Would you play ESO if it was World PvP orientated

Enkil

Yes, but only if my gear/pocessions could be looted on death

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Enkil wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Enkil wrote: »

PvP toggle is all that is needed so that each and every player can say either:

• "Hey, I like going about my PvE with the added sense of danger that being vulnerable to attack brings"
• "I just want to focus on killing mobs and be totally enveloped in the story without getting ganked"

It's quite easy to satisfy both tastes.. why do people try to fight each other about this concept? Just make a PvP toggle and everyone will be with like-minded folks....

They tried that with SWTOR, it didn't work.

What you got was greifers activating the PVP toggle, then getting in the way of other peoples attacks, which then automatically activate them for PVP.

And you can guarantee that ZOS would use something similar if not identical.

No, the solution is to put all the PVP in one area, seperated entirely from PVE, so that if you want PVP you go do it, otherwise you leave it alone. I know we'll call it Cyrodil.

so some *** Dev's couldn't figure out 1+1=2 and now every game from here to eternity must segregate their development and try to appeal to opposite ends of the spectrum when in reality everyone is a player?

Sorry.... fails simple logic test...

If they did it so that it could only be activated by the player toggling, then I'ld agree with you, and we could all have PVP toggles.

But experience for me says otherwise, but hey maybe I'm wrong and these Devs could actually come up with a system that doesn't leave me fuming.

So, the implementation is your issue which I think you are totally justified knowing ZOS's track record thus far...

Personally, I would not want them to make PvP possible until it is done correctly.. I would like to PvE in neutral areas where I might be vulnerable to attack from enemies that are close to my level.... Enemies that are in the same zone, going after the same objectives.. Why is it so hard to get this basic concept across????

AlexDougherty

No

Enkil wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Enkil wrote: »

AlexDougherty wrote: »

Enkil wrote: »

PvP toggle is all that is needed so that each and every player can say either:

• "Hey, I like going about my PvE with the added sense of danger that being vulnerable to attack brings"
• "I just want to focus on killing mobs and be totally enveloped in the story without getting ganked"

It's quite easy to satisfy both tastes.. why do people try to fight each other about this concept? Just make a PvP toggle and everyone will be with like-minded folks....

They tried that with SWTOR, it didn't work.

What you got was greifers activating the PVP toggle, then getting in the way of other peoples attacks, which then automatically activate them for PVP.

And you can guarantee that ZOS would use something similar if not identical.

No, the solution is to put all the PVP in one area, seperated entirely from PVE, so that if you want PVP you go do it, otherwise you leave it alone. I know we'll call it Cyrodil.

so some *** Dev's couldn't figure out 1+1=2 and now every game from here to eternity must segregate their development and try to appeal to opposite ends of the spectrum when in reality everyone is a player?

Sorry.... fails simple logic test...

If they did it so that it could only be activated by the player toggling, then I'ld agree with you, and we could all have PVP toggles.

But experience for me says otherwise, but hey maybe I'm wrong and these Devs could actually come up with a system that doesn't leave me fuming.

So, the implementation is your issue which I think you are totally justified knowing ZOS's track record thus far...

Personally, I would not want them to make PvP possible until it is done correctly.. I would like to PvE in neutral areas where I might be vulnerable to attack from enemies that are close to my level.... Enemies that are in the same zone, going after the same objectives.. Why is it so hard to get this basic concept across????

Oh, I get what you are saying, and if done right, I agree it would be fun.

As you say, my issue is the implementation.

MeowGinger

No

I support a PvP-enabled version of the open world only if there is a PvP-disabled version of Cyrodiil as well

Syntse

No

Don't worry PvP people. They will implement it when they see that there are enough of you paying subs to it to be worthwhile.

* PvP megaserver
* Open world PvP
* All faction PvP

they are all coming, just wait.

billp_ESO

No

If ESO does not provide players with safe zones, where they cannot be PK'd, it will quickly shrink and die (IMHO). However, they could implement lots of things that don't cause this problem:
- special PvP zones that contain valuable items. Want the item? You might have to PvP
- optional PvP flagging, if you want to PvP anywhere, flag yourself
- dueling other players
- battlegrounds with level restrictions, to make it easier to find a fair fight

However, it seems the open world PvP crowd always wants to be able to kill players that don't want to PvP. If ESO goes that route, it's goodbye.

Nazon_Katts

No

Syntse wrote: »

Don't worry PvP people. They will implement it when they see that there are enough of you paying subs to it to be worthwhile.

* PvP megaserver
* Open world PvP
* All faction PvP

they are all coming, just wait.

As long as they're struggling with their phasing and server tech, that's not going to happen any time soon. It's pretty much what the tech was supposed to deliver, I suppose, so eventually, we'll be getting there. It's just that people should keep their expectations managed, as it surely will take it's time and I don't think we'll see any of that before we had a few anniversaries to celebrate.

But when they get everything up and running and we can finally witness the true power of the megaserver and the plethora of options that a working 'on-the-fly' phasing system brings along, it's gonna be a groundbreaking experience. It's a shame it went poof on them, but that's the risk of new tech, I suppose.

But here's still hoping they can still reap the rewards, before competition beats them to it. Though I figure most are still watching how it really pans out.

Tannakaobi

Yes, but only if my gear/pocessions could not be looted on death

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

it is infectious. I didn't harbor any ill will for pve'rs until these threads and then the stuff they said just made me furious.

You are too easily offended. You go around calling everyone that doesn't want forced PVP a "carebear" claiming everyone is persecuting you and calling you a psycho, yet you conveniently ignore requests to quote one single post that did so.

The only thing I have been able to find, is someone saying that people who intentionally go out of their way to camp lowbie corpses and chain-kill quest NPC's so people can't progress are trolls and griefers, which they absolutely ARE, and that this personality type has been proven in several modern psychological studies to indicate imbalance.

Are you suggesting that is what you want to be able to do?

No one ever said you were psychotic because you wanted to PVP. You are just reading into things to be overly offended and cause drama.

But if you are saying the vast majority of people here, who said they WOULD accept PVP if it were phased so they didn't HAVE to be camped by people that feel the need to impose their playstyle on others, are necessarily "carebears," don't be surprised if people get offended.

I happily started calling people carebears after I and my kind were called griefers repeatedly. Please go back and look over the many posts before this and find the instances yourself. They are there, you probably could go to early on in the thread. If you really believe no one has called us griefers, you haven't been reading the thread. Considering that is what sparked a lot of anger from pvprs, I advise you be more selective in accusing people of causing drama, which, in and of itself, is only ever said to stir the pot and cause more drama.

The only people getting offended here are the carebears. But it seems like they get offended if people use abilities in their general vicinity. Or if there's the possibility that a non-essential npc is going to get attacked near them, OR if perhaps two other players are fighting around them.

JKorr

No

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

Tannakaobi

Yes, but only if my gear/pocessions could not be looted on death

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

Nazon_Katts

No

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

No, it is not.

ZOS_AlanG wrote: »

Delith wrote: »

Too bad the justice system is coming and there's noting any of you can do to stop it.

Hehehehe. HEHEHEHEHHEHEHE.

At QuakeCon, Paul Sage discussed the work being done on the in-development justice system, including the possibility of hunting down players who have a bounty. Only players who have chosen to participate in the activity of thievery will have a bounty on them, and be attackable, and only if you are a guard.

While certain activities may open you up to PvP outside of Cyrodiil, we are not considering world PvP.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

No, it is not.

ZOS_AlanG wrote: »

At QuakeCon, Paul Sage discussed the work being done on the in-development justice system, including the possibility of hunting down players who have a bounty. Only players who have chosen to participate in the activity of thievery will have a bounty on them, and be attackable, and only if you are a guard.

While certain activities may open you up to PvP outside of Cyrodiil, we are not considering world PvP.

opt in world pvp

MeowGinger

No

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

Not at all. The poll asked "Would you play ESO if it was world PvP orientated?"

ESO is still not becoming world PvP oriented, even with the justice system. (After all, some people who want owPvP are still not satisfied with only having the justice system.)

The wording of the poll implies that the majority of the game would be built around -- oriented on -- world PvP instead of having a dedicated PvP zone and a limited opt-out world PvP in PvE zones.

If I wanted an open world PvP oriented game, I would be playing Aion, Age of Wushu, or Lineage 2. All of which happen to be free to play. I wouldn't make a purchase + sub.

I wonder how many people advocating for owPvP have completed all the PvE content in Cyrodiil (45 skyshards, 18 dungeons, 10 dolmens, 50 achievement quests, plus various other mini-quests). There's no way you won't come across other players trying to kill you, even when your alliance owns the entire map.

smeeprocketnub19_ESO

MeowGinger wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

Not at all. The poll asked "Would you play ESO if it was world PvP orientated?"

ESO is still not becoming world PvP oriented, even with the justice system. (Your first hint is that the people who want owPvP are still not satisfied with the justice system, and want even more owPvP.)

The wording of the poll implies that the majority of the game would be built around -- oriented on -- world PvP instead of having a dedicated PvP zone and a limited opt-out world PvP.

If I wanted an open world PvP oriented game, I would be playing Aion, Age of Wushu, or Lineage 2. All of which happen to be free to play.

I wonder how many people advocating for owPvP have completed all the PvE content in Cyrodiil (45 skyshards, 18 dungeons, 10 dolmens, 50 achievement quests, plus various other mini-quests). There's no way you won't come across other players trying to kill you, even when your alliance owns the entire map.

Actually, I still need to top off some quests in three of the villages, and doing the dolmens is meaningless because they are wonky and don't even remotely pose a challenge. I have done all the skyshards and as a result the dungeons, but the spawn timer on some of the bosses has caused me not to complete them.

There's a lot of content and it is very fun.

There's this lodge I went to and inside was a naked nord doing jumping jacks talking about how he warmed up working out and then would jump in the icy water. So he runs out of the house and I follow. He stands at the edge of the lake outside and I'm waiting wondering when he is going to jump in.

Suddenly he says "Too cold, too cold!" and runs back inside and starts doing jumping jacks again.

I laughed so hard. No purpose for it other than flavor, and it was well worth finding.

Tannakaobi

Yes, but only if my gear/pocessions could not be looted on death

MeowGinger wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

Not at all. The poll asked "Would you play ESO if it was world PvP orientated?"

ESO is still not becoming world PvP oriented, even with the justice system. (After all, some people who want owPvP are still not satisfied with only having the justice system.)

The wording of the poll implies that the majority of the game would be built around -- oriented on -- world PvP instead of having a dedicated PvP zone and a limited opt-out world PvP in PvE zones.

In my opinion it shouldn't be 'anything' oriented other than a good TES mmorpg. Currently it favors a very solo orientated questing game. Although so far it has been an enjoyable game there is no reason to shut the door on idea's.

Everyone will have there own opinion on what makes a good mmo. Quest's, Dungeons, Battlegrounds, arena, OW PVP, raids, holiday events and so on.

I say have it all, so long as it's optional and takes nothing away from other parts of the game. For example the possible rewards of the arena. Or the dueling in silly places.

Your probably right in what the OP was on about, but I think many people are just talking about having any form of open world PVP.

billp_ESO

No

The line gets drawn when a player who doesn't want to PvP, is forced into it. A large number of those players will quit, if they are forced into PvP against their will.

Optional systems that leave the non-PvP player out of PvP are fine, as long as there is no way to accidentally get flagged.

Nox_Aeterna

No

billp_ESO wrote: »

The line gets drawn when a player who doesn't want to PvP, is forced into it. A large number of those players will quit, if they are forced into PvP against their will.

Optional systems that leave the non-PvP player out of PvP are fine, as long as there is no way to accidentally get flagged.

Pretty much this.

People might not even quit at first , but after a few ganks while trying to just quest , usually a PvE player turns around and leaves.

Heh , i played ONE MMO that had the player drop items on death , I farmed for a few hours in a cave alone and managed to get gold for a better wand , after i got it and want back to the cave , i got killed inside by another player , who then took my wand.

I left and deleted the game 5 mins after , not only i never regret doing this , i never even wasted time playing any other game who has this.

Usually i can manage to even support a few deaths by some annoying PvP players who feel the need to hunt PvE players that do not want to fight them , but just for so long.

billp_ESO

No

Nox_Aeterna wrote: »

billp_ESO wrote: »

The line gets drawn when a player who doesn't want to PvP, is forced into it. A large number of those players will quit, if they are forced into PvP against their will.

Optional systems that leave the non-PvP player out of PvP are fine, as long as there is no way to accidentally get flagged.

Pretty much this.

People might not even quit at first , but after a few ganks while trying to just quest , usually a PvE player turns around and leaves.

Heh , i played ONE MMO that had the player drop items on death , I farmed for a few hours in a cave alone and managed to get gold for a better wand , after i got it and want back to the cave , i got killed inside by another player , who then took my wand.

I left and deleted the game 5 mins after , not only i never regret doing this , i never even wasted time playing any other game who has this.

Usually i can manage to even support a few deaths by some annoying PvP players who feel the need to hunt PvE players that do not want to fight them , but just for so long.

I loved the PvP in DAOC, which this game tried to copy. I also liked how PoTBS did it. Build up enough faction points at a port, and you can force a PvP zone there for a while. If you were based out of that port, you either PvP'd or stayed away. Ryzom also does PvP right: you can flag yourself for open world, you can join the fight over an Outpost, or you can go to the high end digging spots which are PvP to get the best mats.

But make a game true open-world PvP, and the griefers take over.

MercyKilling

No

Tell you what.

Zenimax should cave and make an open-world PvP server and a PvE server where Cyrodill is just another zone, no PvP.

This way, those who want open world PvP can have their own entire game to run around it and do as they please.

Just don't cry that the PvP server is a ghost town.

shiva7663

No

Open-world PvP encourages griefing. Segregating PvP is the only way to keep the leet-speaking munchkins at bay.

JKorr

No

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

If I don't want to be a guard, and I don't commit any crimes, no one can "pvp" me.

Go back and look at ZOS_AlanG's post.

ZOS_AlanG wrote: »

At QuakeCon, Paul Sage discussed the work being done on the in-development justice system, including the possibility of hunting down players who have a bounty. Only players who have chosen to participate in the activity of thievery will have a bounty on them, and be attackable, and only if you are a guard.

While certain activities may open you up to PvP outside of Cyrodiil, we are not considering world PvP.

Now, what part of the statement [I made it easy to see, its bolded] says open world pvp? Open world pvp for people who don't want to pvp?

Sabin1269

No way! All it would be are roaming groups of players just offing everyone. This would totally ruin the whole story and campaign for the players who actually enjoy PvE. I haven't been able to get into the whole PvP aspect of the game yet because it seems like a base requirement of light armor and Destro staff. If I wanted to play a sorcerer I would ha e chosen so but I'll be damned if my DK is going to be forced to play as a Sorc just to be possibly accepted into a group.

yarnevk

No

JKorr wrote: »

Now, what part of the statement [I made it easy to see, its bolded] says open world pvp? Open world pvp for people who don't want to pvp?

It says playing the sneaky criminal which is a very common playstyle in every TES game, will be flagging for PVP . It is open world PVP simply because it is happening in the PVE zone against players who do not want that playstyle mixed in with their thief and assassin PVE roleplay. Those people may be more than happy to risk NPC guards throwing them in jail as with every TES game, they just do not want that guard to be another player. That term open world PVP describes even the hardest core open world PVP games which has rules against actions like thieving and murdering in high security PVE towns can flag you for PVP. This is exactly what the justice system will do, so ZOS saying it is not open PVP is simply not true. Closed PVP is when you have to login to the PVP zone, which is what Cyrodil, or what a PVP phased Tamriel could be. Since you will not have an option to play as a PVE thief, it is in fact open world PVP.

JKorr

No

yarnevk wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Now, what part of the statement [I made it easy to see, its bolded] says open world pvp? Open world pvp for people who don't want to pvp?

It says playing the sneaky criminal which is a very common playstyle in every TES game, will be flagging for PVP . It is open world PVP simply because it is happening in the PVE zone against players who do not want that playstyle mixed in with their thief and assassin PVE roleplay. Those people may be more than happy to risk NPC guards throwing them in jail as with every TES game, they just do not want that guard to be another player. ZOS can say it is not all the want as an attempt to pacify PVErs, but that term open world covers games in which PVE actions can flag you fpr PVP, which is exactly what the justice system will do. Closed PVP is when you have to login to the PVP zone, which is what Cyrodil is. Since you will not have an option to play as a PVE thief, it is open world PVP.

Again, no.

You're making an assumption that "everyone" is playing a sneaky criminal. Even when I played Morrowind and joined the Thieves' Guild I never had a stolen item in my inventory, and never had a bounty. I was the head of the guild, too.

I had a lot of murders on my Skyrim character, but no bounties, and no stolen items. To be fair I didn't bother with the Thieves' guild in Skyrim, but I didn't even accidentally end up with stolen items.

If you're playing a sneaky criminal type and end up constantly getting caught, well, maybe turning over a new leaf and becoming a guard might suit you.

Until they come out with the specifics of how it will work, I would NOT work under the assumption that anyone who steals anything anywhere is automatically going to be flagged for pvp. If that is true, I can see a lot of pve players who don't want to pvp at all either quitting or :gasp: not playing a thief.

It is possible, you know. [considering how the polls constantly turn out, I don't think Zenimax would force people into pvp.]

yarnevk

No

They said it in the video, you do the crime you pay the fine and lose your stuff, or pay with bounties on your life from player guards.. That does mean everyone role playing a thief who thought they was being sneaky, but gets caught by the player guard camping them (or worse hacking them which will happen) will get attacked if they are short on funds (which happens when you use any gold sink in the game such as paying for bank slots) It means that PVE players who just want to roleplay are risking getting caught up in PVP thru forced choice, not consent choice.

Just because you had a perfect thieving career in Skyrim does not mean you can extrapolate that to every thief player in Skyrim, nor that every thief wants that risk of PVP happening. Especially if we are talking about Skyrim in which chickens was notorious for ratting out assassins to the guards...

Now some want that risk of PVP during their PVE activity, but the majority do not as the recent polls here indicate by 2:1. Dragging PVE players into PVP is something that players will quit over, so eventually they will have to figure out how to do login-in phasing for PVP to recapture lost subs. Saying well then don't play a thief is not going to suffice, PVPers do not get to dictate how the majority plays. Another satisfactory win for the griefer until they realize population is low and there is only other griefers to fight.

And it does not take just wanting to roleplay, it is even easier to just get tricked into doing a murder. Just drag a herd of mobs behind you next to some innocent NPCs to trick the panicked PVE player nearby into shooting at the incoming mob but accidently ganking an innocent NPC. Of course the griefer is taking advantage of players that do not realize the mob aggro is not on them, but this sort of thing goes on all the time whenever there is rule based flagging of PVE for PVP that is not based on consensual opt-in, which again is exactly what the justice system is.

Nazon_Katts

No

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

Nazon_Katts wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

Tannakaobi wrote: »

So based on this poll 62% of the player base is soon to leave. I call BS!

Isn't the 62% part of the poll the people who don't want owpvp?

Why would those people [we] be leaving over having the cyrodiil only pvp/pve everywhere else game that currently exists?

I'll leave only if they force owpvp, with or without the added "bonus" of losing all your gear.

er... The Justice System... It's open world PVP!

No, it is not.

ZOS_AlanG wrote: »

At QuakeCon, Paul Sage discussed the work being done on the in-development justice system, including the possibility of hunting down players who have a bounty. Only players who have chosen to participate in the activity of thievery will have a bounty on them, and be attackable, and only if you are a guard.

While certain activities may open you up to PvP outside of Cyrodiil, we are not considering world PvP.

opt in world pvp

opt in restricted pvp

grimjim398

yarnevk wrote: »

They said it in the video, you do the crime you pay the fine and lose your stuff, or pay with bounties on your life from player guards.. That does mean everyone role playing a thief who thought they was being sneaky, but gets caught by the player guard camping them (or worse hacking them which will happen) will get attacked if they are short on funds (which happens when you use any gold sink in the game such as paying for bank slots) It means that PVE players who just want to roleplay are risking getting caught up in PVP thru forced choice, not consent choice.

Just because you had a perfect thieving career in Skyrim does not mean you can extrapolate that to every thief player in Skyrim, nor that every thief wants that risk of PVP happening. Especially if we are talking about Skyrim in which chickens was notorious for ratting out assassins to the guards...

Now some want that risk of PVP during their PVE activity, but the majority do not as the recent polls here indicate by 2:1. Dragging PVE players into PVP is something that players will quit over, so eventually they will have to figure out how to do login-in phasing for PVP to recapture lost subs. Saying well then don't play a thief is not going to suffice, PVPers do not get to dictate how the majority plays. Another satisfactory win for the griefer until they realize population is low and there is only other griefers to fight.

And it does not take just wanting to roleplay, it is even easier to just get tricked into doing a murder. Just drag a herd of mobs behind you next to some innocent NPCs to trick the panicked PVE player nearby into shooting at the incoming mob but accidently ganking an innocent NPC. Of course the griefer is taking advantage of players that do not realize the mob aggro is not on them, but this sort of thing goes on all the time whenever there is rule based flagging of PVE for PVP that is not based on consensual opt-in, which again is exactly what the justice system is.

You are the first poster I've read who actually articulated this position clearly. I do hope the developers read this post to make sure they are accounting for the problems you spell out, since the Justice System is coming one way or the other.

Logik

No

Zorrashi wrote: »

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

No. Just no.

Justice system? Yes. But that's different.

yeah I'm sort of confused on the whole thing. I was under the impression you only get flagged for PvP if you are caught committing a crime or attack an NPC. And that even if you participate as a guard, you can't attack other players who act as 'guards' unless they commit(ed) a crime. Yet with the way people act makes me think that its practically open world PvP.

So, I'm too lazy to see if anyone has cleared up your confusion, but here is how the justice system will work. If you steal or kill you will slowly rack up a bounty, once your bounty is high enough bounty-hunters (i.e. players) can come hunt you down. So it's sort of World PvP, but a very limited one that players have control over whether or not they actually want to participate.

Logik

No

While I do really love world PvP, and I wouldn't mind seeing it implemented, at this point in time for the way the game is heading it's just too big of an issue to really get down to the details and make it fun for everyone. On top of that, Cyrodil is practically world PvP in it's sheer size. So why do we need anything more? Now dueling on the other hand, I'd really love to see that implemented and I'm kind of disappointed that it isn't already.

Logik

No

amm7sb14_ESO wrote: »

From what I understand of current PVP, it's just a FFA in Cyrodiil, and if you're not the top level in the game, then you stand no chance there. That's not fun.

Cyrodil is exactly what you describe when it comes to objective based zones, however I do not agree with the idea that if you're not top-level you don't stand any chance. There are tons of variety in Cyrodil, and as a level 35 I have beat VR7-8 players in one on one combat, even when they have gotten the drop on me. I do think that Veteran Ranked players have a significant advantage, but it's not impossible to be viable at lower levels at all.