Maintenance for the week of January 6:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 13:00 UTC (8:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 8:00AM EST (13:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – January 8, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 13:00 UTC (8:00AM EST)
Justice system sugestion (Addition) - Killing Other players in PVE.
-
smeeprocketnub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭The only way it will turn into pvp is if you get caught and cannot pay or you run from the guards. Now it be good if eso had a bandit town for you to lay low or bandit caves.
I was just thinking this. UO had a place called buccaneer's den that had no guards at all.
I thought it would be a haven for reds (people that have a high murder count) but since I was playing on a free server, it turns out they just gave their stuff to non pvp mules to store, or put it in their house.
Anyway, if you were kos to city guards, you always had the option of going there to do your banking. This seems optimal, but there would need to be one in each faction.
Not even necessarily a town, just a place with all the things towns generally have.Dear Sister, I do not spread rumors, I create them.2 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »The only way it will turn into pvp is if you get caught and cannot pay or you run from the guards. Now it be good if eso had a bandit town for you to lay low or bandit caves.
I was just thinking this. UO had a place called buccaneer's den that had no guards at all.
I thought it would be a haven for reds (people that have a high murder count) but since I was playing on a free server, it turns out they just gave their stuff to non pvp mules to store, or put it in their house.
Anyway, if you were kos to city guards, you always had the option of going there to do your banking. This seems optimal, but there would need to be one in each faction.
Not even necessarily a town, just a place with all the things towns generally have.
Hell no, if you get a bounty in every single town and somehow manage to never get murdered by player guards in every single town then you get to never use the banks.
Wasn't that the whole point of player guards according to some guy back there and Paul Sage - that people wouldn't get to avoid consequences?2 -
Halorin✭✭✭Hell no, if you get a bounty in every single town and somehow manage to never get murdered by player guards in every single town then you get to never use the banks.
Wasn't that the whole point of player guards according to some guy back there and Paul Sage - that people wouldn't get to avoid consequences?
If you get a bounty in every single town then you should pay the guards to have your bounty cleared. This post, to me, confirms that you just want the feeling that you could have consequences for your actions but you never want to actually face them.
Or at the very least, your words suggest that ONLY players would pose a threat to you and not NPC guards, which is why Paul Sage specifically pointed out that player guards are meant to be a deterrent for players' circumventing NPC guards.
I'm glad that the developers are making the danger and consequence real for players like you. This false illusion of danger you're after is not something that should be pushed for at the detriment of the community's opportunity for dynamic content.
2 -
Xenite✭✭✭Kewljag_66_ESO wrote: »
NPC Guards, Bounty Fee, Inability to use town services. Those are called consequences. Not to mention they could make certain characters behave differently with repeated known criminals.
Edited by Xenite on July 28, 2014 4:26PM1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Not sure how you figure any of that, am guessing this is pure logic fail on your part because I said none of that.Hell no, if you get a bounty in every single town and somehow manage to never get murdered by player guards in every single town then you get to never use the banks.
Wasn't that the whole point of player guards according to some guy back there and Paul Sage - that people wouldn't get to avoid consequences?
If you get a bounty in every single town then you should pay the guards to have your bounty cleared. This post, to me, confirms that you just want the feeling that you could have consequences for your actions but you never want to actually face them.
Or at the very least, your words suggest that ONLY players would pose a threat to you and not NPC guards, which is why Paul Sage specifically pointed out that player guards are meant to be a deterrent for players' circumventing NPC guards.
I'm glad that the developers are making the danger and consequence real for players like you. This false illusion of danger you're after is not something that should be pushed for at the detriment of the community's opportunity for dynamic content.
What I said is if someone escaped getting killed or paying a bounty then they should not get to use the bank in a magical evil pirate town just for players who have bounties, because there should be consequences. See how nothing you said I am thinking follows or you still want to try frame me into being someone who wishes to escape all consequences.
Anyway, bottom line is this justice system needs to have a pve-only version, because we don't want to play with randoms, because 1) they clutter up chat and 2) they clutter up our screen and 3) they clutter up our game world, and 4) they clutter up our forums.
Only thing other players are good for is selling crap to.
Edited by babylon on July 28, 2014 4:30PM0 -
smeeprocketnub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »The only way it will turn into pvp is if you get caught and cannot pay or you run from the guards. Now it be good if eso had a bandit town for you to lay low or bandit caves.
I was just thinking this. UO had a place called buccaneer's den that had no guards at all.
I thought it would be a haven for reds (people that have a high murder count) but since I was playing on a free server, it turns out they just gave their stuff to non pvp mules to store, or put it in their house.
Anyway, if you were kos to city guards, you always had the option of going there to do your banking. This seems optimal, but there would need to be one in each faction.
Not even necessarily a town, just a place with all the things towns generally have.
Hell no, if you get a bounty in every single town and somehow manage to never get murdered by player guards in every single town then you get to never use the banks.
Wasn't that the whole point of player guards according to some guy back there and Paul Sage - that people wouldn't get to avoid consequences?
There's no reason you shouldn't be able to bank and buy/sell. You won't be able to enter any city if you rack up that many bounties.
Besides that, the larger reason is a great opportunity for rp oriented pvp. Say you have a group of guards that decides to clean up bandit town and raids it. There could be pitched battles, maybe there would even, as someone said, be ways to set up traps and the like.
Bandit caves seem like it would be the coolest option looking back at the original post.
I know pve'rs think pvp'rs spend all their time thinking up ways to grief noobs, but along with that simply not being the case, I know I like to get into character. That doesn't mean I'm staging events where I try to parlay with the enemy etc (I don't parlay anyway, I kill people or die trying,) If I'm going to be a bad guy, which I am, having a bandit cave to hide out in would be awesome.
Also, I really do hope there is a way to be flagged without racking up a bounty. I like to be able to go where I please without npc guards trying to arrest me. I just want the possibility of player guards attacking me. Plus having my flag wear off and having to go all the way to a city to get another one (it would be in khenarthi's roost I think, I never go there and have even already spotted m'iaq there,) would be a pita. I don't want the bounty to wear off.Dear Sister, I do not spread rumors, I create them.1 -
Izzban✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »
But just to emphasize again, because no one seems to get it: griefing is not possible in this system.
I can think of ways to grief. I don't even want to grief and I can easily think of them.
Most of you seem to be focused on the thief as the victim. I think the thief will be the vehicle of the ganking and griefing.
Consider this: a lv 10 and a VR12 go to one of the populated low level towns. The lv 10 sets up to steal from an NPC in full sight of a Player who has opted-in as a guard. The lv 10 steals and gets caught, the Player guard engages. The VR12 then ALSO steals/murders and is flagged for PVP. VR12 then heals the lv 10 or stands near the lv 10 to get caught in the Player guard AOE. Player guard is now flagged for PVP with the VR12. Proceed to gank the lowbies.
That is one simple example of a way to gank low level guard players.
How easy would it be for a high level to run around a low level area with guards chasing him hoping for a low level opt-in guard player to cast a heal/attack and flag for PVP with him. Result: Lowbie Ganked.
Just because you opted to become a guard doesn't mean you should be open to ganking and griefing. Even Cyrodil gives players a buff to help them defend themselves, this PVP system gives low levels the raw deal.
Nerevarine, I respect your opinion. Your posts are well thought out and I usually agree with you. In this case, I must take exception with your stance that griefing and ganking cannot occur. We need more information and testing before we can say that ganking and griefing cannot occur.
Edited by Izzban on July 28, 2014 5:02PM1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »having to go all the way to a city... (it would be in khenarthi's roost I think
I think players with bounties should also have the ability to use wayshrines removed, so they can't escape.1 -
Halorin✭✭✭Not sure how you figure any of that, am guessing this is pure logic fail on your part because I said none of that.
What I said is if someone escaped getting killed or paying a bounty then they should not get to use the bank in a magical evil pirate town just for players who have bounties, because there should be consequences. See how nothing you said I am thinking follows or you still want to try frame me into being someone who wishes to escape all consequences.
Anyway, bottom line is this justice system needs to have a pve-only version, because we don't want to play with randoms, because 1) they clutter up chat and 2) they clutter up our screen and 3) they clutter up our game world, and 4) they clutter up our forums.
Only thing other players are good for is selling crap to.
Fair. The bottom line, however, is that Paul Sage said in the Future of ESO presentation that player guards were being instituted to ensure consequences for criminal activities were enforced, so your 'we' is going to have to accept that and either participate in the justice system knowing that you might run into other players, or you can not participate at all.
There are plenty of single player ESO games that might be more to your liking. I'm glad we can agree that you think there should be consequences and that there shouldn't be some pirate sanctuary. I still find humor in your want to avoid consequences you don't like, as that defeats the point of said consequences.1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Not sure how you figure any of that, am guessing this is pure logic fail on your part because I said none of that.
What I said is if someone escaped getting killed or paying a bounty then they should not get to use the bank in a magical evil pirate town just for players who have bounties, because there should be consequences. See how nothing you said I am thinking follows or you still want to try frame me into being someone who wishes to escape all consequences.
Anyway, bottom line is this justice system needs to have a pve-only version, because we don't want to play with randoms, because 1) they clutter up chat and 2) they clutter up our screen and 3) they clutter up our game world, and 4) they clutter up our forums.
Only thing other players are good for is selling crap to.
Fair. The bottom line, however, is that Paul Sage said in the Future of ESO presentation that player guards were being instituted to ensure consequences for criminal activities were enforced, so your 'we' is going to have to accept that and either participate in the justice system knowing that you might run into other players, or you can not participate at all.
There are plenty of single player ESO games that might be more to your liking. I'm glad we can agree that you think there should be consequences and that there shouldn't be some pirate sanctuary. I still find humor in your want to avoid consequences you don't like, as that defeats the point of said consequences.
Nope sorry, I like MMOs, other people running about seems cute to me, because they are more random than the AI.
However I prefer to choose who I want to play with (as opposed to playing nearby to) and pve only justice system should be part of that in a pve game, The pvp part of game needs to remain in Cyrodiil, where I can choose to go if I want.
I would also like to choose to participate in the justice system without inadvertently inviting randoms to play with me. I think this system needs to be reconsidered so there isn't a forced pvp component to it or to Thieves Guild and Dark Brotherhood.2 -
Ashtaris✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭The first time they allow PVP in a PVE zone other than killing certain NPC's is when myself and my wife both unsubscribe, plain and simple. If I want to be involved with PVP then I'll go to a PVP zone. And no, you can't haz my stuff
2 -
Halorin✭✭✭Nope sorry, I like MMOs, other people running about seems cute to me, because they are more random than the AI.
However I prefer to choose who I want to play with (as opposed to playing nearby to) and pve only justice system should be part of that in a pve game, The pvp part of game needs to remain in Cyrodiil, where I can choose to go if I want.
I would also like to choose to participate in the justice system without inadvertently inviting randoms to play with me. I think this system needs to be reconsidered so there isn't a forced pvp component to it or to Thieves Guild and Dark Brotherhood.
You're more than entitled to your opinion, but Paul Sage's words were pretty clear. Seems like it's just something you'll have to accept and come to terms with, or not participate in the justice system. That's the impression that was given at the presentation, so.
I'm pretty sure the developers had a discussion where they ultimately decided to introduce PvP elements into the justice system, specifically to avoid players exploiting and getting around NPC guards.
Your choice of who you want to play with is still preserved by your not committing crimes. Like I said earlier, it makes no sense for criminals to have a choice in who comes to collect their bounty. Nowhere in TES lore have I ever seen something like that, and I doubt it's going to be done now to appease your want to 'choose who you play with'.
But I guess we'll see how it shakes out. I'd be surprised if they moved on their position, though.Edited by Halorin on July 28, 2014 5:18PM1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Your choice of who you want to play with is still preserved by your not committing crimes.
What seems to be flying over your head is the concept that players would want to steal from/kill NPCs but only get punished by NPCs and not involve random players in their gametime.
Basically choice is taken away in this system, and the whole thing needs to be revamped so there is a pve option.3 -
smeeprocketnub19_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »
But just to emphasize again, because no one seems to get it: griefing is not possible in this system.
I can think of ways to grief. I don't even want to grief and I can easily think of them.
Most of you seem to be focused on the thief as the victim. I think the thief will be the vehicle of the ganking and griefing.
Consider this: a lv 10 and a VR12 go to one of the populated low level towns. The lv 10 sets up to steal from an NPC in full sight of a Player who has opted-in as a guard. The lv 10 steals and gets caught, the Player guard engages. The VR12 then ALSO steals/murders and is flagged for PVP. VR12 then heals the lv 10 or stands near the lv 10 to get caught in the Player guard AOE. Player guard is now flagged for PVP with the VR12. Proceed to gank the lowbies.
That is one simple example of a way to gank low level guard players.
How easy would it be for a high level to run around a low level area with guards chasing him hoping for a low level opt-in guard player to cast a heal/attack and flag for PVP with him. Result: Lowbie Ganked.
Just because you opted to become a guard doesn't mean you should be open to ganking and griefing. Even Cyrodil gives players a buff to help them defend themselves, this PVP system gives low levels the raw deal.
Nerevarine, I respect your opinion. Your posts are well thought out and I usually agree with you. In this case, I must take exception with your stance that griefing and ganking cannot occur. We need more information and testing before we can say that ganking and griefing cannot occur.
lol wut? None of that sounds like griefing, all of those people opted in to the process. If you are level 10, don't opt in, problem solved. If a guard is only targetting level 10s, he would deserve that. Not that I wouldn't kill level 10s, I do not discriminate. I am an equal opportunity murderer.
Also, we better be able to preemptively attack guards, my attacks depend on stealth.
I posted about healing maybe on this thread maybe on another, it will need to be addressed, I'm not sure how but I don't yet know how they will implement it. If someone is healing my target, however, I should definitely be able to kill them. Furthermore, if the low level in this snecnario is a guard, he is opting in, as well. He is not being ganked in this scenario, he is even initiating.
You clearly have 0 idea what griefing is.Dear Sister, I do not spread rumors, I create them.2 -
Halorin✭✭✭What seems to be flying over your head is the concept that players would want to steal from/kill NPCs but only get punished by NPCs and not involve random players in their gametime.
Basically choice is taken away in this system, and the whole thing needs to be revamped so there is a pve option.
No it doesn't. What seems to be flying over your head is that Paul Sage expressly pointed out their disinterest in having a PVE option to the justice system. They haven't even revealed the full details on the justice system, so you have no idea what you're talking about when you talk of anything needing to be revamped.
Based on the emphatic cheering that followed the announcement of a PVP element to the justice system, I think you'll be left wanting when it goes live.
1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭What seems to be flying over your head is the concept that players would want to steal from/kill NPCs but only get punished by NPCs and not involve random players in their gametime.
Basically choice is taken away in this system, and the whole thing needs to be revamped so there is a pve option.
No it doesn't. What seems to be flying over your head is that Paul Sage snip
What seems to be flying over your head is that I already heard this quote many times, but am suggesting that the system needs to have a pve only option to keep the pve players happy. Who cares if random NPCs have their stale radishes stolen from them and the NPC guards can't punish anyone? Who cares if random NPC #2576 gets topped and an NPC guard doesn't nab the murderer because they are somehow too quick for the NPC guards.
All that needs to happen in this system is to ensure that bankers/shop NPCs/quest NPCs are not part of this system in the first place, so that no actual griefing of non-involved players can take place, and it would be 100% okay to have an NPC punishment system.1 -
Nox_Aeterna✭✭✭✭✭
✭Im quite sure it is against the rules to grief others , so if anyone does this , report them , worst case , the GM thinks it was not valid , best , the guy is perma banned and the problem is solved.
If this system does allow people to grief others , im sure people will come to the forums a LOT to complain. Once that happens , even if it takes zen a month or more to finally react to an issue , they will probably fix it by limiting the system more."Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
-Hanlon's razor1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »
Also, I really do hope there is a way to be flagged without racking up a bounty. I like to be able to go where I please without npc guards trying to arrest me. I just want the possibility of player guards attacking me. Plus having my flag wear off and having to go all the way to a city to get another one (it would be in khenarthi's roost I think, I never go there and have even already spotted m'iaq there,) would be a pita. I don't want the bounty to wear off.
So you don't really want a justice system, you just want open world PvP.3 -
Halorin✭✭✭What seems to be flying over your head is that I already heard this quote many times, but am suggesting that the system needs to have a pve only option to keep the pve players happy. Who cares if random NPCs have their stale radishes stolen from them and the NPC guards can't punish anyone? Who cares if random NPC #2576 gets topped and an NPC guard doesn't nab the murderer because they are somehow too quick for the NPC guards.
All that needs to happen in this system is to ensure that bankers/shop NPCs/quest NPCs are not part of this system in the first place, so that no actual griefing of non-involved players can take place, and it would be 100% okay to have an NPC punishment system.
Paul Sage and the developers care, or else they wouldn't have expressed such a hardened statement on the inclusion of PVP in the justice system. There's a lot you don't know about the justice system, and potential changes that could influence the economy. They may entice players to become criminals by making looting more valuable than the provisioning items or motifs you get now. If that's the case, it'd make sense to make the risks match the rewards.
A player guard killing a player criminal is not griefing at all. It's the player enforcing the law. They can only attack you if you break the law. You aren't being harrassed while trying to complete quests or while going to bank NPCs. You are being met with the consequences of your actions, actions that sign you up for player involvement.
If you go into Cyrodiil to do quests and get attacked by a player, you aren't being griefed. You need to read up on what it means to grief someone.
They've already said that important NPCs can't be killed, so criminals won't be able to grief players that way. It doesn't sound like you're going to get what you want. They want player guards to enforce the consequences of criminal activity. I'm sure your reasoning why you're against has been reasonably expressed by now if the developers cared to read this thread.
4 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
The first statement they made on banker NPCs and other important NPCs was that they were able to be attacked and would be reactive, so that griefing of other players would be possible (knocking people out of the banking window and so on).They've already said that important NPCs can't be killed, so criminals won't be able to grief players that way.
I'm not sure if they have reconsidered this given it being brought to their attention, if not then it's a shame and will be an issue in the live game, and if so then it's something that indicates they are open to a reworking of the system as initially proposed.
And so here we are suggesting improvements.
Edited by babylon on July 28, 2014 5:57PM1 -
yarnevk✭✭✭NPC Guards, Bounty Fee, Inability to use town services. Those are called consequences. Not to mention they could make certain characters behave differently with repeated known criminals.
Exactly as in every past TES game. These PVE mechanics are well known to the devs. It is about being able to play a PVE criminal without having to play PVP because of choice, regardless if the PVP players think your choice is valid or not, it should not be their choice to make.. It is also not about avoiding consequences for there would be PVE consequences. Adding PVE consequence choice is about not being victimized by PVP. I find it funny that the same people saying it is impossible for PVP griefers to cheat the system are saying that player guards are necessary because PVE criminals would cheat the system. So on one hand it is OK for players to victimize players, but horrible for players to victimize the hapless NPC guards. What utter nonsense.
Edited by yarnevk on July 28, 2014 6:09PM1 -
yarnevk✭✭✭Nox_Aeterna wrote: »Im quite sure it is against the rules to grief others , so if anyone does this , report them , worst case , the GM thinks it was not valid , best , the guy is perma banned and the problem is solved.
If this system does allow people to grief others , im sure people will come to the forums a LOT to complain. Once that happens , even if it takes zen a month or more to finally react to an issue , they will probably fix it by limiting the system more.
Let me rephrase exactly what you just said
'Im quite sure it is against the rules to harvest bot in the game, so if anyone does this, report them , worse case, the GM this it was not valid, best the guy is permabanned and the problems is solved
If the game does allows bots to exist, im sure people will come to the forums a lot to complain. Once that happens, even if itakes zen a month or more to finally react to the issue, they will probably fix it by limiting the system more.
'
Yeah we all know how well that worked it took an entire quarter after beta for them to lessen the problem of bots by changing the alt login procedures, yet there are still people complaining about hidden bots and PVP hackers. Since we already know PVP griefers are already a problem in other games that have rules based flagging of PVE zones for PVP, we are demanding that they solve the problem before release by adding opt-in to PVP or PVE consequences so that players can roleplay the criminals as they choose and not as others choose. Even if those PVP griefers never exist because the admin team is just so awesome at banning them, there are still PVE players that want to be play a criminal without playing PVP.
Edited by yarnevk on July 28, 2014 6:06PM0 -
Halorin✭✭✭
The first statement they made on banker NPCs and other important NPCs was that they were able to be attacked and would be reactive, so that griefing of other players would be possible (knocking people out of the banking window and so on).They've already said that important NPCs can't be killed, so criminals won't be able to grief players that way.
I'm not sure if they have reconsidered this given it being brought to their attention, if not then it's a shame and will be an issue in the live game, and if so then it's something that indicates they are open to a reworking of the system as initially proposed.
And so here we are suggesting improvements.
I'd be curious to see the quote that confirms you'd be taken out of the banking window and so on. Until you see that, you're operating on unconfirmed assumption. If that were the case, then that would be an act of griefing we can agree would be bad for the health of that game. But that's not a door to shove your foot in to try to get your iteration of the justice system that has a set of consequences you feel comfortable with.
How about you wait until more details have been released?1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
The first statement they made on banker NPCs and other important NPCs was that they were able to be attacked and would be reactive, so that griefing of other players would be possible (knocking people out of the banking window and so on).They've already said that important NPCs can't be killed, so criminals won't be able to grief players that way.
I'm not sure if they have reconsidered this given it being brought to their attention, if not then it's a shame and will be an issue in the live game, and if so then it's something that indicates they are open to a reworking of the system as initially proposed.
And so here we are suggesting improvements.
I'd be curious to see the quote that confirms you'd be taken out of the banking window and so on. Until you see that, you're operating on unconfirmed assumption. If that were the case, then that would be an act of griefing we can agree would be bad for the health of that game. But that's not a door to shove your foot in to try to get your iteration of the justice system that has a set of consequences you feel comfortable with.
How about you wait until more details have been released?
There is no quote confirming anything, it's based on experience with how bankers currently react in this game.
Also we are here discussing things because the details have not been released. It will not be so easy to force people to stop talking simply because they have alternate viewpoints to you I'm afraid.3 -
Halorin✭✭✭There is no quote confirming anything, it's based on experience with how bankers currently react in this game.
Also we are here discussing things because the details have not been released. It will not be so easy to force people to stop talking simply because they have alternate viewpoints to you I'm afraid.
I don't recall getting kicked out of the bankers screen ever, so. I'm wondering where you get that.
If discussing points firmly made by the developers as if they were still open for discussion helps you to feel better, then I hope you enjoy the exercise. But I'm afraid Paul Sage said what he said for a reason, and it's because they've decided they want PVP in the justice system.1 -
babylon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭There is no quote confirming anything, it's based on experience with how bankers currently react in this game.
Also we are here discussing things because the details have not been released. It will not be so easy to force people to stop talking simply because they have alternate viewpoints to you I'm afraid.
I don't recall getting kicked out of the bankers screen ever, so. I'm wondering where you get that.
Go to the Khenarthi's Roost banker and wait for him to move, you will be knocked out of the banking window when he moves.2 -
Apophiss✭✭✭The ONLY winners with the Justice System, are the PVP players.
No amount of spinning the facts, twisting the details or So-and-So said at Q-Con will change that.
Yes it is %100 speculation right now, but it is a damn slippery slope introducing "consensual" or "decision based" PVP into a PVE player area. Once they start down the slide, there will be no turning back.
I am all for playing as you want, but when my playstyle and your playstyle clash, there are no winners. One playstyle will suffer, and in the long run, both will."Just when I think you have said the stupidest thing possible, you keep talking."
-Hank Hill2 -
yarnevk✭✭✭No it doesn't. What seems to be flying over your head is that Paul Sage expressly pointed out their disinterest in having a PVE option to the justice system.
Yes this is the same dev that said he wanted forced grouping in VR and forced third party view in an MMO only to have to eat crow and redesign his game to limit the damage in declining subs. Those issue where ones that some could tolerate, but forced choice PVP in PVE zones just because someone wants to roleplay a criminal against NPCs and not other PCs? That is most certainly something he will notice in declining subs. Since it is estimated this game has already lost a million subs, they best not be making the same mistake thrice.Edited by yarnevk on July 28, 2014 6:19PM2 -
Nox_Aeterna✭✭✭✭✭
✭Nox_Aeterna wrote: »Im quite sure it is against the rules to grief others , so if anyone does this , report them , worst case , the GM thinks it was not valid , best , the guy is perma banned and the problem is solved.
If this system does allow people to grief others , im sure people will come to the forums a LOT to complain. Once that happens , even if it takes zen a month or more to finally react to an issue , they will probably fix it by limiting the system more.
Let me rephrase exactly what you just said
'Im quite sure it is against the rules to harvest bot in the game, so if anyone does this, report them , worse case, the GM this it was not valid, best the guy is permabanned and the problems is solved
If the game does allows bots to exist, im sure people will come to the forums a lot to complain. Once that happens, even if itakes zen a month or more to finally react to the issue, they will probably fix it by limiting the system more.
'
Yeah we all know how well that worked it took an entire quarter after beta for them to lessen the problem of bots by changing the alt login procedures, yet there are still people complaining about hidden bots and PVP hackers. Since we already know PVP griefers are already a problem in other games that have rules based flagging of PVE zones for PVP, we are demanding that they solve the problem before release by adding opt-in to PVP or PVE consequences so that players can roleplay the criminals as they choose and not as others choose. Even if those PVP griefers never exist because the admin team is just so awesome at banning them, there are still PVE players that want to be play a criminal without playing PVP.
I do assume that griefers are not like botters , they do have their one account they actually use and lvl. Not like the botters who could not care less about the perma ban.
So i would not say the result would be the same.
With that said , being a PvE player i can understand that people want to only deal with NPC guards , i would pick that also , but i really dont think zen will make this optional."Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
-Hanlon's razor0