.

Some thrill is good, yes, but this can easily go too far into pure frustration if the amount of time you lose is too much, especially if the situations you are forced into leave you vastly outmatched.

 

[666]

I love how hardcore pvpers call it hardcore when they can grief noobs without proper consequence.

The reason mo1 failed was it turned out to be pvp death match without other content.

I hope they manage to turn mo2 more towards what uo was. Like Henrik said. You were never supposed to be able to kill everyone without consequence.

yeah sure pvp killed full loot game
(NO)

mo1 died because of:
1) polarity changes everytime i.e. lack of balance
2) halfmade patches
3) and ofcourse tc
first they made everyone grind gold behind xxhp walls (waaaaay less people than before tc) and after they add private lictors (which was zero motivation to farm) and final one they made sieges way harder

i had feeling that all changes was made without any plan
ok lets try that, oh it's doesnt work lets try that oh it's fine, mayb change that? oh it brakes another 10 things, np we will fix it in couple month just play what we give

personally i stopped play mo1 after sv said that they started working on mo2 ,
btw announce was made also very bad.

what reason to play if you knows that everything meaningless..

 

[Wollkneul]

Wolfzeit made a video showing Henrik's comment to that topic.

 

[Tzone]

SV has been saying since day one that they want MO2 to be about not just player risk but player consequences. Currently this means if you kill someone innocent You will be punished with the reputation system. MO1 didn't really have consequences because if you murder someone and they report you; you gain a kill count which is more of a reward. If you put a house next to a graveyard just to grief noobs expect the devs to remove the red priests. It is what it is now until they improve the system. And forced wardecs was a cancer to the life of the gaming community. Can't believe you even brought that up.

You want to kill everyone. Eventually there will be no population. No game. No one will log in. Players will hide behind walls and SV will lose money. This means no more MO2.

Where is the risk and consequences for losing as a non player? Always see people that want the game easier for them saying the game should be harder for players that make the game have consequences.

Open world PvP is what makes this game have risk and consequences. People calling for consequences for red players are hypocrites.

 

[Wollkneul]

Where is the risk and consequences for losing as a non player? Always see people that want the game easier for them saying the game should be harder for players that make the game have consequences.

Open world PvP is what makes this game have risk and consequences. People calling for consequences for red players are hypocrites.

Consequences for doing what?

 

[Emdash]

rofl man I hate seeing my icon. THIS IS THE MORTAL ONLINE FORUM (MASSIVE EMDASH ICONS.) I fux with wolf, he was a cool guy even in Mo1 on mofo1, but I dunno if I wanna watch a video about Henrik's comments. I thought it was gonna be him answering questions or something.

Like Tzone said, it is a bad look because people can res there and you have to camp that priest. Basically any priest that encourages camping is bg. That's why I was kinda wishing they put a cool down on priests at places like JC instead of worrying about red/blue. Cuz it just becomes a war of attrition. Camping is wack, but if you start it, I'm not gonna stop You're gonna need to take shifts unless I actually have to do something else. I'm def not spawning elsewhere. So imagine reds spawning at keeps during sieges, as said. It feels good to READ OTHER PEOPLE'S POSTS, everyone, instead of just focusing on trigger words.

So, that already goes in the "con" or "poorly thought out" category. And yes, half implementation is a problem for sure. I've only been here since like Sep or something and I've already seen enough 'we'll fix it later's, and when they actually affect gameplay, that's BG.

I legit do not think that Henrik is out there brain storming game changes most of the time. I think someone is in his ear, or some people. I also believe, despite what you guys think, that Henrik and co DO read this forum.

But yea duels added, yey. AFK timer, which they said they hadn't planned, yey. Red priest changes? Was there even a murmur of that as a possibility? That's the part I don't understand. I mean it doesn't affect me, but I really do care about THE WHOLE game pop. I at the very least want things to be fair.

 

[Tzone]

Consequences for doing what?

Making the wrong choices that led the the players death. People asking for consequences are not asking for consequences they are asking for the game to punish the people they lost to. Will consequences for losing would be harsh for everyone not just the people who have the track record of winning.

 

[The Khan]

Open world PvP is what makes this game have risk and consequences. People calling for consequences for red players are hypocrites.

there are multiple different axes on which pvp can happen.

outright murder should be the rarest form of pvp, or else the game devolves into a deathmatch.

most pvp should exist on some form of organized playing field, whether it's guild vs guild, nation vs nation, etc.


having an endless stream of players who *present* as blues, despite having multiple murder counts, who you have to just guess if they're going to attack you or not is pretty lame, no matter how you slice it.

and if you actually *want* to play as a bandit character, then you have to recognize that you're taking an advanced playstyle choice, and it's intended that *you* be hunted just as often as you get to be the hunter -- this is only fair.

 

[Kaemik]

I think to a certain degree changes like this encourage the rat lifestyle to those who kill enough blues to go red.

Think about it. The downside for going red that nobody disagrees on is you live in a town with no guards while blues can craft and do their transactions in guarded towns. No issue there. I think we all agree this is fine.

Originally this is 4 towns somewhat distributed across the map. They do tend to be pushed more toward the NE with nothing in the far west at all, but they have some level of distribution. This means you can still kind of create an economy of outlaws. You still need your harvesters and crafters. There are downsides to being red, but reds are a legitimate faction with towns of their own to live in.

Then you take 2/4 of those towns away pushing them exclusively to the North/Northwest. They can't really build an economy outside GK and Kran. They can't really be a legitimate faction.

What is there to do for reds at that point OTHER than run around ganking and stealing gear from the easiest targets? It only encourages people inclined toward murder to game the system to stay blue. Which blues that act like reds are literally the most unfun/toxic part of PvP in this game.

I think actually moving red respawns a bit further from blue towns isn't a bad idea. But they need their own banks, vendors, etc. at these priests. It shouldn't just be a priest. It should be a place to rally and re-gear. A base for outlaw factions be they bandits or vigilantes. AT LEAST one base for reds for every blue/guarded town. Spread around the map about as evenly.

If this was put in my hands. I'd take every red priest location they just set, maybe move it a bit to a nearby point of interest like a ruin or maybe put a point of interest where it is at. Give it a bank and a vendor for arrows/regs. No crafting areas just small simple camps that work as a base. Then I would buff JC and CC making them towns on the level of GK and Kran with stables, all major vendors, all major crafting stations and a few things such as attractors that not all other towns have. Proper red towns with red priests. I'd also put 1 additional red town in the SW. Somewhere south of Meduli. Perhaps a pirate port.

Bear in mind. Blues could still use ALL of these things. AND our blue/guarded towns evenly distributed across the entire map. We still have the advantage.

 

[The Khan]

Then you take 2/4 of those towns away pushing them exclusively to the North/Northwest. They can't really build an economy outside GK and Kran. They can't really be a legitimate faction.

this is the problem with being an RPK guild, not with kran & gk

being an actual rpk clan is just not a feasible option for guilds that want to both murder anybody/everybody, and *also* participate in larger scale actual pvp conflicts.

murder guilds ought be *small*. A handful of murderers.

rpk guilds need to transform their playstyles *away* from rpking, and towards meaningful political conflicts & ideally, friendly pvp with other red guilds & even blues.

the root of the toxicity that games like MO and other full loot mmo's suffer from has always been players trying to dominate the competition out of the game to the point where it's not even fun for them to fight back.

it really *shouldn't* be played like that. You should be nearly as concerned that your enemies are having a good time as your allies. If they *aren't*, then that means the game will inevitably enter a tailspin of an anti-fun death spiral -- as players try to use underhanded tactics, ganking, griefing, etc, just to *win*, rather than *have fun playing the game*

 

[Sgr]

I think to a certain degree changes like this encourage the rat lifestyle to those who kill enough blues to go red.

Think about it. The downside for going red that nobody disagrees on is you live in a town with no guards while blues can craft and do their transactions in guarded towns. No issue there. I think we all agree this is fine.

Originally this is 4 towns somewhat distributed across the map. They do tend to be pushed more toward the NE with nothing in the far west at all, but they have some level of distribution. This means you can still kind of create an economy of outlaws. You still need your harvesters and crafters. There are downsides to being red, but reds are a legitimate faction with towns of their own to live in.

Then you take 2/4 of those towns away pushing them exclusively to the North/Northwest. They can't really build an economy outside GK and Kran. They can't really be a legitimate faction.

What is there to do for reds at that point OTHER than run around ganking and stealing gear from the easiest targets? It only encourages people inclined toward murder to game the system to stay blue. Which blues that act like reds are literally the most unfun/toxic part of PvP in this game.

I think actually moving red respawns a bit further from blue towns isn't a bad idea. But they need their own banks, vendors, etc. at these priests. It shouldn't just be a priest. It should be a place to rally and re-gear. A base for outlaw factions be they bandits or vigilantes. AT LEAST one base for reds for every blue/guarded town. Spread around the map about as evenly.

Tc solve that.

problem that sv remove some mechanic while other still in work or plan but not in the game yet

 

[Kaemik]

True griefing is easier to do by gaming the system and going blue than being a red/bandit group. Miscreants basically shut down Bakti during beta using primarily blue characters. If you really want to ruin someone's game experience find ways to troll them as a blue until they kill you, and then give them murder counts. Still entirely possible the way the game is setup right now.

 

[Timothias]

You shouldnt have access to lawlful areas as a murderer. This change is welcomed and jusitifed.