PlaneShift
Gameplay => Wish list => PvP,PK and Thieving => Topic started by: Valorius Rageway on February 14, 2007, 08:38:00 pm
-
In PS when a guild wishes to war with another, both leaders must be in LOS of one another(lol), and the attacked guild gets the option to DECLINE THE ATTACKER! What a handy feature this would be!!!!
"Poland has declined Germany's invitation to war"
"The soviets decline to participate in Operation Barbarossa."
"Saddam Hussien declines the US invitation of invasion"
If you're going to include guild wars, then the option to decline has GOT to be removed. It is quite frankly utterly ridiculous.
-
I totally agree, it's dumb. I think it was added without much thought put into it a few years ago. A better system needs to be put in place. We've gotta make sure big guilds can't just attack everyone though (so the noobs don't get pwnt).
-
It has to be there, otherwise you will get maniac "evil" guilds murdering everyone.
-
I totally agree, it's dumb. I think it was added without much thought put into it a few years ago. A better system needs to be put in place. We've gotta make sure big guilds can't just attack everyone though (so the noobs don't get pwnt).
No, just the other guilds. That way, one guild could take over all of Planeshift, and you're either a member of that, or the member of a hidden guild, or dead ;)
I think it was put into place for the same reason that the whole game isn't open PvP, to prevent people from going all "ub3r-l337" and killing everybody they see in Hydlaa or Ojaveda, or the DR (*dies* *wakes up in the DR* *dies* *get called noob* *repeat until the other person gets bored* or I get pissed and quit). So that big guilds couldn't say "Oh, a guild, KILL!" and have all the other guilds fall before the "ub3rl337/\/355" of that guild (Basically, so that RP wouldn't get screwed by a group who wants to make this the next Runescape).
-
It has to be there, otherwise you will get maniac "evil" guilds murdering everyone.
And where would be the Octarch's Police and Military Forces?
-
If you're going to include guild wars, then the option to decline has GOT to be removed. It is quite frankly utterly ridiculous.
Well the entire PvP system is like that- its not very realistic, but it's like that for reasons to stop abuse, and will stay like that until a better system is devised and implemented.
-
Well there could be a switch installed such that any guild that abuses the warring privilege could be rendered defenseless en mass by a gm command i.e. permanently at war for the duration of the punishment, permanently auto-accept and permanently incapable of retaliating until the gods punishment is lifted.
-
Well there could be a switch installed such that any guild that abuses the warring privilege could be rendered defenseless en mass by a gm command i.e. permanently at war for the duration of the punishment, permanently auto-accept and permanently incapable of retaliating until the gods punishment is lifted.
"Godly punishment" is a bad option and seems a little preposterous.
Better would be the intervention of the following ones as some kind of "UN Peacekeepers" esque:
And where would be the Octarch's Police and Military Forces?
-
Why have gods if they do nothing? it was, at best, a temporary solution anyway.
-
Why have gods if they do nothing? it was, at best, a temporary solution anyway.
Because then, it would break down the reason and safety for many guilds to exist if the gods realized a constant interference on the matters of the mortals. Evil guilds wouldn't exist because a god would take care of them, and the arguments about it may be raised even more, this absolute power "godly" thing is a big straightjacket to Roleplay. I mean why would exist guilds and organizations struggling for power if Yliakum was directly ruled in absolute power by Talad or Laanx?
-
Well there could be a switch installed such that any guild that abuses the warring privilege could be rendered defenseless en mass by a gm command i.e. permanently at war for the duration of the punishment, permanently auto-accept and permanently incapable of retaliating until the gods punishment is lifted.
What exactly does "abuses[ing] the warring privilege" mean? What is abuse? How many wars is too many? What if they are roleplaying a guild that is constantly at war?? The GM's have enough to police already without having to look after "abuse of the warring privilege". Even if you could only say, have one automatic war, a group of people could simply make a guild, declare war on a newbie guild, kill them all, then dissolve the guild and make a new one, and repeat. High level characters could easily wreck havoc like this, and it wouldn't even be abuse under the strictest definition that you started with. There need to be proper, thought out mechanisms in place to prevent abuse, not just "we'll step in and ban/stop anyone 'abusing' it".
-
Bad ideas sometimes trigger good ideas, no ideas are useless.
-
Bad ideas sometimes trigger good ideas, no ideas are useless.
I still stand for the idea of the Octarchs having a "Peacekeeping" group that will intervene once certain guilds start wreaking havoc just like the RW United Nations(That would require either a very developed NPC AI or lots of available GMs). Although better ideas may come on this thread.
-
Until you have a mechanism that guarantees murderers and such are pursued by the guard, you can't afford having auto accept in guild wars and challenges. Because that would make the game not realistic. And a hack n slash heaven. You'll have all these morons that don't even know they're at a MMORPG kicking people's butt in a town where there should be someone protecting the villagers.
PvP is not that important. People make a great fuss over it and even go as far as making it the objective and prime feature of their pseudo-roleplays (that's what I call the concept of "let's have a roleplay today about chesse!"). I've seen it more than once, someone coming around with the "Power Glyph of Doom" and the "Immortal, Unaffected by Guards Slavers Of All" just to have a big fancy war in the end where people fight, people die, people live, people fight, people die, people live and nothing comes out if afterwards. Everything becomes just the way it was before the uberness had settled.
Really people. Some of you just need to expand your perspective of roleplay. Nowadays people "roleplay" fights like I roleplay Sangwa going to the tavern. Vulgar, daily, boring.
When you read a fantasy book you're not just hoping to see fights. You're also hoping to see magic, feelings, surprises and fun.
-
Sangwa's right.
But I also agree that the whole 'declining a guild war' thing is stupid.
But it doesn't really matter - any self-respecting RP Guild would 'auto-accept' a war. Otherwise it's bad RP. Any Guild which doesn't accept, isn't worth fighting...
Personally I think it would be fun to be the underdogs, being hunted down by a big massive guild, relying on your wits and guile to survive...
-
I've seen it more than once, someone coming around with the "Power Glyph of Doom" and the "Immortal, Unaffected by Guards Slavers Of All" just to have a big fancy war in the end where people fight, people die, people live, people fight, people die, people live and nothing comes out if afterwards. Everything becomes just the way it was before the uberness had settled.
Really people. Some of you just need to expand your perspective of roleplay. Nowadays people "roleplay" fights like I roleplay Sangwa going to the tavern. Vulgar, daily, boring.
When you read a fantasy book you're not just hoping to see fights. You're also hoping to see magic, feelings, surprises and fun.
Can guilds fight for controlling territories?
A: Yes, if the whole PS community agrees on a guild assuming the control of a certain location on RP, but on the game itself, no.
Can real wars provoke impact in the economy?
A: Not on the game engine, besides the fact silverweaves may have an increase in demand(Roleplaying an economical crisis is next to impossible as many won't agree with it).
Can fortresses be built, with defensive siege weapons inside, that will give anyone trying to invade it a real challenge that does not involve random one-hit kills with silverweaves but a real, epic and longlasting siege?
A: No, but once Planeshift reaches 1.0, hopefully yes. Unfortunately, it is too big for being roleplayed, and deciding which army wins the battle in a roll of a dice won't help at all in the agreement between both sides.
Can a fighter ride a ryunaak armed with a lance to operate as a knight in warfare?
A: Obviously no, and few would accept such thing in roleplay.
Does this all justifies many "wars for nothing" per month?
A: No way. No one make wars because "they're cool". In most cases, such things will be preceded by a long and tense diplomatic crisis, by some kind of "igniter" and by several other previous political and economical reasons, like the example below about the real World War I:
On June 28, 1914, Gavrilo Princip shot and killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austria-Hungarian throne, and his wife, in Sarajevo after purchasing a sandwich. Princip was a member of Young Bosnia, a group whose aims included the unification of the South Slavs and independence from Austria-Hungary (see also: the Black Hand). The assassination in Sarajevo set into motion a series of fast-moving events that escalated into a full-scale war. However, the ultimate causes of the conflict were multiple and complex.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I#Causes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I#Causes)
And real wars also bring real consequences. Any casualities on a seriously roleplayed war should be permanent at most cases(In other words, you can't just bring your dead character back to life after only few minutes from when this character was killed) and it also should bring other consequences, there are too much "1337 w4rs t0 pwn n00bs" in Planeshift.
-
Because manic evil guilds DO murder people.
Its their purpose!
its ridiculous that guild wars need to be accepted by both sides.
-
why would it be a worry if someone went around killing noobs in a guild war? a leader should decide whether his guild is ready for a war, if not the war wouldnt start..
-
Why not just restrict open guild wars to somewhere like the arena? That will prevent all out chaos in the world and stop the guilds just fighting anyone, noobs or RPer's, and you'll only be able to war against another guild if your in the arena and the war is declared. People could even come and watch from the arena grand stands ;D Even place bets on which guild will win :devil:
I think World of Warcraft has something like this called "Battlefields"... Not a WOW player, so correct me if I am wrong....
*Puts on Craig Charles voice*
LET THE WARS BEGIN!
-
why would it be a worry if someone went around killing noobs in a guild war? a leader should decide whether his guild is ready for a war, if not the war wouldnt start..
Yes but the entire point of the thread is to make it so one leader doesn't have any choice at all whether the war starts. It would be abused.
-
We need to devise a system that's both realistic and ordered.
To do that we'd have to take a close look at the dynamics of how real-world factions clash.
The main thing I see is - exterminations, genocide, brutal organised assaults (i.e. terrorism) all happen without warning in the real world. But the thing that prevents them from happening constantly are the governing bodies' army/police force, which step in to eliminate the threat.
The only realistic and unabusable system I could think of is where guards attack anyone who starts trouble. Gangs (i.e. guilds) would have to settle their disputes outside the cities, just like in real life, and the 'newbies' can stay under the watchful eyes of the guards, or hire PCs to guard them (which would open up a new, potentially profitable outlet for 'duelists' and their need to fight).
-
Why not just restrict open guild wars to somewhere like the arena?
Like an, Elder Scrolls Oblivion style arena. You go there to fight, and if you win, you get money, move up in ranks depending on how many Wins-losses and who you defeat. People can come from outside and watch in the stands, and they can place wagers on who they think will win the fights.
-
Why not just restrict open guild wars to somewhere like the arena?
Like an, Elder Scrolls Oblivion style arena. You go there to fight, and if you win, you get money, move up in ranks depending on how many Wins-losses and who you defeat. People can come from outside and watch in the stands, and they can place wagers on who they think will win the fights.
What if you want to RP a proper war?
-
What if you want to RP a proper war?
Then RP it? :P
Well you could fight anyone you wish, but you would only move up in ranks the harder the enimies you fight (so you cant just own noobs all the time then become #1)
Also, you could have a guild and player ranking system, for guild wars.
-
What if you want to RP a proper war?
Got an Idea:
After the proper causes for a war happened(Not "I wanna pwn u cause I'm leet")
Invite the leader of the other guild to a multiplayer game in a medieval RTS :P
Whoever wins becomes victorious on the RP, then just be a good writer and describe the battles that happened during it.
-
I`ve said this before in some thread : I am all for open PvP and open war . Both sides agreeing on a conflict is ridiculous , agreed , but i allso see the other side of the problem , people just runing around swinging there silverweaves slaughtering everyone in sight . The solution to the entire PvP issue in my opinion is SERIOUS consequences of death . No ammount of "accept/decline`s" or GM policing will fix all the stupid PvP going around for absolutely NO reason . Finding a way to make death a serious issue (even to the point of losing your character) would be the only way to go...in my humble opinion
In any case killing inside or nearby towns should make the guards react imediatly . The wildlands are another story though . Yes there may be l33ts roaming the roads and the hills, but then again if they are proven to be dangerous criminals they should think twice before approaching any town`s gates or risk beeing killed on sight . Perhaps Harnquist will not deal with someone who is suspected of beeing a criminal... But again , the key is how serious death is . If it`s just respawning and a little time spent to get back out there , all the above things will be useless . First thing to do in my opinion would be losing your inventory on death...now i`d love to see how many l33t pwn3rz would risk loosing there ub3r-m3g4-l33t-swords-of-pwning just to get another duel point.I say free PvP and open wars but with consequences! If i could have it my way the "challange" button would go away , so try killing that harmless-looking dwarf if you feel like it but deal with it if you fail .
Now about PvP , does anyone remember that feature of Gothic 2 where when fighting quest-related NPC`s or stuff you would knock them down , then had the choiche of delivering the killing blow or leting them live? Would that work in PS? In some form anyway , I mean when someone is allmoast dead he falls down (now about that , it would be great to see hitpoints affecting stats/skills , as in someone who is at 20% hp should not be able to fight/run like someone who is at 100%) , combat is over , the winer can either kill the loser or walk away . I guess the loser would be compleatly incapacitated , and either recover after a while or die eventualy if noone shows up to heal him
-
/die is the only way anyone dies in a pure RolePlay war...anything else would mean resorting to OOC game mechanics %}
-
/die is the only way anyone dies in a pure RolePlay war...anything else would mean resorting to OOC game mechanics %}
/roll 1 10
* rolled a 10 sided die for a 2
/me is strucked down by a boulder launched from a trebuchet inside the enemy fortress as the siege is happening, and the other fighters near him also are hitted and die together.
/die (And hope other characters near you will accept it)
Little challenging to make it realistic and without cheating or godmodding, isn't it?
-
As i see it Guild wars shoul;d be restricted to anywhere outside of main cities and settlements such as Hydlaa and Odjevada. if a guild starts a war on the streets its only right thata the guards step in with some really heavy handed aggression and break some heads. Small village and such would be less easy to stop a war erupting as they dont have the same man power, neverthe lkess they would have the odd guard and soldier to stop fights, but not as many as a main city and certainly not as well trained and powerful.
Killing guards as a result will obviously get you outlawed from the city, and you'd be attacked on sight for enetring the city.
I have more idea's following the killing of guards but these go beyond guild wars, so I shall save them.
-
In real life wars have to be agreed to legaly. So why not have a war council that decides if it is a legal war, if it is legal then it is solely between the two factions and is in decided places only. If it is illegal the war goes a head but attacking faction is open to attack from anyone and the war can take place anywhere any time.
-
In real life wars have to be agreed to legaly. So why not have a war council that decides if it is a legal war, if it is legal then it is solely between the two factions and is in decided places only. If it is illegal the war goes a head but attacking faction is open to attack from anyone and the war can take place anywhere any time.
No they don't. The current war in Iraq is seen as illegal by many people. I would argue that no war is legal.
-
Well im not 100% sure but i read somewhere a list of things that made a war legal. Either way the idea still stands.
-
I think the wars would be automatically modded by other players. if a guild gets too strong (this is with autoaccept on), wouldnt the other guilds just gang up on them? even the strongest guild can get weighed down if it gets attacked by like 50 other guilds.
-
I think the wars would be automatically modded by other players. if a guild gets too strong (this is with autoaccept on), wouldnt the other guilds just gang up on them? even the strongest guild can get weighed down if it gets attacked by like 50 other guilds.
Not if each guild is picked off individually before they even start up. Think about it - you either join the bully guild, or you get owned. What would you choose? To the fresh-faced new player, they're going to want protection for their first steps in Yliakum. The only way the cycle would be broken is if enough oldbies banded together to put a stop to it...
Well im not 100% sure but i read somewhere a list of things that made a war legal. Either way the idea still stands.
I think you're thinking of the Geneva Convention, which nobody really pays attention to anyway...
And the War Council is just the same as the 'guards' idea, really.
-
It has to be there, otherwise you will get maniac "evil" guilds murdering everyone.
Forge alliances to stop them- as in real life. That is a simple enough prescription.
-
When he says evil he means guilds that don't know how to rp properly.
-
Until you have a mechanism that guarantees murderers and such are pursued by the guard, you can't afford having auto accept in guild wars and challenges. Because that would make the game not realistic. And a hack n slash heaven. You'll have all these morons that don't even know they're at a MMORPG kicking people's butt in a town where there should be someone protecting the villagers.
PvP is not that important. People make a great fuss over it and even go as far as making it the objective and prime feature of their pseudo-roleplays (that's what I call the concept of "let's have a roleplay today about chesse!"). I've seen it more than once, someone coming around with the "Power Glyph of Doom" and the "Immortal, Unaffected by Guards Slavers Of All" just to have a big fancy war in the end where people fight, people die, people live, people fight, people die, people live and nothing comes out if afterwards. Everything becomes just the way it was before the uberness had settled.
Really people. Some of you just need to expand your perspective of roleplay. Nowadays people "roleplay" fights like I roleplay Sangwa going to the tavern. Vulgar, daily, boring.
When you read a fantasy book you're not just hoping to see fights. You're also hoping to see magic, feelings, surprises and fun.
Again with the RPing angle.
Why dont we all just tpye into our chat boxes? Have you good citizens never heard of alliances? Perhaps....the authority to war could only be granted by the political authority in winch area. Meaning leader of guild would both need access to winch, and the politiicos given the power to "authorize war". Instill a sizeble "war tax" that the aggressor must pay for authorization. There are many things one could place in game to act as control-mechanisms.
As far as unruly behavior and challenge "abuse", a lot of OC noobish or ignorant behavior could be policed in game by the players if upon report of OC insults and silly noob behavior the intervening GM set the disprespectful offender to auto-accept. ;)
-
Valorius, please do not double-post. You have been told this several times before - use the "Modify" button to add new information to your first post if no one has replied yet. This is forum policy.
-
Valorius, please do not double-post. You have been told this several times before - use the "Modify" button to add new information to your first post if no one has replied yet. This is forum policy.
There is a post between my posts, by parallo, and now by you.
Valorius- parollo- valorius- karyuu- valorius.
-
You know what I am talking about :) I will leave it at that.
*edit*
Evidently I was mistaken - you don't. Two consecutive posts from one poster is double-posting. You don't have to reply to different people using two different posts - use one, as I merged your last two. So again, please remember the Modify button.
-
There is a post between my posts, by parallo, and now by you.
Valorius- parollo- valorius- karyuu- valorius.
Dont try and fight back against the great Karyuu. You will always lose XD
-
There is a post between my posts, by parallo, and now by you.
Valorius- parollo- valorius- karyuu- valorius.
Dont try and fight back against the great Karyuu. You will always lose XD
The proper wording is: Don't fight back against someone with an authority position as Moderator regarding rules unless you're Talad or a "Legendary Suppreme H4xx0r" capable of bringing down the whole Internet with some thousands of keystrokes(Legendary, because no one ever heard about one, and of course a manhunt would be organized for the legendary one who could do such thing :P ). And I suggest you to avoid calling people in positions of authority as "great" if you do not wish to be viewed as belonging to a certain stereotype :innocent: (Except if it was some kind of joke as I presume) . But I have the hope that the dev team does not argue too much on things to the point of "fighting" as all hopefully are civilized.
-
I could always just not post if my posts are so annoying. I wonder how the thousands of members of my forums have survived so many years despite this dreaded "double post" phenomenon not being rigidly controlled at my site??? And in all that time not a single member has ever complained of it(by any poster), even once.
I guess we're all just ignorant to what's "annoying". Or not...
www.a-10.org
-
The proper wording is: Don't fight back against someone with an authority position as Moderator regarding rules unless you're Talad or a "Legendary Suppreme H4xx0r" capable of bringing down the whole Internet with some thousands of keystrokes(Legendary, because no one ever heard about one, and of course a manhunt would be organized for the legendary one who could do such thing :P ). And I suggest you to avoid calling people in positions of authority as "great" if you do not wish to be viewed as belonging to a certain stereotype :innocent: (Except if it was some kind of joke as I presume) . But I have the hope that the dev team does not argue too much on things to the point of "fighting" as all hopefully are civilized.
Yeah, it was a joke :P
-
back on topic...
how about protection for newguilds for a length of time? the it wouldnt be that much of a problem
-
back on topic...
how about protection for newguilds for a length of time? the it wouldnt be that much of a problem
Which doesn't solve the problem for guilds which it would be hard to see them fighting with others (merchant guilds: I mean, I can see a merchant getting ambushed here or there, but a full out, bloody war isn't very realistic), or guilds that prefer quality over quantity, especially as far as roleplaying goes. Such a rule would only benefit guilds that recruit irresponsibly and don't have any sort of "Oh, is he a good member for the guild" catching, or any sort of "Can he rp?" questioning about the person joining. Such guilds are likely to be, to some degree, the guilds that will go manically postal and kill everybody.
-
Whats the problem anyway? If you are some bloodthirsty guild of murderous maniacs (in that case World of Warcraft PvP server suits you better), you would be expelled from all civilised areas, and there would be rewards written on your heads. You would end up being constantly hunt down, living at the Ruins (poor Nyshyn not to mention ulbernauts for company like that). The more you would kill the bigger masses would be after you. You would end up dead sooner or later. Thats the reality. (really dead, not returning from DR to bother us all over ;)) No one is interested in group of simpletons.
If you have IC reasons for war, I guess the oposite guild will accept it anyway. Until there will be more active role of Octars and city guards and until there will be bounties for outlaws (doesnt really mean the guild with the same name) heads, implementing simple declare war system is out of question.
Else I can just support what Sangwa wrote before.
-
^^^ My point exactly ^^^
-
Well, what does the term "war" imply? No large group fights just anywhere, they fight on a battlefield. Battlefields are OUTSIDE cities, ususally far away. If a little group is in a war with a large guild, then it'll stay inside a city. Also, remember that the Cold War tought us that fighting is not just physical. A small guild might be able to convince people not to trade with members of a larger guild. Or maybe it'll sell things for lower prices than the larger guild. As the boycott of the large guild continues, guild members leave. Eventually:
A) the once-large guild is small enough to take on
-or-
B)it'll surrender
Either way, no fighting. Also, new things could be employed, like bribing guards to attack members of a guild, or poisoning a guild's stalls. Who knows
-
I think the wars would be automatically modded by other players. if a guild gets too strong (this is with autoaccept on), wouldnt the other guilds just gang up on them? even the strongest guild can get weighed down if it gets attacked by like 50 other guilds.
Not if each guild is picked off individually before they even start up. Think about it - you either join the bully guild, or you get owned. What would you choose? To the fresh-faced new player, they're going to want protection for their first steps in Yliakum. The only way the cycle would be broken is if enough oldbies banded together to put a stop to it...
Well im not 100% sure but i read somewhere a list of things that made a war legal. Either way the idea still stands.
I think you're thinking of the Geneva Convention, which nobody really pays attention to anyway...
And the War Council is just the same as the 'guards' idea, really.
Such large alliances that could face virtually any evildoing guild already exist.
Also, secret guilds are the wildcard. I have near 60 members currently, many hardcore duel trained players among them. Yet because we are secret, no one knows who or where. Attacking us effectively would be virtually impossible. Defending against us even harder. Defending against an alliance of secret guilds like The Order of Daggers has forged, well......
It would be a very rude surprise ineed. :)
-
Most of secret guilds would prefer to avoid war in most cases, or rely on allies for it when necessary.
If you can declare war on a secret guild, is it really that secret?
*Added random comment
Alex Jones on a certain way "declared war" on the supposedly existing Illuminati, of course if he "disappears", his claims will certainly become more believed.
http://www.infowars.com/ (http://www.infowars.com/)
-
The system is fundamentally flawed, but not for the reasons you are stating. Guilds did not have wars. Guilds controlled commerce. I blame WoW, GW, and all the other MMOs out there for the miseducation of the masses, and blame PS for perpetuating this myth and fallacy, despite the supposedly more intelligent community. The only guilds that truly fought for a living were combat guilds, and they did so for the entertainment of others.
-
The system is fundamentally flawed, but not for the reasons you are stating. Guilds did not have wars. Guilds controlled commerce. I blame WoW, GW, and all the other MMOs out there for the miseducation of the masses, and blame PS for perpetuating this myth and fallacy, despite the supposedly more intelligent community. The only guilds that truly fought for a living were combat guilds, and they did so for the entertainment of others.
Who make "wars": Governments, Organized Crime... (All those types of organizations would be based on "guilds", realistically they would be made of several of the so called "guilds" )
The word "guild" is pretty generic and away from its RL meaning on most MMORPGs.
-
Most of secret guilds would prefer to avoid war in most cases, or rely on allies for it when necessary.
If you can declare war on a secret guild, is it really that secret?
*Added random comment
Alex Jones on a certain way "declared war" on the supposedly existing Illuminati, of course if he "disappears", his claims will certainly become more believed.
http://www.infowars.com/ (http://www.infowars.com/)
Under current system all you have to do is target guild leader and if he accepts, a war is on, even if you dont know a single other member of the guild.
And to say there are no guild wars is the same as saying there are no gang or mob wars. Silliness. Not only armies fight wars. What about an insurgency? Hmmm?
LOL
-
Guild wars are nothing more than group on group duels. Normal PvP approval rules apply. Sorry if you don't like it.
Moving to PvP wish list thread.
- Vengeance
-
Guild wars are nothing more than group on group duels. Normal PvP approval rules apply. Sorry if you don't like it.
Moving to PvP wish list thread.
- Vengeance
Normal PvP rules dont apply at all actually. Once war is accepted....there are no rules in a guild war. You can attack any member of guild anywhere, anytime, without cause or reason.
And no, i dont like the decline option.
-
I doubt there is a "Geneva Convention" in Yliakum, specially on the regions bordering the Stone Labyrinths.
-
Normal PvP rules dont apply at all actually. Once war is accepted....there are no rules in a guild war. You can attack any member of guild anywhere, anytime, without cause or reason.
And no, i dont like the decline option.
You said once it is accepted so yes, normal rules apply. It is like a group on group duel.
-
Personaly this is far from being made an open pvp game
First of all the best and most realistic solution would be to have guards attack if a guild war get out of control (like fighting in the plaza)
or maybe if a guild war is more than 50 vs 50 than the Ochtarch of that level dispenses him military forces to "remove" the trouble makers. Also the part about secret guilds fighting is quite imposibleif you are secret how do you fight wars it would be more like a large number of attacks against a group of people.
Thirdly i would like to resumea bit on the fort idea. The forts should cost a whole mountain of money to build (500.000 at the least i think) and it wouldnt be permanent unless you are making a castle (which would cost another everest of gold) but also the castle would be slow to build castle have the rock cut for them in 20 years while forts are usualy made for a better defense line and a standard fort is usualy made of wood.
I hope i made sense (i tend to type giberish from time to time :sweatdrop:)
-
Personaly this is far from being made an open pvp game
First of all the best and most realistic solution would be to have guards attack if a guild war get out of control (like fighting in the plaza)
or maybe if a guild war is more than 50 vs 50 than the Ochtarch of that level dispenses him military forces to "remove" the trouble makers. Also the part about secret guilds fighting is quite imposibleif you are secret how do you fight wars it would be more like a large number of attacks against a group of people.
Thirdly i would like to resumea bit on the fort idea. The forts should cost a whole mountain of money to build (500.000 at the least i think) and it wouldnt be permanent unless you are making a castle (which would cost another everest of gold) but also the castle would be slow to build castle have the rock cut for them in 20 years while forts are usualy made for a better defense line and a standard fort is usualy made of wood.
I hope i made sense (i tend to type giberish from time to time :sweatdrop:)
Hiring masons to build fortresses/castles should be a long, expensive but rewarding option in the distant future.
Also about secret "guilds". Any truly secret organization wouldn't engage directly into wars, but instead use some puppets or allies for their goals. Or sometimes even provoke wars between third parties.
Keyword: Conspiracy. (Specially for a secret "guild" that deals with politics)
Also when "wars" happen directly between secret groups the common result will be a lot of "accidents" and of people dying of "heart strokes"
-
Normal PvP rules dont apply at all actually. Once war is accepted....there are no rules in a guild war. You can attack any member of guild anywhere, anytime, without cause or reason.
And no, i dont like the decline option.
You said once it is accepted so yes, normal rules apply. It is like a group on group duel.
Again, normal rules do not apply because ONLY the guild leader can accept or decline, there is no individual choice for each person, as per a normal or 'group' duel. In those setting the individual has full ability to decline any challenge.
Also the part about secret guilds fighting is quite imposibleif you are secret how do you fight wars it would be more like a large number of attacks against a group of people.
The concept of spies and carfully drawn target lists of enemy personnel obviously eludes you. What's more, barring spies and excellent intel, a open guild would be at a massive disadvantage to a secret one in PS. One of the many reasons there are so many secret guilds in PS.
-
The concept of spies and carfully drawn target lists of enemy personnel obviously eludes you. What's more, barring spies and excellent intel, a open guild would be at a massive disadvantage to a secret one in PS. One of the many reasons there are so many secret guilds in PS.
Being a secret guild in a guild war against another open guild would be a advantage to the secret. Obvioulsy because the Open guild couldnt track them. I doubt the open guild would be dumb enough to start the war in the first place without a good plan. I would enjoy using guerilla style...much more fun and frustrating for the other side. :devil:
-
Valorius, once again, the big green letters over someone are not IC knowledge. Unless a person wears a uniform marking them as part of their guild or a marking then you won't know what guild they are part of.
As for the guild wars, it has to be accepted just like regular pvp so that makes sense. If you don't follow your leaders cuase why are you in the guild in the first place. From an OOC point of view think of how long it would take to wait untill everyone in the guild has come online and accepted. I don't know about you but I have been in guilds with many barely active players that still play a big role.
-
As for the fairness of the accepting i think its all in the guild leaders power and individual members can either leave or there could be something like a white scarf that shows you surender and wearing it would make you impervious but also if more than 50% of the guild wear them make the guild auto lose because that would seem more like surender to me.
On another note guild wars should not only be fights but also as some have mentioned use difrent more cuning tactics and secret allies.
I can easily picture a raid group attacking from one side while an ally of a secret guild sneaks in to poison the food and water suplies and maybe sabotage plans and inteligence.O course this tactic wont be used until/if there is a nurisment requierment bar so players dont only RP food stop and bringing suplies.
-
Hold on here...I have looked through this topic (and recieved a stack of headaches) but has anyone ever considered a few simple options for a guild to toggle at creation (and could later only be changed through a hefty price and GM action)?
RP wise they could be represented as a series of licenses that are observed and enforced by all organizations and governments.
These toggles include a full PVP status, this one would allow full out war as well as scirmishes and one on one fights between players of a guild.
To optain this licence, I think that maybe a hefty price might be required, or perhaps a special quest wherein a number of the guild members have to prove their ability through combat.
With this licence, not only are you vulnerable to PK by other priveilaged players, there would be a public roster that shows which guilds are full PK and possibly the members.
To put it simply (ignoring my suggestions about the license bit) a guild can go full PK at creation, or they can go passive.
The difference between the two can either be simple or complicated, in fact there could be many nuances added to the system.
For instance, maybe PK licenced guilds can be labeled as independants, which means that they could not be helped by guards, nor hindered. Any official ingame RP or NPC governments would likely ignore their actions and not protect members from monsters or other
"Independant" guilds.
I would love to be a passive player watching two Guilds duke it out in the middle of town and be effectively imune to their actions, and since I don't have a license my self, nor belong to a guild with one, I could not help them.
I have some other ideas on the subject, but I think they would merit their own thread....
-
I don't see the merits of this system. It's not IC at all and people fighting in the streets isn't something we want to encourage at all.
-
I don't see the merits of this system. It's not IC at all and people fighting in the streets isn't something we want to encourage at all.
Labryinth armies running through streets of hydlaa = "barbarians" invade rome and sack it.
Ojaveda is overrun with rogue invasion = trying to get more tourist attraction for ojaveda.
-
We're talking about guilds fighting each other in the street and the guards letting them.
-
We're talking about guilds fighting each other in the street and the guards letting them.
If thats the case, if you all seem to dislike dueling near harnquist or the plaza, then put a sensor around and if a challenge is made, harnquiist automatically says, "Guards help!". They come running and ta-dah, also, if people just mis-clicked while trying to greet using the shortcut tab, put a "do you really want to challenge dude?" the first time so you wont be harasses by guards for a mis-guided mouse click.
-
If thats the case, if you all seem to dislike dueling near harnquist or the plaza, then put a sensor around and if a challenge is made, harnquiist automatically says, "Guards help!". They come running and ta-dah, also, if people just mis-clicked while trying to greet using the shortcut tab, put a "do you really want to challenge dude?" the first time so you wont be harasses by guards for a mis-guided mouse click.
It would be much easier to just disable the possibility to duel in the Plaza.
-
How would that be explained IC? The gaurds idea is much better in my opinion.
-
How would that be explained IC? The gaurds idea is much better in my opinion.
Agreed, somehow being unable to attack someone anywhere is out of character, guards would be a much better idea. How ever this is badly off topic now!
To point out the origonal post of this thread I'd have to say I agree, no body 'declines' a war... However, how does somebody decline being sucker punched or attacked? Sometimes ooc stuff is needed to prevent '1337 kr3wz' from just up[ and killing anyone, by all rights ICly you should be able to beat someone up without their permission, but the accept/decline is there as an ooc protecton.
In any case I do like the idea... Im just saying ooc precautions are nessasary for things. But there is a way around this, make guild making a tad harder, I recall there being a suggestion for a 'petiton' to make a guild proving it is IC and such. This would make newbie ooc guilds unheard of, and thus we wouldn't need to worry about evil guilds picking on weak guilds. Also, leaders should have to have been in game for a while, at least *I* think so.
The rest, follows in. ;)
-
I think the main problem here is:
role-playing quality vs protection for new players
well, lets face it. War isnt supposed to be a situation where everyone wins.