Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
If it was grief-proof, would you like to see Justice System phase 2 - PvP?
-
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭It is quite simple - those, who want to enforce law in this game, are exactly those who have the least qualification to do so. Introducing a law enforcer system would just give wolves sheep clothes that they can bring grief on others. There is no grief-proof way, simply because the wrong kind of guys for this job want to become law enforcers in this game.
This in no way reflects onto instanced heist PvP.
You haven't read a word of my suggestion, have you?
I am against it - period. The wrong guys want to be law enforcers - to be a law enforcer you have to be lawful in the first place and to go against crime, you have to have a non-criminal mind in the first place - people, who love to kill are not of this kind.
What you are against is YOUR idea of PvP Justice.
Please take 5 minutes to read through the post above if you wish to contribute in any way to grief-free PvP Justice.
If you don't want to read it, fine. You have said your piece and there is nothing more for you to add.0 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭NoIt is quite simple - those, who want to enforce law in this game, are exactly those who have the least qualification to do so. Introducing a law enforcer system would just give wolves sheep clothes that they can bring grief on others. There is no grief-proof way, simply because the wrong kind of guys for this job want to become law enforcers in this game.
This in no way reflects onto instanced heist PvP.
You haven't read a word of my suggestion, have you?
I am against it - period. The wrong guys want to be law enforcers - to be a law enforcer you have to be lawful in the first place and to go against crime, you have to have a non-criminal mind in the first place - people, who love to kill are not of this kind.
What you are against is YOUR idea of PvP Justice.
Please take 5 minutes to read through the post above if you wish to contribute in any way to grief-free PvP Justice.
If you don't want to read it, fine. You have said your piece and there is nothing more for you to add.
You quoted me and I made my point again - in order to not be used to make your case - I do not want this kind of game play.3 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭NoIt is quite simple - those, who want to enforce law in this game, are exactly those who have the least qualification to do so. Introducing a law enforcer system would just give wolves sheep clothes that they can bring grief on others. There is no grief-proof way, simply because the wrong kind of guys for this job want to become law enforcers in this game.
This in no way reflects onto instanced heist PvP.
You haven't read a word of my suggestion, have you?
I am against it - period. The wrong guys want to be law enforcers - to be a law enforcer you have to be lawful in the first place and to go against crime, you have to have a non-criminal mind in the first place - people, who love to kill are not of this kind.
What you are against is YOUR idea of PvP Justice.
Please take 5 minutes to read through the post above if you wish to contribute in any way to grief-free PvP Justice.
If you don't want to read it, fine. You have said your piece and there is nothing more for you to add.
I am sorry, your post is just too confusing to even find out what your suggestion really is and in what it differs from chasing players and kill them. instead to quote a lot of people, make clear statements.3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are selfish and only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no.You are only thinking about yourself in this instance under the belief that it will mess up your experience in PVE.While not even being affected by it since all you Zos has to do is make a Toggle to say not to be flagged for PVP.Unless you think ZOs programmers are so terrible that they can't even code a toggle correctly.This doesn't affect you in no way at all you and so you want to ruin it for others people. Godly why are we all so selfish.
I love the shaming those who vote no as being selfish. +1.
I think the toggle would be great because the qq about most players having pvp toggled off would be great entertainment.
When I want to gank players and get loot off them I just head to ic. Great place.3 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoIm am against it for many reasons. The main one being I would rather limited and very valuable development time go for things the majority would enjoy. Not only would this eat up a ton of money and time but it would be a royal pain. Constant screams for nerfs. Exploiters and cheaters etc would ruin the fun for anyone who casually wanted to participate. Not to mention pvp is stretched out enough as it is.
Fact is that while it might be possible to do its a waste of time and resources which are limited.Edited by jamesharv2005ub17_ESO on March 8, 2016 2:03PM3 -
helediron✭✭✭✭✭
✭NoOP, i and others say no because you proposal is not good enough. It is is uninteresting and risky. I have few suggestions.
- Change the proposal of PvP area from Cadwell silver/gold to Cyro and IC. Then the opt-in is clear: travel to Cyro. Keep your sandbox and stay there.
- You should reverse your planning: what kind of thieving is in connection to enforcer PvP inside IC. PvP is granted, griefing is no longer problem. Original proposal uses PvE like a free lunch. In Cyro you need to make complete plan.Edited by helediron on March 8, 2016 3:28PMOn hiatus. PC,EU,AD - crafting completionist - @helediron 900+ cp, @helestor 1000+ cp, @helestar 800+ cp, @helester 700+ cp - Dragonborn Z Suomikilta, Harrods, Master Crafter. - Blog - Crafthouse: all stations, all munduses, all dummies, open to everyone1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭NoI been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are selfish and only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no.You are only thinking about yourself in this instance under the belief that it will mess up your experience in PVE.While not even being affected by it since all you Zos has to do is make a Toggle to say not to be flagged for PVP.Unless you think ZOs programmers are so terrible that they can't even code a toggle correctly.This doesn't affect you in no way at all you and so you want to ruin it for others people. Godly why are we all so selfish.
The converse could equally be said to be true of those who vote "yes", of course, not least given that this topic has been fully aired for many months and the developers have made their decision, yet still a few players keep banging on a closed door. Had the developers considered that the addition of PvP for PvE crimes in PvE areas was likely to be good for the game they would doubtless have come to a different decision.
In any event, it is simply not the case that PvP in open world areas will not impact those who don't want to take part in it. There is no grief-proof method of running it, there is no way of eliminating its impact on performance in cities and other areas, and there is no way of introducing it without developer resources being diverted from other more pressing things. Most player proposals for it are based on PvPers denying PvEers access to the full PvE elements of the Justice System in PvE areas and it is they who are selfishly telling PvEers not to do the PvE content if they don't want to be forced into PvP in PvE areas.
5 -
Tan9oSuccka✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoI been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are [snip] only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no.You are only thinking about yourself in this instance under the belief that it will mess up your experience in PVE.While not even being affected by it since all you Zos has to do is make a Toggle to say not to be flagged for PVP. Unless you think ZOs programmers are so terrible that they can't even code a toggle correctly.This doesn't affect you in no way at all you and so you want to ruin it for others people. Godly why are we all so selfish.
[edited to remove bait]
Even if the toggle was implemented, the PvP try hard gankers/game police wouldn't have much of a feast. I would opt out of neckbeard justice immediately.
I'm glad they saw what a colossal mess this would be and squashed it.
3 -
EnemyOfDaState✭✭✭✭People complain all the time about getting their Tel Var stones jacked can you imagine if you could take their armor and gold lol. I like the idea but would never fly, people are too whinny.
Where did you get an idea you could snatch somebody's armor or gold?
When the police arrest a criminal, do they get to keep the stolen money and/or drugs?
Yeah sometimes.Edited by EnemyOfDaState on March 8, 2016 5:20PM1 -
Dubhliam✭✭✭✭✭
✭@Lysette , @Tandor and @helediron (those who have obviously not read this),
here it is for you:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESO , you seem to have read my suggestion and have pointed out a valid reason you do not wish for this to be implemented: because ZOS would invest precious resources into developing something you are not interested in.
Duly noted.0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭No@Lysette , @Tandor and @helediron (those who have obviously not read this),
here it is for you:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESO , you seem to have read my suggestion and have pointed out a valid reason you do not wish for this to be implemented: because ZOS would invest precious resources into developing something you are not interested in.
Duly noted.
Not just me. Talking about the majority of people. Like Matt whateverhislastnameis said people like PVE in PVE areas and PVP in PVP areas. So the decision was made for the good of the majority to just forget about it and use that money somewhere else. Not somewhere outside of PVP just somewhere besides designing this complicated system. Many improvements are sorely needed before they think about doing something like the instanced pvp you talk about.2 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭No@Lysette , @Tandor and @helediron (those who have obviously not read this),
here it is for you:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESO , you seem to have read my suggestion and have pointed out a valid reason you do not wish for this to be implemented: because ZOS would invest precious resources into developing something you are not interested in.
Duly noted.
If you want to come up with a scheme that is materially different to those detailed in the gazillion other topics on the subject then you need to describe it in your poll thread rather than giving links to multiple other threads and then asking a poll question in terms which mirror all the other threads on the subject.
Interesting that you credit one poster for making what you consider a valid reason for this not being implemented but not me although I gave the very same reason!0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭No@Lysette , @Tandor and @helediron (those who have obviously not read this),
here it is for you:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESO , you seem to have read my suggestion and have pointed out a valid reason you do not wish for this to be implemented: because ZOS would invest precious resources into developing something you are not interested in.
Duly noted.
If you want to come up with a scheme that is materially different to those detailed in the gazillion other topics on the subject then you need to describe it in your poll thread rather than giving links to multiple other threads and then asking a poll question in terms which mirror all the other threads on the subject.
Interesting that you credit one poster for making what you consider a valid reason for this not being implemented but not me although I gave the very same reason!
I dont think he was complimenting me. I could be wrong but I took it as sarcasm heh.1 -
houjo2000b16_ESO✭✭✭NoIt's already grief-proof. Just log out. No PVE guards. No PVP Righteous Neckbeard breathing down your neck. It's an entirely avoidable penalty system if you think things through.
The only way Justice would ever actually work is if you only had one character and had to face lasting consequences for negative actions. Which is, of course, called a single-player game.
So far, I believe this was one of the most constructive negative feedback in this thread.
And it does have a point: the current system has an avoidable penalty tied to it.
BUT!
If a reward was tied to a quest or instance that needs to be completed successfully, getting caught stealing would mean not getting the reward. Punishment enough.
I have already given an example of such a system:
This post is an example of another constructive feedback:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.Pangnirtung wrote: »Griefing might be a problem.
What might also be a problem is friends who purposely set themselves to be killed by other "friends" to boost their stats?
The bypass for this kind of exploitation in the above suggestion is this:
- an Iron Wheel member does not get gold or items that s/he confiscated from the thief
- s/he instead gains Justice points for successfully capturing the thief (or a repeatable quest), it is easy making a reward system for law enforcers
- the system places law enforces into instances, and since they cannot choose who they chase, it prevents intentional exploiting
I call out to nay sayers:@RAGUNAnoOneto read the above suggestion in full and point out any exploits and or griefing opportunities presented.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESOThere is no possible way to make grief proof PvP it should be seperate from PvE at least in this game.
@heledironNo such thing as grief proof. Waste of time bothering with it. Move on.
@WolfenbelleAfter IC failure of mixing PvP and PvE, no. But there is one exception: Implement it in Cyro or in revised IC.
@MercyKillingAbsolutely NO!!!! If ZOS ever implemented some kind of game-wide PvP, I would quit the game. After the experiences I've had in IC, there is NO WAY whatsoever that I'd want to see anything even remotely similar implemented game wide. It would not be exciting to me. It would not be fun. It would totally ruin the game for me.Umm............lemme think.......no. Leave PvP where it is. Out of sight, out of mind.You sir, are obviously and painfully unaware of the inescapable fact of internet gaming.
To wit; if it CAN be abused it most certainly will be, and nothing is totally grief proof.
@babylonWell, I do not factor in any "DLC" into my posts for I do not OWN any "DLC". If griefing occurs there, then I am blissfully unaware of it and will never experience it until ZoS sees fit to make it free for me to download and play.
Edit:
The point is: there are many reasons not to implement this. You just cannot or will not grasp the theory behind them all.Uh no, I still want to steal, but I don't want to interact with you or any other player, I only want to deal with NPCs.
So a big fat NO to your idea about trying to prevent PVE players from experiencing the Justice System.
@AelthwynWhat OP actually suggested is that PVE players simply not steal, then they won't be able to be killed by PVP actions...ie OP advocates banning PVE players from participating in the Justice System at all, in PVE areas.
OP wants PVE players to not be able to enjoy the Justice System.No.
Even if they implemented a no steal toggle like the no targeting innocents, even if they had a no healing criminals toggle, even if they changed all quests that require you to do crime so player enforcers couldn’t camp out at known quest points and prevent people from completing those objectives, even if they could somehow prevent players blockading the entrance to thieves refuges and standing guard over chests etc., even if they prevented innocent by standers from getting hurt or drawn into a fight, even if they prevented player enforcers from killing you for petty bounties you would have payed off to a guard, even if they prevented player enforcers from specifically watching/tailing/targeting certain players just waiting to jump on every attempt to advance their ledgermain skill or theives guild/dark brother hood quests in the future, even if they could somehow prevent enforcer groups from trying to gang up on criminals and criminal groups from ganging up on enforcers in return resulting in massive fights, etc. I would not personally like to see this implemented because:
- I don’t care for battles and chaos in my nice quiet cities, which we already have enough of with the NPC guards catching people, PVP battles seem way more crazy to me
- I don’t care for markets and towns becoming more crowded with people just hanging around patrolling for criminals on top of the NPCs that are also patrolling, instead of taking care of business and moving on.
- I don’t care for the… tense, wary, unfriendliness I think this could cause among the player population of the same faction while in PvE zones, nor do I care for the out-to-get-others self-righteous attitude or the desire to get back at the ‘upstanding citizen’ types which such a system promotes, as it just seems all too likely to attract the trolls so to speak.
- I don’t want to see zone chat full of people angry about it, or whining about it, or taunts, etc.
While I’m sure they could take many measures to prevent griefing, I feel there are some unavoidable aspects I would not enjoy even if I wasn’t an active participant, and I’m not confident that even with the best efforts that they could really stop all those determined to find a way to be obnoxious to others.
@LysetteEven if I’m not ‘participating’ I don’t want to have it going on all around me.
[snip] I don’t like an air of conflict between players and want a more positive helpful atmosphere when doing PVE stuff. I don’t want the added tense-ness of worrying if other players you might have wanted to group with in the public dungeon or something are checking to see if you have a bounty or whatever. I want a sense of camaraderie between players against the NPC enemies, not infighting between players within their home faction.
And I feel like in-faction hostilities of this kind could undermine some of the team spirit on the battle field for those who do like PVP - not for everyone, but still….
[snip] I don’t even want to think about Elden Root with PVP stuff going on there, it takes ages to load as it is now. Most of the time my mount that I’m ‘riding’ doesn’t even spawn till I’ve reached the door to upstairs.
Yeah, for those who are not interested in PVP but still want to participate in the crime aspect of the game, even adding PVP only for highest level bounties still tresspasses on this. It’s not an aspect of the game that inherently needs to be PVP - the war in cyrodil yes, and if you don’t want to do PVP I don’t think you’re still entitled to related achievements and what not, however the PVE area crimes should definitely be able to be done without PVP being forced on you - at any level.
Additionally you are ‘battle leveled’ in Cyrodil, but in your regular factions you’re not, so how would they prevent High level characters basically halting any low level’s progress in the ledgermain skill until they can become high level AND competent PVPers?
@TandorGrief-proof as in what? - never commited a crime, never reported for harrasment, never used foul words, having no ledgerdemain skill line (because that tracks crime), never killed someone innocent, never murdered anybody - stuff like that?There is one other reason it shouldn't be done, and that is that it constitutes the imposition of PvP penalties for PvE crimes in PvE areas.
I understand why serious PvPers want to be able to jump casual PvEers, it's the nature of the beast, but we have to be honest and recognise that what people are asking for is simply open world PvP masquerading as some sort of a "justice" system. It wholly distorts a major aspect of the game in terms of bringing the Thieves Guild and potentially the Dark Brotherhood content into a hybrid PvE/PvP mix, and that is a mix that is proven not to work. Prudent developers will provide plenty of content for both styles of play, but not mix them together.
@Tan9oSucckaActually, you don't get it at all. It isn't that people fear open world PvP, it's that they don't want it.
Why do PvPers always assume that non-PvPers are afraid of PvP? It's simply that a lot of people play these games to co-operate with other players rather than to have conflict with them, and they don't want their questing and other adventuring activities (including the PvE elements of the Justice System in PvE areas) interrupted by PvP actions they have no interest in.
@TabbycatNo thanks.
Towns would be littered with people in hiding, waiting to gank a cheap kill.
I could see it now. Grab an item on a crafting table on accident, and like PvP in general, get cheesed by 20 people spamming crystal frags/ambush/wrecking blow.
@Giles.floydub17_ESOEven grief proof you'd still have people who would sit around in the cities all day waiting for people to commit crimes.
That would lead to increased congestion in cities.
Increased congestion would lead to lag.
More lag is bad.
Thus my answer is no because of lag.
@VorcilActually, you are assuming it can be done without grief. OP offers absolutely nothing to suggest otherwise. [snip]
Edit, this thread should be locked. It will likely devolve into bashing since it lacks substance, unfortunately.
[edited for bait]
@houjo2000b16_ESONo;
I just want to enjoy my thieving alone, no reason I should have to worry about cheap templars and others spamming biting jabs and wrecking blow all day.
Just no. If you want to ruin someone's day go to IC and Cyrodiil, but keep PvE to PvE.No, it can't be grief proof unless it's completely opt in. The thieving system is great as it is without level 5s being one shot by v16s hanging out by the refuge entrances.
Now, if the system were a toggle it could work, but in that case you still run two risks. Either a- nobody wants to toggle on the criminal side, leading it to be very boring for enforcers as well as still making it so criminals face swarms at refuge gates.
Or, b- it gets lots of interest (look at open pvp zones so far and realize this won't happen, but let's pretend); in which case, already packed cities now are flooded with FFA pvp, both completely ruining the point of hub cities, not making any sense lore-wise and making them laggy nightmares.
Sure, it's nice to say 'but grief free', but that's really not something that's possible- at least in other pvp zones you scale level and you're willingly entering a pvp zone- the justice system has massive level differences and most 'participants' aren't willing. There's a reason pretty much no game has FFA pvp outside of a few niche titles. This isn't a FFA PvP niche game, it's at best a RvRvR game, and even that's limited to few areas due to lack of interest.
Since there are apparently "many reasons not to implement this and I just cannot or will not grasp the theory behind them all".
Fine, if you're going to call out people who disagree with you, I'll bite.
What's wrong with the PvP heist system detailed? Nothing, because it's not open world PvP, it's more or less a battleground. I don't think any of the 'nay-sayers' are against instanced PvP, perhaps you should read the posts you quoted first to realize this rather than just seeing a 'no' and spam quoting them. None of them have said they're against instanced heists- in fact some of them said that was one way it might work, that or something like Cyrodil.
That's my call out to you- don't accuse other people of not reading when you clearly refuse to do so yourself.3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭houjo2000b16_ESO wrote: »It's already grief-proof. Just log out. No PVE guards. No PVP Righteous Neckbeard breathing down your neck. It's an entirely avoidable penalty system if you think things through.
The only way Justice would ever actually work is if you only had one character and had to face lasting consequences for negative actions. Which is, of course, called a single-player game.
So far, I believe this was one of the most constructive negative feedback in this thread.
And it does have a point: the current system has an avoidable penalty tied to it.
BUT!
If a reward was tied to a quest or instance that needs to be completed successfully, getting caught stealing would mean not getting the reward. Punishment enough.
I have already given an example of such a system:
This post is an example of another constructive feedback:One of the things they could do is "PvP heists":
- Level 50+ members of the Thief Guild can take PvP heist jobs (separate from normal Heists) that take them into instanced areas with X treasure chests.
- Level 50+ members of the Iron Wheel can register for a job, then a Cyro-like queue would jump them into an occupied instance with a thief inside. (1TG, 1IW max) Why not make it that if a thief gets spotted while in a Heist (instance, not open world), a player gets notified and teleported into that instance to try and catch that thief.
- The goal of the thief is to get as much treasure possible without getting caught (gains nothing from killing guard).
- The goal of the guard is to capture the thief or at least prevent him from looting all chests in time.
It is still the exact same PvE Justice System with just one thing added - veteran heists.
Much as causal players have the option to beat Maelstrom Arena in normal mode, casual thieves still have the Justice system intact, and PvP-free.
For those players that want a challenge, and wish to improve in Maelstrom Arena or thieving, they have veteran instances where they can go to (vMA and veteran heists).
Nobody forces anybody to do vMA, do they? Nobody has to go play a heist with PvP punishment (remember, it is still a normal PvE heist until you get caught by nps, at which point an Iron Wheel member player is notified and teleported to your instance) if they don't want to.Pangnirtung wrote: »Griefing might be a problem.
What might also be a problem is friends who purposely set themselves to be killed by other "friends" to boost their stats?
The bypass for this kind of exploitation in the above suggestion is this:
- an Iron Wheel member does not get gold or items that s/he confiscated from the thief
- s/he instead gains Justice points for successfully capturing the thief (or a repeatable quest), it is easy making a reward system for law enforcers
- the system places law enforces into instances, and since they cannot choose who they chase, it prevents intentional exploiting
I call out to nay sayers:@RAGUNAnoOneto read the above suggestion in full and point out any exploits and or griefing opportunities presented.
@jamesharv2005ub17_ESOThere is no possible way to make grief proof PvP it should be seperate from PvE at least in this game.
@heledironNo such thing as grief proof. Waste of time bothering with it. Move on.
@WolfenbelleAfter IC failure of mixing PvP and PvE, no. But there is one exception: Implement it in Cyro or in revised IC.
@MercyKillingAbsolutely NO!!!! If ZOS ever implemented some kind of game-wide PvP, I would quit the game. After the experiences I've had in IC, there is NO WAY whatsoever that I'd want to see anything even remotely similar implemented game wide. It would not be exciting to me. It would not be fun. It would totally ruin the game for me.Umm............lemme think.......no. Leave PvP where it is. Out of sight, out of mind.You sir, are obviously and painfully unaware of the inescapable fact of internet gaming.
To wit; if it CAN be abused it most certainly will be, and nothing is totally grief proof.
@babylonWell, I do not factor in any "DLC" into my posts for I do not OWN any "DLC". If griefing occurs there, then I am blissfully unaware of it and will never experience it until ZoS sees fit to make it free for me to download and play.
Edit:
The point is: there are many reasons not to implement this. You just cannot or will not grasp the theory behind them all.Uh no, I still want to steal, but I don't want to interact with you or any other player, I only want to deal with NPCs.
So a big fat NO to your idea about trying to prevent PVE players from experiencing the Justice System.
@AelthwynWhat OP actually suggested is that PVE players simply not steal, then they won't be able to be killed by PVP actions...ie OP advocates banning PVE players from participating in the Justice System at all, in PVE areas.
OP wants PVE players to not be able to enjoy the Justice System.No.
Even if they implemented a no steal toggle like the no targeting innocents, even if they had a no healing criminals toggle, even if they changed all quests that require you to do crime so player enforcers couldn’t camp out at known quest points and prevent people from completing those objectives, even if they could somehow prevent players blockading the entrance to thieves refuges and standing guard over chests etc., even if they prevented innocent by standers from getting hurt or drawn into a fight, even if they prevented player enforcers from killing you for petty bounties you would have payed off to a guard, even if they prevented player enforcers from specifically watching/tailing/targeting certain players just waiting to jump on every attempt to advance their ledgermain skill or theives guild/dark brother hood quests in the future, even if they could somehow prevent enforcer groups from trying to gang up on criminals and criminal groups from ganging up on enforcers in return resulting in massive fights, etc. I would not personally like to see this implemented because:
- I don’t care for battles and chaos in my nice quiet cities, which we already have enough of with the NPC guards catching people, PVP battles seem way more crazy to me
- I don’t care for markets and towns becoming more crowded with people just hanging around patrolling for criminals on top of the NPCs that are also patrolling, instead of taking care of business and moving on.
- I don’t care for the… tense, wary, unfriendliness I think this could cause among the player population of the same faction while in PvE zones, nor do I care for the out-to-get-others self-righteous attitude or the desire to get back at the ‘upstanding citizen’ types which such a system promotes, as it just seems all too likely to attract the trolls so to speak.
- I don’t want to see zone chat full of people angry about it, or whining about it, or taunts, etc.
While I’m sure they could take many measures to prevent griefing, I feel there are some unavoidable aspects I would not enjoy even if I wasn’t an active participant, and I’m not confident that even with the best efforts that they could really stop all those determined to find a way to be obnoxious to others.
@LysetteEven if I’m not ‘participating’ I don’t want to have it going on all around me.
[snip] I don’t like an air of conflict between players and want a more positive helpful atmosphere when doing PVE stuff. I don’t want the added tense-ness of worrying if other players you might have wanted to group with in the public dungeon or something are checking to see if you have a bounty or whatever. I want a sense of camaraderie between players against the NPC enemies, not infighting between players within their home faction.
And I feel like in-faction hostilities of this kind could undermine some of the team spirit on the battle field for those who do like PVP - not for everyone, but still….
[snip] I don’t even want to think about Elden Root with PVP stuff going on there, it takes ages to load as it is now. Most of the time my mount that I’m ‘riding’ doesn’t even spawn till I’ve reached the door to upstairs.
Yeah, for those who are not interested in PVP but still want to participate in the crime aspect of the game, even adding PVP only for highest level bounties still tresspasses on this. It’s not an aspect of the game that inherently needs to be PVP - the war in cyrodil yes, and if you don’t want to do PVP I don’t think you’re still entitled to related achievements and what not, however the PVE area crimes should definitely be able to be done without PVP being forced on you - at any level.
Additionally you are ‘battle leveled’ in Cyrodil, but in your regular factions you’re not, so how would they prevent High level characters basically halting any low level’s progress in the ledgermain skill until they can become high level AND competent PVPers?
@TandorGrief-proof as in what? - never commited a crime, never reported for harrasment, never used foul words, having no ledgerdemain skill line (because that tracks crime), never killed someone innocent, never murdered anybody - stuff like that?There is one other reason it shouldn't be done, and that is that it constitutes the imposition of PvP penalties for PvE crimes in PvE areas.
I understand why serious PvPers want to be able to jump casual PvEers, it's the nature of the beast, but we have to be honest and recognise that what people are asking for is simply open world PvP masquerading as some sort of a "justice" system. It wholly distorts a major aspect of the game in terms of bringing the Thieves Guild and potentially the Dark Brotherhood content into a hybrid PvE/PvP mix, and that is a mix that is proven not to work. Prudent developers will provide plenty of content for both styles of play, but not mix them together.
@Tan9oSucckaActually, you don't get it at all. It isn't that people fear open world PvP, it's that they don't want it.
Why do PvPers always assume that non-PvPers are afraid of PvP? It's simply that a lot of people play these games to co-operate with other players rather than to have conflict with them, and they don't want their questing and other adventuring activities (including the PvE elements of the Justice System in PvE areas) interrupted by PvP actions they have no interest in.
@TabbycatNo thanks.
Towns would be littered with people in hiding, waiting to gank a cheap kill.
I could see it now. Grab an item on a crafting table on accident, and like PvP in general, get cheesed by 20 people spamming crystal frags/ambush/wrecking blow.
@Giles.floydub17_ESOEven grief proof you'd still have people who would sit around in the cities all day waiting for people to commit crimes.
That would lead to increased congestion in cities.
Increased congestion would lead to lag.
More lag is bad.
Thus my answer is no because of lag.
@VorcilActually, you are assuming it can be done without grief. OP offers absolutely nothing to suggest otherwise. [snip]
Edit, this thread should be locked. It will likely devolve into bashing since it lacks substance, unfortunately.
[edited for bait]
@houjo2000b16_ESONo;
I just want to enjoy my thieving alone, no reason I should have to worry about cheap templars and others spamming biting jabs and wrecking blow all day.
Just no. If you want to ruin someone's day go to IC and Cyrodiil, but keep PvE to PvE.No, it can't be grief proof unless it's completely opt in. The thieving system is great as it is without level 5s being one shot by v16s hanging out by the refuge entrances.
Now, if the system were a toggle it could work, but in that case you still run two risks. Either a- nobody wants to toggle on the criminal side, leading it to be very boring for enforcers as well as still making it so criminals face swarms at refuge gates.
Or, b- it gets lots of interest (look at open pvp zones so far and realize this won't happen, but let's pretend); in which case, already packed cities now are flooded with FFA pvp, both completely ruining the point of hub cities, not making any sense lore-wise and making them laggy nightmares.
Sure, it's nice to say 'but grief free', but that's really not something that's possible- at least in other pvp zones you scale level and you're willingly entering a pvp zone- the justice system has massive level differences and most 'participants' aren't willing. There's a reason pretty much no game has FFA pvp outside of a few niche titles. This isn't a FFA PvP niche game, it's at best a RvRvR game, and even that's limited to few areas due to lack of interest.
Since there are apparently "many reasons not to implement this and I just cannot or will not grasp the theory behind them all".
Fine, if you're going to call out people who disagree with you, I'll bite.
What's wrong with the PvP heist system detailed? Nothing, because it's not open world PvP, it's more or less a battleground. I don't think any of the 'nay-sayers' are against instanced PvP, perhaps you should read the posts you quoted first to realize this rather than just seeing a 'no' and spam quoting them. None of them have said they're against instanced heists- in fact some of them said that was one way it might work, that or something like Cyrodil.
That's my call out to you- don't accuse other people of not reading when you clearly refuse to do so yourself.
@houjo2000b16_ESO you got it right. Heck, he did not even have those links until I called him out on a baseless and empty argument.
If someone cannot be bothered to explain their position/ideas in their OP it may be a good idea to avoid creating the thread. I think he created the thread to have fun calling people out for anything that comes up.3 -
Troneon✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoNo
Because they can't even get what we have now working correctly....
Fix current issues and stop adding more crap.
Edited by Troneon on March 8, 2016 8:57PMPC EU ADMaster Crafter - Anything you need!!High Elf Magicka Templar Healer/DPS/TankTrials / Dungeons / PVP / Everything2 -
Khaos_Bane✭✭✭✭✭
✭How is this so hard to implement. Whenever this is discussed it's like there is rocket science behind it. Can someone please tell me why it is so difficult to opt out of the PvP portion by having something simple as a flag in the UI to enable yourself or not? I do not see what is so complicated about implementing this and separate PvE PvP. It's almost like ZoS developers never played any other MMO before.0 -
Khaos_Bane✭✭✭✭✭
✭Wolfenbelle wrote: »Absolutely NO!!!! If ZOS ever implemented some kind of game-wide PvP, I would quit the game. After the experiences I've had in IC, there is NO WAY whatsoever that I'd want to see anything even remotely similar implemented game wide. It would not be exciting to me. It would not be fun. It would totally ruin the game for me.
See, this is what I mean. PvP and PvE don't mix well where there is already an established audience that identify as "pure" PvEers and "pure" PvPers who want nothing to do with each other. Add onto the fact that the justice system will be innately tied into the Thieves Guild and Dark Brotherhood--two of the most popular TES guilds--the PvP portion of the Justice System would have caused more problems than anything else.
...Unless if they could opt out of the PvP portion entirely. But even that will not go over smoothly.
Like you finally said, you OPT out. This has been done in many games and it is FAR from a new concept.
0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Khaos_Bane wrote: »How is this so hard to implement. Whenever this is discussed it's like there is rocket science behind it. Can someone please tell me why it is so difficult to opt out of the PvP portion by having something simple as a flag in the UI to enable yourself or not? I do not see what is so complicated about implementing this and separate PvE PvP. It's almost like ZoS developers never played any other MMO before.
And it hasn't always worked well on other games. I've seen players cause others to become flagged by stepping into their aoe or a heal hitting someone flagged.
The last part would prove the most challenging with the game design we have here. Especially where it comes to the lack of control of heals.
I don't see a way it would work here and no one has explained otherwise. All the support says they should cause I want it. We don't always get what we want.2 -
Jaronking✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yes
Hey I didn't say all I said the majority who posted and voted No gave selfish reasoning for their vote.Some of them made valued points but most said I don't want it because it will effect my single player version of the game and effect how the screen look like come on.Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »I been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are selfish and only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no.You are only thinking about yourself in this instance under the belief that it will mess up your experience in PVE.While not even being affected by it since all you Zos has to do is make a Toggle to say not to be flagged for PVP.Unless you think ZOs programmers are so terrible that they can't even code a toggle correctly.This doesn't affect you in no way at all you and so you want to ruin it for others people. Godly why are we all so selfish.
I love the shaming those who vote no as being selfish. +1.
I think the toggle would be great because the qq about most players having pvp toggled off would be great entertainment.
When I want to gank players and get loot off them I just head to ic. Great place.0 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoI have no interest in that system. I do have an interest in looting in town.
I would rather devs work on other things.
If I could continue to loot while having PvP enforcers turned off in PvE zones, I would not object to other people engaging in PvP in PvE zones. Just leave me out while not taking away my ability to loot.Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »What is the purpose of this poll. It really says nothing.
The purpose is that people assume this system cannot be done without people being able to exploit and grief.
That is the sole reason they oppose this system.
If it could be done grief-proof, they have no reason to hate this system. Yet they firmly refuse to believe it is possible.
They keep pointing fingers at IC as if that was in any way similar.
Uh, no.
I do not "oppose" a PvP justice system. I just don't want to do it. I want to continue stealing and I have zero interest in engaging in PvP in PvE zones. Very simple.
I have no problem with other people killing each other. I don't mind seeing it. I would just keep my game set to PvE in PvE zones.
If you want to force me into PvP if I accrue bounty, no, that is not acceptable. I don't want that game.
I don't care about exploiting and grief, because I have no interest in engaging in PvP in Glenumbra but I will continue to steal things in Glenumbra. Do you understand that there are people who avoid Cyrodiil for reasons that have nothing to do with griefing or exploits? They just aren't interested in PvP. I do in fact join my guilds in Cyrodiil or IC a few times a month and enjoy playing with them for an hour or two. But I spend most of my time not in PvP because PvP is not particularly entertaining to me.
In fact, I spend more time stealing things than I spend in PvP.Edited by DaveMoeDee on March 8, 2016 9:13PM3 -
Khaos_Bane✭✭✭✭✭
✭Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Khaos_Bane wrote: »How is this so hard to implement. Whenever this is discussed it's like there is rocket science behind it. Can someone please tell me why it is so difficult to opt out of the PvP portion by having something simple as a flag in the UI to enable yourself or not? I do not see what is so complicated about implementing this and separate PvE PvP. It's almost like ZoS developers never played any other MMO before.
And it hasn't always worked well on other games. I've seen players cause others to become flagged by stepping into their aoe or a heal hitting someone flagged.
The last part would prove the most challenging with the game design we have here. Especially where it comes to the lack of control of heals.
I don't see a way it would work here and no one has explained otherwise. All the support says they should cause I want it. We don't always get what we want.
Well you must be taking a mechanic from another game and not thinking outside of that. You can simply have a checkbox on your UI that you can FLAG YOURSELF for PVP with a timer and Decay on it for unflagging it. It would have nothing to do with another pvp player jumping in front of you or AoE or anything like that. You can code whatever rules you want to with software and this is far from a difficult problem.
Edited by Khaos_Bane on March 8, 2016 9:15PM0 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoIt sounds cool, fun and exciting.
BUT really do you think ZOS can implement something like this without messing it up?
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)0 -
Khaos_Bane✭✭✭✭✭
✭vamp_emily wrote: »It sounds cool, fun and exciting.
BUT really do you think ZOS can implement something like this without messing it up?
Yes it's simple.
0 -
jamesharv2005ub17_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoYet they have already said they are not going to because it is too difficult to implement. So ya have to use the entire gigantic map of cyrodill and an entire DLC of imperial city to do your pvp in. I just have to wonder what is the motive here. When there are so many opportunities for pvp why do you want to add even more areas?2 -
WalkingLegacy✭✭✭✭✭
✭Nothing is simple when it comes to this game. Past two years make that painfully obvious.
And nothing is grief proof. There are still griefers in the game right now without it. That shouldn't even be the way they design a system.
It should be designed with fun and replay-ability in mind. Griefers can be dealt with via reporting.1 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoI been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are [snip] only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no...
[edited to remove bait]
Did you read the actual question the OP posted?
"If it was grief-proof, would you like to see Justice System phase 2 - PvP?"
No, I don't want to "see it" as in I don't want to take part in it. I want to to continue with the current Justice system. That answer is not selfish and it has nothing to do with those who want it. I am not opposed to them having it. I just want to continue with the PvE justice system. If other people want to also get killed by other players, good for them. Just don't involve me.
Your problem isn't that I am selfish. Your problem is that you aren't listening to people who have different opinions to you.
I understand 100% why certain people want more PvP conflict in the game. That is not the game I am interested in. I have no objections to more PvP in the game for those who want it. Just don't turn my stealing into forced entry into PvP. If I want PvP, I'll go to Cyrodiil.
One thing I would in fact find entertaining in PvP in PvE zones is fights getting split up by people ending up in different instances. That would be hilarious.2 -
CromulentForumID✭✭✭✭Khaos_Bane wrote: »Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »Khaos_Bane wrote: »How is this so hard to implement. Whenever this is discussed it's like there is rocket science behind it. Can someone please tell me why it is so difficult to opt out of the PvP portion by having something simple as a flag in the UI to enable yourself or not? I do not see what is so complicated about implementing this and separate PvE PvP. It's almost like ZoS developers never played any other MMO before.
And it hasn't always worked well on other games. I've seen players cause others to become flagged by stepping into their aoe or a heal hitting someone flagged.
The last part would prove the most challenging with the game design we have here. Especially where it comes to the lack of control of heals.
I don't see a way it would work here and no one has explained otherwise. All the support says they should cause I want it. We don't always get what we want.
Well you must be taking a mechanic from another game and not thinking outside of that. You can simply have a checkbox on your UI that you can FLAG YOURSELF for PVP with a timer and Decay on it for unflagging it. It would have nothing to do with another pvp player jumping in front of you or AoE or anything like that. You can code whatever rules you want to with software and this is far from a difficult problem.
So, is it just the simple flag, or is it the less simple flag and timer, with decay? So is it a simple flag, or the simple flag with a timer, and decay, and then making sure other members of the group are flagged or unflagged? Is it a simple flag, or a simple flag with a timer, and decay, and group management, and recoding the powers to take the flag into account? Is it a simple flag, or is it a flag with a timer, and decay, and group management, and powers taking the flag into account, and rules about when people are attackable.....1 -
DaveMoeDee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭NoOP, i and others say no because you proposal is not good enough. It is is uninteresting and risky. I have few suggestions.
- Change the proposal of PvP area from Cadwell silver/gold to Cyro and IC. Then the opt-in is clear: travel to Cyro. Keep your sandbox and stay there.
- You should reverse your planning: what kind of thieving is in connection to enforcer PvP inside IC. PvP is granted, griefing is no longer problem. Original proposal uses PvE like a free lunch. In Cyro you need to make complete plan.
I think Cyrodiil is the absolutely worst place for PvP justice. Introducing intra-faction killing would make the campaigns a joke.
If they were going to do it, it would need to be a zone that isn't already PvP as the 2 PvP zones are designed for particular kinds of PvP. In fact, all containers in Cyrodiil can be looted and it isn't even stealing. The idea of stealing in IC is even more absurd. Stealing from daedra?1 -
jkemmery✭✭✭✭YesDaveMoeDee wrote: »I been reading this thread twice and trying to understand all the posters who voted no and I have came to the conclusion that the majority of you guys are [snip] only thinking about yourself and not other players and the health of the game for most players who voted no...
[edited to remove bait]
Did you read the actual question the OP posted?
"If it was grief-proof, would you like to see Justice System phase 2 - PvP?"
No, I don't want to "see it" as in I don't want to take part in it. I want to to continue with the current Justice system. That answer is not selfish and it has nothing to do with those who want it. I am not opposed to them having it. I just want to continue with the PvE justice system. If other people want to also get killed by other players, good for them. Just don't involve me.
Your problem isn't that I am selfish. Your problem is that you aren't listening to people who have different opinions to you.
I understand 100% why certain people want more PvP conflict in the game. That is not the game I am interested in. I have no objections to more PvP in the game for those who want it. Just don't turn my stealing into forced entry into PvP. If I want PvP, I'll go to Cyrodiil.
One thing I would in fact find entertaining in PvP in PvE zones is fights getting split up by people ending up in different instances. That would be hilarious.
@DaveMoeDee
If it was an "Opt in/Opt out" system, where someone could upon logging in, or by accessing the main menu, opt in or out of the system, would you still be opposed to it?0
This discussion has been closed.