The PvP Justice System Concept, now with opt-out

Tipsy · July 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

So by between consensual players pvp or whatever you mean one of them did pve actions and eventually got thrown into it because that part of the current pve play has been taken over and given to pvp?

IE right now, the player doing that in pve - stays in pve. If you get your way, the player doing that in pve - gets pvp.

Right?

Consensual.

As I said many times,I see pve and pvp as aspects of one game.And apparantely some compare it to two games,like football and basketball.And thats the problem.
As NeilMcAttack says,what about players that enjoy all aspects of the game?One Tamriel has much potential.And pve and pvp are just that;aspects of a game.
Would you want divided Tamriel instead of a One Tamriel?
I think where you and I differ most in opinion STEVIL is that there are "different kinds of games within the game" while I see "pve and pvp as aspects of the same game"
Lore and immersion is very important and all there needs to be as reason to introduce either pve or pvp activities.
I try to suggest something for consensual pvp above and it gets no attention.But I believe it is actually an opt out what I suggested . and then

Niastissa wrote: »

No I'm not going to be ransomed into PVP. I hate the idea. It's bad enough they put PVE objectives into the PVP zones to get non PVP people in there so you all can spoil their fun. Now you want to force your way into the PVE zones.

I'll quit if I even think that this is going to happen. Have fun playing PVP with the same people who PVP now in a dead game.

PVE and PVP belongs together because they are aspects of the game.
You'd deny all the players who want to be able to pvp anywhere their fun?
I'd support a pve only option in cyrodiil too actually,let that sink in.
I'm not going to argue since you clearly overreact to my proposal and I doubt you are even open to discuss it any further.
"No way cuz i'll quite & I don't care for any ,nor your proposal" is all get from your message

ahstin2001nub18_ESO · July 2016

im more of a 90% PVEer and 10% PVPer, and i thought the original PVP justice system was going to be fun- full disclosure i wanted to be a guard not a thief/murderer.. well maybe i would at some point, be a murdering thief, after having to put up with the gold/silver questlines, but thats way down the road. i pretty well have given up on the PVP side of the system, because i think ZoS is too lazy to implement it, but i think its more irritating that the assumption is that some large number of PVEers don't want the PVP portion of the justice system to be implemented. i wanted it; i don't get it; and it won't change.

the trend with these posts, is that there are set PVEers that comment about not "ruining their PVE" with PVP; they don't bend, nor work with those for the PVP portion that got scraped, and those for the PVP portion try to work with the PVEers to no avail. so im pretty annoyed with the idea of being lumped in with "those" PVEers... i just play the game, for the game, in all aspects.

among the other suggestions, making it opt-in/out could even be region (zone) based bounties- get a bounty in one zone that turns on PVP, then just go to the next zone where your bounty is 0, turning off PVP; rinse and repeat. i dont really understand why the bounty would be universal anyways, unless you really rack up the bounty to an extreme amount, that would produce a large reputation anyways. either you can make it a VERY large (and i stress VERY large) bounty amount in any zone, or just tie it to the number of zones, or both, before universal PVP is turned on- in other words you have to work pretty hard to obtain the title of "reputed bandit" before you really have major concerns for full blown PVP, which could please PVPers that rather play a highwaymen/highwaylady for the PVP/RP reasons. this could keep PVE players from PVPing by racking up a PVP bounty, as the system can be manipulated (not exploited mind you), so that if the PVP turns on at 5k gold, then build a 4999 gold or less bounty then move to the next region(zone), and you won't have to worry about PVPing. your primary concern will still only be guards.

also, why can't they just add a "yield" option... if you don't want to PVP, then yield, and the player is just treated like a guard- you pay your bounty, and lose your stolen goods. don't want to lose your stuff, don't get caught. don't want to PVP? then just yield.

another point... don't steal from high population areas. rob and murder from low population area's and reduce the risk, of pvp. i do this already, when i get the itch to steal.

i see issues with the thieves guild and dark brotherhood DLCs. there are 2 ways to go about it:

1)leave it as is, and don't allow PVP

2)add a PVP overlay, in conjunction with a no-PVP, which the player is allowed to choose between.

with regards to the PVE quests that specifically requires illegal acts, just remove the bounty portion/illegal act from those quests- in other words, picking a lock for the storyline quest is not an illegal act. then again, if you have to acquire X-amount of gold before PVP is triggered, it will be high enough, that it will do little to nothing to trigger PVP and you will still only have to worry about guards.

Niastissa · July 2016

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

im more of a 90% PVEer and 10% PVPer, and i thought the original PVP justice system was going to be fun- full disclosure i wanted to be a guard not a thief/murderer.. well maybe i would at some point, be a murdering thief, after having to put up with the gold/silver questlines, but thats way down the road. i pretty well have given up on the PVP side of the system, because i think ZoS is too lazy to implement it, but i think its more irritating that the assumption is that some large number of PVEers don't want the PVP portion of the justice system to be implemented. i wanted it; i don't get it; and it won't change.

the trend with these posts, is that there are set PVEers that comment about not "ruining their PVE" with PVP; they don't bend, nor work with those for the PVP portion that got scraped, and those for the PVP portion try to work with the PVEers to no avail. so im pretty annoyed with the idea of being lumped in with "those" PVEers... i just play the game, for the game, in all aspects.

among the other suggestions, making it opt-in/out could even be region (zone) based bounties- get a bounty in one zone that turns on PVP, then just go to the next zone where your bounty is 0, turning off PVP; rinse and repeat. i dont really understand why the bounty would be universal anyways, unless you really rack up the bounty to an extreme amount, that would produce a large reputation anyways. either you can make it a VERY large (and i stress VERY large) bounty amount in any zone, or just tie it to the number of zones, or both, before universal PVP is turned on- in other words you have to work pretty hard to obtain the title of "reputed bandit" before you really have major concerns for full blown PVP, which could please PVPers that rather play a highwaymen/highwaylady for the PVP/RP reasons. this could keep PVE players from PVPing by racking up a PVP bounty, as the system can be manipulated (not exploited mind you), so that if the PVP turns on at 5k gold, then build a 4999 gold or less bounty then move to the next region(zone), and you won't have to worry about PVPing. your primary concern will still only be guards.

also, why can't they just add a "yield" option... if you don't want to PVP, then yield, and the player is just treated like a guard- you pay your bounty, and lose your stolen goods. don't want to lose your stuff, don't get caught. don't want to PVP? then just yield.

another point... don't steal from high population areas. rob and murder from low population area's and reduce the risk, of pvp. i do this already, when i get the itch to steal.

i see issues with the thieves guild and dark brotherhood DLCs. there are 2 ways to go about it:

1)leave it as is, and don't allow PVP

2)add a PVP overlay, in conjunction with a no-PVP, which the player is allowed to choose between.

with regards to the PVE quests that specifically requires illegal acts, just remove the bounty portion/illegal act from those quests- in other words, picking a lock for the storyline quest is not an illegal act. then again, if you have to acquire X-amount of gold before PVP is triggered, it will be high enough, that it will do little to nothing to trigger PVP and you will still only have to worry about guards.

[snip]

The reason why PVE players seem inflexible is because the end goal of the PVP players no matter the system proposed is to be able to go grief players who don't want to do PVP at that moment if at all.

[edited to remove bait]

STEVIL · July 2016

@tipsy
You'd deny all the players who want to be able to pvp anywhere their fun?

Not so far.

Your view of justice doesnt limit itself to just letting two consenting pvp players play anywhere. It includes enabling pvp against folks who have not chosen to participate.

You defend play anywhere but propose attack anyone doing pve onlyb of sorts you claim to not like.

Those are two different things.

One sounds more defensible than the other.

But i do wonder that if pvp could happen between pvp players anywhere, and so they spread scross tamriel instead of having their own zone, would that make finding foihts easier? I mean trying to find the opted in among the slews of opted out in evermore seems like it would be more waiting without payoff thsn just going to zones where its full of pvp players no exceptions.

Kalifas · July 2016

Tipsy wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

To finally add some feedback on your suggestion:
I like the idea from the lore and immersion standpoint, but I have some questions:
Does "Alliance specific bounties" mean that f.e. if someone gets seen committing a crime in Grahtwood, only AD Enforcers would be able to accost that player?

Indeed,if you commit crime in grathwood,only AD enforcers would accost that player
(if you are EP player your own alliance might even reward you for crimes commited in enemy territory,depending on the amount of badges you can present them as a sign of dedication & service)
If you are justice level "wanted" ,any bounty hunter player of AD can hunt you(the wanted player) down in One Tamriel.
The bounty hunters must flag themselves bounty hunter.Only by doing so you can chase the wanted player down & get the reward(increasing with how long that wanted player is able to remain fugitive)
The reason a player would need to flag themselves bounty hunter is so that a wanted player can't pull other players into unwanted pvp by standing in their aoe ,...
So @STEVIL ,it would be consensual PVP between wanted players and bounty hunters)

Dubhliam wrote: »

[*] What happens when players accumulates a bounty in neutral zones like Coldharbor, Craglorn or any current and future DLC zone?
You see, there are some issues that need addressing before this becomes viable.
From the system standpoint is has less appeal, since you would be limiting the amount of players that can accost a certain alliance bounty to approximately 33% of all Enforcers, while crimes in DLC zones would be open to 100% of Enforcers.
Making DLC zones (those include TG and DB) less appealing for crime activities, which I don't think will pass with ZOS.

The beauty of the One Tamriel release is that bounty hunters serving their alliance will chase you down anywhere when you become wanted.No matter where you are.Even in the new DLC areas.Wouldn't this change the circumstances?looking at the % of enforcers is looking only at the pve side perhaps?
(a meter will go up the longer you stay fugitive which either the bounty hunter or the wanted player can collect if he is able to stay out of hands of other players)
So greater risk equals greater reward. if you take the risk to go pvp mode and are able to survive I believe you deserve greater reward for taking greater risk.
A bounty hunter would also be able to mark fugitives,which will act as a curse.This will make the fugitive visible for 1 minute on the whole map,after 1 minute the visibility radius will decrease.
Also npc agents & assassins of the alliance where the player is wanted will come after a marked player in the wilderness.
A marked fugitive can purge the mark at any outlaw refugee,hide in certain houses(perhaps when housing is introduced a friend can hide them) Or perhaps new type of ingame disguises will make them go unnoticed?

Kalifas wrote: »

If you play tennis in the court and other people start playing basketball in the middle of your tennis court, isn't that fudged?
You would either have to accept it, change it by leaving or telling them to leave, or reject it.

The thing is,tennis and basketball are two entirely different games.While pve & pvp are aspects of a game.
Thus pvp and pve should not be treated like 2 different games on their own.The union of well designed pve & pvp features make for 1 great game.

In the end I believe pvp should be consensual
and i'm not against the introduction of it in all the other areas.

Ok if you want to spin it that way. Let's say basketball in a virtual space, you are playing with friends against a AI opponent team. Suddenly another basketball player team, or two, or three teams invade your court and your game comes to a crashing halt. Isn't that fudged? I played FFXI which was mostly PvE but players fought or shared camps for experience points. It was not a quest game but you leveled by chaining monster kills. Do you know that even there, more casual players hated having to compete for camps to kill NPC enemies.

PvP and PvE are entirely different games. And they are treated as such in this game and multiples of other games.If they were the same, why does ZoS or other companies either design skills separate or nerf/buff skill in reaction to the PvE or PvP side. If they were the same, all builds could be balanced uniformly. Because they can't. Why does Call of Duty have a story offline mode and an online PvP mode?

No, a well designed union of PvE and PvP would make a great game for you. The general consensus is that anyone drawn to here is usually due to the offline experience of other TES games which have no PvP. ZoS is having a hard enough time with performance having the two systems separate. Do you really think they will do better combining both systems and maintaining balance?

There should be a PvE only version of Imperial City and a PvP only version of Imperial City. I wonder which would be more populated if the metrics were shown.

PvE= Compete against the world by defeating the environment.
PvP= Compete against the world by defeating other players.

Two entirely different games.

STEVIL · July 2016

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

im more of a 90% PVEer and 10% PVPer, and i thought the original PVP justice system was going to be fun- full disclosure i wanted to be a guard not a thief/murderer.. well maybe i would at some point, be a murdering thief, after having to put up with the gold/silver questlines, but thats way down the road. i pretty well have given up on the PVP side of the system, because i think ZoS is too lazy to implement it, but i think its more irritating that the assumption is that some large number of PVEers don't want the PVP portion of the justice system to be implemented. i wanted it; i don't get it; and it won't change.

the trend with these posts, is that there are set PVEers that comment about not "ruining their PVE" with PVP; they don't bend, nor work with those for the PVP portion that got scraped, and those for the PVP portion try to work with the PVEers to no avail. so im pretty annoyed with the idea of being lumped in with "those" PVEers... i just play the game, for the game, in all aspects.
among the other suggestions, making it opt-in/out could even be region (zone) based bounties- get a bounty in one zone that turns on PVP, then just go to the next zone where your bounty is 0, turning off PVP; rinse and repeat. i dont really understand why the bounty would be universal anyways, unless you really rack up the bounty to an extreme amount, that would produce a large reputation anyways. either you can make it a VERY large (and i stress VERY large) bounty amount in any zone, or just tie it to the number of zones, or both, before universal PVP is turned on- in other words you have to work pretty hard to obtain the title of "reputed bandit" before you really have major concerns for full blown PVP, which could please PVPers that rather play a highwaymen/highwaylady for the PVP/RP reasons. this could keep PVE players from PVPing by racking up a PVP bounty, as the system can be manipulated (not exploited mind you), so that if the PVP turns on at 5k gold, then build a 4999 gold or less bounty then move to the next region(zone), and you won't have to worry about PVPing. your primary concern will still only be guards.

also, why can't they just add a "yield" option... if you don't want to PVP, then yield, and the player is just treated like a guard- you pay your bounty, and lose your stolen goods. don't want to lose your stuff, don't get caught. don't want to PVP? then just yield.

another point... don't steal from high population areas. rob and murder from low population area's and reduce the risk, of pvp. i do this already, when i get the itch to steal.
i see issues with the thieves guild and dark brotherhood DLCs. there are 2 ways to go about it:

1)leave it as is, and don't allow PVP

2)add a PVP overlay, in conjunction with a no-PVP, which the player is allowed to choose between.

with regards to the PVE quests that specifically requires illegal acts, just remove the bounty portion/illegal act from those quests- in other words, picking a lock for the storyline quest is not an illegal act. then again, if you have to acquire X-amount of gold before PVP is triggered, it will be high enough, that it will do little to nothing to trigger PVP and you will still only have to worry about guards
.

I dont agree so much with your trend assessment. There are quite a few in the pve not pvp crowd who say its ok for a totally consensual version of the PVP intrusion into justice. But then we hit a brick wall much of the time because a total opt-out is unacceptable. There is an inflexible segment that views allowing pve to not get sucked into pvp as a non-started, wont be accepted into etc etc etc.

The immediate response of many pve players involved here is to say NO NO HECK NO because at almost every point in the past these threads have been similarly against an opt-out for pvp. Both current proposals the Op ans tipsy are not allowing a full opt-out option and when PVE flee was put forth as being right beside PVP flee not taken away... that somehow wasn't accepted though the pvp-on-pve not competitive duels well thats was just fine.

On the other hand, many on either side are fine with adding more to the current existing justice activites content.

Second, the yeild button - thats been in the OP kost of the time. They basically want to have the normal dialog with guard kind of replaced at one point with a similar accost for pcs where you get a PVP flee replacing the PVE flee - emphasis REPLACING not adding alongside.

This is what i call the PVP-RANSOM-TAKEOVER because it TAKESOVER an existing PVE flee option and while it gives you a choice to PVP or not, it puts a pricetag on saying "no" which often seems to be dismissed as a little gold for the bounty but when honest about it its the gold and the stolen the loot you carry. which can be quite a bit. This takes the decision of "do i pvp or not" out of just a preference so like minded folks can go either way to a PVP-or-ELSE ransom where the PVE player is given a choice between two negatives in losing a bunch of stuff or doing content he doesn't want.

It sounds to me like its not enough to just let people choose but instead gotta get something extorted out of them if they refuse. Could have called it mugging, stick-up or whatever... but ransom seems ok too.

Funny thing is... i recall a thread months ago.

Some guy went into cyrodil chasing pve quests. Call Abel.
Some other guy, call him Cain, caught him near the PVE choke point and killed him. Abel didnt even fight back.
Respawn come back to do the... Cain kills again. Again abel doesn't fight back. tries to get the point "not here to pvp"
lather-rinse repeat several times. same results.
So next time from a ways off Abel asks what can i do to get you to stop or something like that.
Cain says hmmm... gimme 10k gold.

So abel got upset and posted do we want to encourage extortion like this....

While the thread was divided on the topic, as one might expect some common themes carried the day:
First Abel shouldn't be griping over getting killed in pvp zone no matter how much.
Second Abel shouldn't have opened the dialog because that opened the door for the extortion offer OR the other guy shouldn't have made an offer to stop for gold - divided about 50/50.

So the baffling part to me and i posted it to that thread as for one reason i wont ever understand pvp-think is the idea that the guy who was intentionally thwarting the other guy from getting his stuff done was ok fine business as usual BUT the fact that they started a dialog about reaching a different agreement than "one lives one dies" was almost universally deemed the error in the piece, whether you thought cain or abel was at fault.

Just an odd anecdote. Sometimes elements of this thread bring it back to me.

Tipsy · July 2016

@Kalifas
Both pvp and pve provide a manner of acting and existing in a virtual world,they are a part/aspects of the same game.
The only difference really is that you fight computer controlled enemies in PVE and other players in pvp.

You forget that basketball is a game with different structure,strict rules/setup ,and this game is an mmo with a more or less open world
so players are supposed to move freely through this virtual world with the freedom in regards to how or when to approach objectives

Hmmm thinking about this,we aren't really free to travel through the virtual world as cyrodiil is mostly off limits for pve-only players
And there is nothing to look for for pvp-only players outside of cyrodiil.
Next to freedom in regards to how or when we approach objectives,we need different manners of acting and existing in this virtual world to suite all flavors.
Thats why it is so imperative to feature pvp and pve in all areas of the game & why they need to exist next to each other.
So all players have something to enjoy in all areas of the game.

Perhaps mmo's of past decades have been too protective for pve players and now they are all used to living inside that little bubble,pretending they are all special snowflake demi gods..
And the often rude,abusive pvp griefers in other games might have caused to drift them apart even further.
To me its all flavor and I believe both deserve to act & exist as they want

Its not that the 2 modes do not belong together(and there are many other styles;Like SINGLE player with online co op)..But poor implementation in mmo's has gotten us in this situation.
I believe that One Tamriel could prove you wrong & show how the two together actually bring more flavor to the table for everyone.Well I made some suggestions(which are already burried in the topic and won't keep repeating myself here)
And i'm open to discuss suggestions.But not keep going back and forth about the same thing.

ahstin2001nub18_ESO · July 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

im more of a 90% PVEer and 10% PVPer, and i thought the original PVP justice system was going to be fun- full disclosure i wanted to be a guard not a thief/murderer.. well maybe i would at some point, be a murdering thief, after having to put up with the gold/silver questlines, but thats way down the road. i pretty well have given up on the PVP side of the system, because i think ZoS is too lazy to implement it, but i think its more irritating that the assumption is that some large number of PVEers don't want the PVP portion of the justice system to be implemented. i wanted it; i don't get it; and it won't change.

the trend with these posts, is that there are set PVEers that comment about not "ruining their PVE" with PVP; they don't bend, nor work with those for the PVP portion that got scraped, and those for the PVP portion try to work with the PVEers to no avail. so im pretty annoyed with the idea of being lumped in with "those" PVEers... i just play the game, for the game, in all aspects.
among the other suggestions, making it opt-in/out could even be region (zone) based bounties- get a bounty in one zone that turns on PVP, then just go to the next zone where your bounty is 0, turning off PVP; rinse and repeat. i dont really understand why the bounty would be universal anyways, unless you really rack up the bounty to an extreme amount, that would produce a large reputation anyways. either you can make it a VERY large (and i stress VERY large) bounty amount in any zone, or just tie it to the number of zones, or both, before universal PVP is turned on- in other words you have to work pretty hard to obtain the title of "reputed bandit" before you really have major concerns for full blown PVP, which could please PVPers that rather play a highwaymen/highwaylady for the PVP/RP reasons. this could keep PVE players from PVPing by racking up a PVP bounty, as the system can be manipulated (not exploited mind you), so that if the PVP turns on at 5k gold, then build a 4999 gold or less bounty then move to the next region(zone), and you won't have to worry about PVPing. your primary concern will still only be guards.

also, why can't they just add a "yield" option... if you don't want to PVP, then yield, and the player is just treated like a guard- you pay your bounty, and lose your stolen goods. don't want to lose your stuff, don't get caught. don't want to PVP? then just yield.

another point... don't steal from high population areas. rob and murder from low population area's and reduce the risk, of pvp. i do this already, when i get the itch to steal.
i see issues with the thieves guild and dark brotherhood DLCs. there are 2 ways to go about it:

1)leave it as is, and don't allow PVP

2)add a PVP overlay, in conjunction with a no-PVP, which the player is allowed to choose between.

with regards to the PVE quests that specifically requires illegal acts, just remove the bounty portion/illegal act from those quests- in other words, picking a lock for the storyline quest is not an illegal act. then again, if you have to acquire X-amount of gold before PVP is triggered, it will be high enough, that it will do little to nothing to trigger PVP and you will still only have to worry about guards
.

I dont agree so much with your trend assessment. There are quite a few in the pve not pvp crowd who say its ok for a totally consensual version of the PVP intrusion into justice. But then we hit a brick wall much of the time because a total opt-out is unacceptable. There is an inflexible segment that views allowing pve to not get sucked into pvp as a non-started, wont be accepted into etc etc etc.

The immediate response of many pve players involved here is to say NO NO HECK NO because at almost every point in the past these threads have been similarly against an opt-out for pvp. Both current proposals the Op ans tipsy are not allowing a full opt-out option and when PVE flee was put forth as being right beside PVP flee not taken away... that somehow wasn't accepted though the pvp-on-pve not competitive duels well thats was just fine.

On the other hand, many on either side are fine with adding more to the current existing justice activites content.

Second, the yeild button - thats been in the OP kost of the time. They basically want to have the normal dialog with guard kind of replaced at one point with a similar accost for pcs where you get a PVP flee replacing the PVE flee - emphasis REPLACING not adding alongside.

This is what i call the PVP-RANSOM-TAKEOVER because it TAKESOVER an existing PVE flee option and while it gives you a choice to PVP or not, it puts a pricetag on saying "no" which often seems to be dismissed as a little gold for the bounty but when honest about it its the gold and the stolen the loot you carry. which can be quite a bit. This takes the decision of "do i pvp or not" out of just a preference so like minded folks can go either way to a PVP-or-ELSE ransom where the PVE player is given a choice between two negatives in losing a bunch of stuff or doing content he doesn't want.

It sounds to me like its not enough to just let people choose but instead gotta get something extorted out of them if they refuse. Could have called it mugging, stick-up or whatever... but ransom seems ok too.

Funny thing is... i recall a thread months ago.

Some guy went into cyrodil chasing pve quests. Call Abel.
Some other guy, call him Cain, caught him near the PVE choke point and killed him. Abel didnt even fight back.
Respawn come back to do the... Cain kills again. Again abel doesn't fight back. tries to get the point "not here to pvp"
lather-rinse repeat several times. same results.
So next time from a ways off Abel asks what can i do to get you to stop or something like that.
Cain says hmmm... gimme 10k gold.

So abel got upset and posted do we want to encourage extortion like this....

While the thread was divided on the topic, as one might expect some common themes carried the day:
First Abel shouldn't be griping over getting killed in pvp zone no matter how much.
Second Abel shouldn't have opened the dialog because that opened the door for the extortion offer OR the other guy shouldn't have made an offer to stop for gold - divided about 50/50.

So the baffling part to me and i posted it to that thread as for one reason i wont ever understand pvp-think is the idea that the guy who was intentionally thwarting the other guy from getting his stuff done was ok fine business as usual BUT the fact that they started a dialog about reaching a different agreement than "one lives one dies" was almost universally deemed the error in the piece, whether you thought cain or abel was at fault.

Just an odd anecdote. Sometimes elements of this thread bring it back to me.

-first the problem was ZOS releasing a PVP system, without the PVP portion. the justice system was NOT a PVE system, from conception. thus, no there isn't SUPPOSED to be a full opt-out. again, i doubt zos will release the PVP portion, but i simply don't want to be lumped in with the PVE crowd that doesn't move.

-im full for a "yield" feature, specifically for the fact that you have the risk of a player finding you, and you lose your loot. you will also then lose the bounty so there is no spawn camping. again, with the spirt of the system from birth was to be a PVP system, that really ends up being tough cookies. it is not ransom when an NPC forces the loss of items and bounty; nor is it when it is initiated by player contact. keep in mind, choosing to flee, doesn't require you to fight, you can flee. on top of that, you got to keep in mind people aren't going to be in one focused spot all of the time. also, in a PVE zone, you have quest layers pure pvpers don't have, since they likely havent finished the PVE content. which increases the likelihood of success to the PVE player. not to mention that since i AM a PVEer, in order to effectively attack another player, i would have to first swtich my skills (both bars), then put on a tabard to activate guard enabled PVP. that takes enough time that i would not even bother with it a lot of the time.

your cain and abel example is completely moot... no bounty = no pvp. using cyrodiil as an example is using phalanx combat environment in an urban-fighting setting . those are completely different styles, and might as well compare boxing to jujitsu... if you surrender you lose the bounty, PVP turns off and you lose your loot; flee and get away then you get to keep it, along with the bounty- no fighting required. having intractable objects would be required, to ensure the criminal has an adequate means of stealth options- in other words, it is to the criminal's advantage to NOT PVP, and instead use stealth, subterfuge, and good choice of locations to ransack (see note below). using my example, if you get away then you know to head to the next 0 bounty zone, until the heat is off (pvp flag is off).

NOTE: there are big parts of this system regarding rewards that would need to be addressed, as i see it has an increase risk to the thief/murderer. i lean towards there needing to be a slight reward advantage to the thief/murderer as they are at the disadvantage. there is more, but due to a lack of ambition of ZOS regarding the PVP portion of the system, im just not going to spend the time hashing it out.

Kalifas · July 2016

Tipsy wrote: »

@Kalifas
Both pvp and pve provide a manner of acting and existing in a virtual world,they are a part/aspects of the same game.
The only difference really is that you fight computer controlled enemies in PVE and other players in pvp.

You forget that basketball is a game with different structure,strict rules/setup ,and this game is an mmo with a more or less open world
so players are supposed to move freely through this virtual world with the freedom in regards to how or when to approach objectives

Hmmm thinking about this,we aren't really free to travel through the virtual world as cyrodiil is mostly off limits for pve-only players
And there is nothing to look for for pvp-only players outside of cyrodiil.
Next to freedom in regards to how or when we approach objectives,we need different manners of acting and existing in this virtual world to suite all flavors.
Thats why it is so imperative to feature pvp and pve in all areas of the game & why they need to exist next to each other.
So all players have something to enjoy in all areas of the game.

Perhaps mmo's of past decades have been too protective for pve players and now they are all used to living inside that little bubble,pretending they are all special snowflake demi gods..
And the often rude,abusive pvp griefers in other games might have caused to drift them apart even further.
To me its all flavor and I believe both deserve to act & exist as they want

Its not that the 2 modes do not belong together(and there are many other styles;Like SINGLE player with online co op)..But poor implementation in mmo's has gotten us in this situation.
I believe that One Tamriel could prove you wrong & show how the two together actually bring more flavor to the table for everyone.Well I made some suggestions(which are already burried in the topic and won't keep repeating myself here)
And i'm open to discuss suggestions.But not keep going back and forth about the same thing.

If no mmorpg to date has really gotten open world type PvP to be implemented properly except maybe DaoC, I don't think ESO would get it perfect seeing as they can't get performance good in a PvP only area Cyrodil. The grandest feature in this game so far that separates it from other mmos is The Champion System, and yet that even has things wrong with it. I want Spellcrafting so bad, but even then there will probably be issues with that system as well.

A common struggle in this game is balance. Start combining layers onto the existing foundation and it will make matters even worse. That is why ZoS is so hesitant about bringing spellcrafting sooner rather than later and that is why they keep altering the rule sets of the Champion System.

The only thing worse than a grandiose idea, is a grandiose idea that turns into a mediocre implementation.

I have never in my history of mmo gaming read a majority wish for PvP and PvE to exist in one world. Unless the game was created towards PvP centric first. Here it PvE oriented with an option to PvP in a consensual area. The one area they mixed it up in Imperial City has drawn major flack from PvErs.

Not knocking your hope and beliefs. Just saying it won't work in this game.

STEVIL · July 2016

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

im more of a 90% PVEer and 10% PVPer, and i thought the original PVP justice system was going to be fun- full disclosure i wanted to be a guard not a thief/murderer.. well maybe i would at some point, be a murdering thief, after having to put up with the gold/silver questlines, but thats way down the road. i pretty well have given up on the PVP side of the system, because i think ZoS is too lazy to implement it, but i think its more irritating that the assumption is that some large number of PVEers don't want the PVP portion of the justice system to be implemented. i wanted it; i don't get it; and it won't change.

the trend with these posts, is that there are set PVEers that comment about not "ruining their PVE" with PVP; they don't bend, nor work with those for the PVP portion that got scraped, and those for the PVP portion try to work with the PVEers to no avail. so im pretty annoyed with the idea of being lumped in with "those" PVEers... i just play the game, for the game, in all aspects.
among the other suggestions, making it opt-in/out could even be region (zone) based bounties- get a bounty in one zone that turns on PVP, then just go to the next zone where your bounty is 0, turning off PVP; rinse and repeat. i dont really understand why the bounty would be universal anyways, unless you really rack up the bounty to an extreme amount, that would produce a large reputation anyways. either you can make it a VERY large (and i stress VERY large) bounty amount in any zone, or just tie it to the number of zones, or both, before universal PVP is turned on- in other words you have to work pretty hard to obtain the title of "reputed bandit" before you really have major concerns for full blown PVP, which could please PVPers that rather play a highwaymen/highwaylady for the PVP/RP reasons. this could keep PVE players from PVPing by racking up a PVP bounty, as the system can be manipulated (not exploited mind you), so that if the PVP turns on at 5k gold, then build a 4999 gold or less bounty then move to the next region(zone), and you won't have to worry about PVPing. your primary concern will still only be guards.

also, why can't they just add a "yield" option... if you don't want to PVP, then yield, and the player is just treated like a guard- you pay your bounty, and lose your stolen goods. don't want to lose your stuff, don't get caught. don't want to PVP? then just yield.

another point... don't steal from high population areas. rob and murder from low population area's and reduce the risk, of pvp. i do this already, when i get the itch to steal.
i see issues with the thieves guild and dark brotherhood DLCs. there are 2 ways to go about it:

1)leave it as is, and don't allow PVP

2)add a PVP overlay, in conjunction with a no-PVP, which the player is allowed to choose between.

with regards to the PVE quests that specifically requires illegal acts, just remove the bounty portion/illegal act from those quests- in other words, picking a lock for the storyline quest is not an illegal act. then again, if you have to acquire X-amount of gold before PVP is triggered, it will be high enough, that it will do little to nothing to trigger PVP and you will still only have to worry about guards
.

I dont agree so much with your trend assessment. There are quite a few in the pve not pvp crowd who say its ok for a totally consensual version of the PVP intrusion into justice. But then we hit a brick wall much of the time because a total opt-out is unacceptable. There is an inflexible segment that views allowing pve to not get sucked into pvp as a non-started, wont be accepted into etc etc etc.

The immediate response of many pve players involved here is to say NO NO HECK NO because at almost every point in the past these threads have been similarly against an opt-out for pvp. Both current proposals the Op ans tipsy are not allowing a full opt-out option and when PVE flee was put forth as being right beside PVP flee not taken away... that somehow wasn't accepted though the pvp-on-pve not competitive duels well thats was just fine.

On the other hand, many on either side are fine with adding more to the current existing justice activites content.

Second, the yeild button - thats been in the OP kost of the time. They basically want to have the normal dialog with guard kind of replaced at one point with a similar accost for pcs where you get a PVP flee replacing the PVE flee - emphasis REPLACING not adding alongside.

This is what i call the PVP-RANSOM-TAKEOVER because it TAKESOVER an existing PVE flee option and while it gives you a choice to PVP or not, it puts a pricetag on saying "no" which often seems to be dismissed as a little gold for the bounty but when honest about it its the gold and the stolen the loot you carry. which can be quite a bit. This takes the decision of "do i pvp or not" out of just a preference so like minded folks can go either way to a PVP-or-ELSE ransom where the PVE player is given a choice between two negatives in losing a bunch of stuff or doing content he doesn't want.

It sounds to me like its not enough to just let people choose but instead gotta get something extorted out of them if they refuse. Could have called it mugging, stick-up or whatever... but ransom seems ok too.

Funny thing is... i recall a thread months ago.

Some guy went into cyrodil chasing pve quests. Call Abel.
Some other guy, call him Cain, caught him near the PVE choke point and killed him. Abel didnt even fight back.
Respawn come back to do the... Cain kills again. Again abel doesn't fight back. tries to get the point "not here to pvp"
lather-rinse repeat several times. same results.
So next time from a ways off Abel asks what can i do to get you to stop or something like that.
Cain says hmmm... gimme 10k gold.

So abel got upset and posted do we want to encourage extortion like this....

While the thread was divided on the topic, as one might expect some common themes carried the day:
First Abel shouldn't be griping over getting killed in pvp zone no matter how much.
Second Abel shouldn't have opened the dialog because that opened the door for the extortion offer OR the other guy shouldn't have made an offer to stop for gold - divided about 50/50.

So the baffling part to me and i posted it to that thread as for one reason i wont ever understand pvp-think is the idea that the guy who was intentionally thwarting the other guy from getting his stuff done was ok fine business as usual BUT the fact that they started a dialog about reaching a different agreement than "one lives one dies" was almost universally deemed the error in the piece, whether you thought cain or abel was at fault.

Just an odd anecdote. Sometimes elements of this thread bring it back to me.

-first the problem was ZOS releasing a PVP system, without the PVP portion. the justice system was NOT a PVE system, from conception. thus, no there isn't SUPPOSED to be a full opt-out. again, i doubt zos will release the PVP portion, but i simply don't want to be lumped in with the PVE crowd that doesn't move.

-im full for a "yield" feature, specifically for the fact that you have the risk of a player finding you, and you lose your loot. you will also then lose the bounty so there is no spawn camping. again, with the spirt of the system from birth was to be a PVP system, that really ends up being tough cookies. it is not ransom when an NPC forces the loss of items and bounty; nor is it when it is initiated by player contact. keep in mind, choosing to flee, doesn't require you to fight, you can flee. on top of that, you got to keep in mind people aren't going to be in one focused spot all of the time. also, in a PVE zone, you have quest layers pure pvpers don't have, since they likely havent finished the PVE content. which increases the likelihood of success to the PVE player. not to mention that since i AM a PVEer, in order to effectively attack another player, i would have to first swtich my skills (both bars), then put on a tabard to activate guard enabled PVP. that takes enough time that i would not even bother with it a lot of the time.

your cain and abel example is completely moot... no bounty = no pvp. using cyrodiil as an example is using phalanx combat environment in an urban-fighting setting . those are completely different styles, and might as well compare boxing to jujitsu... if you surrender you lose the bounty, PVP turns off and you lose your loot; flee and get away then you get to keep it, along with the bounty- no fighting required. having intractable objects would be required, to ensure the criminal has an adequate means of stealth options- in other words, it is to the criminal's advantage to NOT PVP, and instead use stealth, subterfuge, and good choice of locations to ransack (see note below). using my example, if you get away then you know to head to the next 0 bounty zone, until the heat is off (pvp flag is off).

NOTE: there are big parts of this system regarding rewards that would need to be addressed, as i see it has an increase risk to the thief/murderer. i lean towards there needing to be a slight reward advantage to the thief/murderer as they are at the disadvantage. there is more, but due to a lack of ambition of ZOS regarding the PVP portion of the system, im just not going to spend the time hashing it out.

First off unless you think the penalty for failing to pickpocket a npc was supposed to be pvp deathmatch, then its odd to insist justice suystem was never meant to be pve. Its just making no sense there. Why build an entire consequence for pve actions that would have no pve enforcement and rely on pvp playyers happening to be there? That is unbelievable. Me i believe the justice system based on what was said and done was intended to be like ic a fusion of pve and pvp but as the development went on they realized it did not design out well enough to serve both crowds.

Secondly pve guards for pve actions is not ransom, because you slready are in pve... get it? Not being taken out of ehat you agreed to play. Pvp or lose stuff is ransom because its pay or pvp, pay or get taken out of the game you were playing and into another.

As you note in your closer, those are completely different styles. But hey pay up or else.

Why cant some pvp players be satisfied with getting to pvp with like minded folks who like the same thing and chose it willingly and not at the threat of losing stuff? Why do they need a coercive mechanic to find preferable playmates for less competitive duels?

Not sure.

ahstin2001nub18_ESO · July 2016

Kalifas wrote: »

Tipsy wrote: »

@Kalifas
Both pvp and pve provide a manner of acting and existing in a virtual world,they are a part/aspects of the same game.
The only difference really is that you fight computer controlled enemies in PVE and other players in pvp.

You forget that basketball is a game with different structure,strict rules/setup ,and this game is an mmo with a more or less open world
so players are supposed to move freely through this virtual world with the freedom in regards to how or when to approach objectives

Hmmm thinking about this,we aren't really free to travel through the virtual world as cyrodiil is mostly off limits for pve-only players
And there is nothing to look for for pvp-only players outside of cyrodiil.
Next to freedom in regards to how or when we approach objectives,we need different manners of acting and existing in this virtual world to suite all flavors.
Thats why it is so imperative to feature pvp and pve in all areas of the game & why they need to exist next to each other.
So all players have something to enjoy in all areas of the game.

Perhaps mmo's of past decades have been too protective for pve players and now they are all used to living inside that little bubble,pretending they are all special snowflake demi gods..
And the often rude,abusive pvp griefers in other games might have caused to drift them apart even further.
To me its all flavor and I believe both deserve to act & exist as they want

Its not that the 2 modes do not belong together(and there are many other styles;Like SINGLE player with online co op)..But poor implementation in mmo's has gotten us in this situation.
I believe that One Tamriel could prove you wrong & show how the two together actually bring more flavor to the table for everyone.Well I made some suggestions(which are already burried in the topic and won't keep repeating myself here)
And i'm open to discuss suggestions.But not keep going back and forth about the same thing.

If no mmorpg to date has really gotten open world type PvP to be implemented properly except maybe DaoC, I don't think ESO would get it perfect seeing as they can't get performance good in a PvP only area Cyrodil. The grandest feature in this game so far that separates it from other mmos is The Champion System, and yet that even has things wrong with it. I want Spellcrafting so bad, but even then there will probably be issues with that system as well.

A common struggle in this game is balance. Start combining layers onto the existing foundation and it will make matters even worse. That is why ZoS is so hesitant about bringing spellcrafting sooner rather than later and that is why they keep altering the rule sets of the Champion System.

The only thing worse than a grandiose idea, is a grandiose idea that turns into a mediocre implementation.

I have never in my history of mmo gaming read a majority wish for PvP and PvE to exist in one world. Unless the game was created towards PvP centric first. Here it PvE oriented with an option to PvP in a consensual area. The one area they mixed it up in Imperial City has drawn major flack from PvErs.

Not knocking your hope and beliefs. Just saying it won't work in this game.

this game was originally touted as a PVP heavy game, though not quite what i would call a central theme. i almost had nothing to do with the game specifically because of how heavy the PVP was talked about.

that being said, they have the options for a decent world PVP in the ESO game environment via the justice system. it could reward solo players using evade-and-escape tactics, to player made raids on cities, with the one tamrial coming and the battle leveling. if they implemented a reasonable bounty prior to activating criminal-PVP, it would force a solo player to make the decisions to risk capture via a player and killing guards, or evading guards to avoid capture by the player. guilds could potentially establish raids to take "heroes" of each faction for a reward, etc. thieft rewards "x"; murder rewards "y"; stopping vagabonds rewards "z". it MAY alleviate some of the issues in cyrodiil as well, by lightening the load since fewer players may be there for the PVP, but that could be speculation, since i really never had issues when i did do some PVP there.

and of course quest specific NPCs would have to have some form of protection....

but you know... ZoS....

Thevampirenight · July 2016

I do think they need to add more to the justice system. For one they have to make it so each faction has there own bounty. Or give each zone its own bounty. They should add a lot of randam npcs in the streets or on the roads, that can be hunted for enforce quests. Once a day, a player would be able to attack another player. If they have a bounty, they will get all if its a small bounty but have to get only 75 precent if its a very high bounty.

Once you killed the player you can't attack another player. For a day. Then you can take the quest again. This is one way they could balance it. So basically it would not be abused by those who obviously would. If you killed a player your then done till the next day. Also they can make enforcer quests not all about hunting criminals but also saving folks. From bandits, vampires, werewolves, werebears, you name it. This could greatly expand the justice system.

I would like a prison jail sytem. Basically you laydown in the bed, or have to do gather ore quest which would not be too long, and the game will pretend time has past. Then your out again, but also they could add a lot of social areas, joint cells, that can be accessible for rp. Each zone would have its own jail. Or Dungeon, each with differant layouts and cool features.

Tipsy · July 2016

Kalifas wrote: »

The only thing worse than a grandiose idea, is a grandiose idea that turns into a mediocre implementation.
I have never in my history of mmo gaming read a majority wish for PvP and PvE to exist in one world. Unless the game was created towards PvP centric first. Here it PvE oriented with an option to PvP in a consensual area. The one area they mixed it up in Imperial City has drawn major flack from PvErs.
Not knocking your hope and beliefs. Just saying it won't work in this game.

Do you have so little faith in the way they implement things,when you know how far the game has come?
Balance is always an ongoing process.An mmo changes over the years & I believe with the way it is going with One Tamriel where all players of any alliance play together ,its for the better.
"It just won't work" is easy to say,but try to look at the bigger picture.

Niastissa wrote: »

if you actually read my proposal here
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/3190009/#Comment_3190009
you'd know it would be near impossible to gank fugitives,as they only stay visible on the map for one minute if a bounty hunter is able to tag them.
So groups can't plan to gank up on one player.Its more like a cat & mouse game.
And for fugitives who choose the option to surrender if caught a group of agents will arrest them if a bounty hunter tags them and they are unable to go unnoticed.
Only the ones that choose to "resist all" are the more lucrative targets for bounty hunters.

ahstin2001nub18_ESO wrote: »

this game was originally touted as a PVP heavy game
they have the options for a decent world PVP in the ESO game environment via the justice system. it could reward solo players using evade-and-escape tactics, to player made raids on cities,
with the one tamrial coming and the battle leveling. if they implemented a reasonable bounty prior to activating criminal-PVP,
it would force a solo player to make the decisions to risk capture via a player and killing guards, or evading guards to avoid capture by the player.
guilds could potentially establish raids to take "heroes" of each faction for a reward, etc. thieft rewards "x"; murder rewards "y"; stopping vagabonds rewards "z".
it MAY alleviate some of the issues in cyrodiil as well, by lightening the load since fewer players may be there for the PVP, but that could be speculation, since i really never had issues when i did do some PVP there.
and of course quest specific NPCs would have to have some form of protection....

I'm so glad you're here too.And I've put one important part bold to make it more clear that it would just be a decision/option to risk capture via a players and guards.
Players have the option to avoid capture by the player.
Yes ,I believe PvP and PvE can exist in one world perfectly too.
As both pvp and pve provide different flavor & a manor of acting and existing in a virtual world,we need both because we need more freedom in how we play and approach ingame objectives.
I agree that a decent world pvp needs an ingame backbone,to enrich eso's game environment.Expanding the justice system surely is the ticket to do it.
I've been thinking that it might alleviate some of the cyrodiil issues too,lightening the load of concentrated players since it makes any region viable for both pve and pvp

Also with my topic about content packs for organizing guild events (link in signature)
I think about how to make all regions more viable & to give any kind of player more reason to spend time there.
So that is my true concern @Niastissa

[edit to remove quote]

ScottK1994 · July 2016

Lol bouncers in cities walking around daring newbies to steal infront of them..

Tipsy · July 2016

since the other justice levels would still be in place they can steal and all without "risking" pvp.
Its when they decide to push boundaries and go over to the new justice level "wanted" that they are arrestable by agents/bounty hunters.

STEVIL · July 2016

Tipsy wrote: »

since the other justice levels would still be in place they can steal and all without "risking" pvp.
Its when they decide to push boundaries and go over to the new justice level "wanted" that they are arrestable by agents/bounty hunters.

ince the other justice levels would still be in place they can steal and all without "risking" pvp.
Its when they decide to push boundaries and go over to the new justice level "wanted" contiue with those pve activities others dont like that they are arrestable by agents/bounty hunters.

Really, @Tipsy, just because you take an existing PVE range of activities and give them a new label, that doesn't chaneg at all the fact that you are doing a takeover of pve activities to make them into pvp activities (or pvp enabling activities.) This is really no different than removing PVE flee and replacing it with PVP flee, just a different set pf pve activities being swapped out for pvp. Its the same grab, just to a dfferent pocket (run from guards vs high bounty ) and still a no opt-out policy, which is the point of course.

If i label mudcrabs as an endangered species because i really like mudcrabs and put a new justice level called "ESA Violator PVP" I have still done a PVP-takeover olf PVE actions even though i just gave it a new and shiny PVP exclusive label.

If i wrote in content which said "i dont like seeing people in PVP in cryodil and elsewhere just staying in stealth to ambush people, and i wrote new content called "Shadows of Fear" which said "if you sta in stealth for 15s or more in a pvp zone you sucked into maelstrom level and have to stay there until you beat 2-4 levels" I bet any pvpers would not see that as "well, if i stay in stealth i am opting in so its fair." but would instead see a takeover of pvp activities into pve consequewnces, even though i gave it a new label and its predicated on what i decided was excessive levels of use.

Dubhliam · July 2016

Added a few changes, also renamed the thread to include "now with opt-out":

July 21
- added this line in the Introduction section:

Opted-in players will be referred as Outlaws (or Outlaw Criminals), while opted-out players will be referred as Criminals.

- changed this line in the General section:

Guards are no longer immortal, but and Enforcers cannot be attacked unless getting attacked by them.
PlayersOutlaw Criminals now gain an additional option in the "pay bounty" dialogue: Go to Court.

- added this line in the General section:

Every other patrolling Guard comes with a Hound and they share aggro. Hounds chase players without resetting, but are killable. Hounds can also swim, and attack players in deep water.

- added these lines in the Heat levels section:

Hounds can "sniff out" Notorious Criminals from greater distances (they have a larger detection radius than Guards). They trigger the "pay bounty", but their accompanied Guard provides the dialogue.
Whenever a Fugitive Criminal gains a bounty, there is a chance that a Guard accompanied by two Hounds will be spawned and engage the Criminal. The chance is proportional to the heat (higher heat will have a higher chance).
Outlaw Criminals will no longer be marked as "attack on sight" while having the Fugitive status.

- changed these lines in the Heat levels section:

The highest heat level- Wanted can be only triggered by Outlaw Criminals, by choosing the "Flee dialogue" when accosted by a Guard or Enforcer while having a bounty. This does not apply in Trespassing areasOutlaw Prison, which is the only Trespassing area accessible by Enforcers - where Outlaws are constantly marked as Wanted.
If the Criminal is an Outlaw, the Flee option clearly indicates youhe or she will be flagged for PvP.
If the Criminal Awareness passive is maxed, Enforcers can see the exact location of a Wanted Outlaw on the map indicated by an Outlaw icon. If the Wanted enters stealth, the icon reverts into a circle on the map on the last non-stealthed location for 30 seconds.

- added another section just below Becoming an Enforcer section called "Becoming an Outlaw":

Criminals can toggle the Outlaw status by interacting with a Fence. This toggle can happen once every 20 hours. Outlaws are "opted-in" for PvP Justice. Pirharri the Smuggler assistant cannot be used to toggle this status.
Wanted Outlaws are able to damage and kill Guards.
Outlaws have the option to go to Court while being accosted, and may also choose to enter Veteran Heists or Sacraments.

- changed these lines in the Iron Wheel skill line section:

A single target skill with range 15 meters, castable on playersOutlaws with bounties for 2500 magicka.
When cast on a Disreputable or Notorious playerOutlaw, forces the "Pay bounty" dialog.
When cast on a Wanted playerOutlaw, reduces the player's Movement Speed by 30% for 12 seconds.

- changed these lines in the Veteran Heists and Sacraments section:

Outlaws can now do TG and DB daily quests can now be done in either Veteran or normal modes. The mode is chosen while interacting with the quest giver.
Veteran Heists and Sacraments can only be entered by a single playerOutlaw, not by groups and not by regular Criminals.

- changed these lines in the Outlaw prison section:

By choosing the "Go to Court" option in the "pay bounty" dialogue instead of paying or fleeing, playersOutlaws are now transferred to an instanced dungeon called Prison. Before being transferred to their cells, players are presented to the Court, where the player is given an one-time option to fight for freedom in the Arena*. Winning a duel will clear that player's bounty without the gold penalty and transfer him/her out of Prison. Losing has no additional penalty.
Outlaws are automatically grouped upon entering, without the ability to leave group or disband.
When the heat and bounty of a playerand Outlaw wears off, a portal is spawned inside the cell that takes the player out of Prison. The portal is not visible to and interactable by other players.
Getting seen by a Guard or Enforcer while inside the Prison automatically locks your cell door permanently.
Inside each cell there is exactly 1 stolen lockpick that can be found to pick the cell lock with. Taking the lockpick starts the shareable "Prison Break" quest. Players that open their cell doors may also go and pick the doors of other locked players, but cannot enter cells other than their own.
The area outside the cell room is marked as Trespassing to Outlaws, marking them constantly as Wanted. This is the only Trespassing area Enforcers are able to visit, and Trespassing does not apply to them.
Leaving the room with the cells automatically starts a visible dungeon timer that is shared among all Outlaws that leave the cell room. Getting noticed outside the cell room by a Guard or Enforcer subtracts 1 minute from the timer. After the time expires, the instance goes to High Alert and On-Duty Enforcers get a queue notification to enter that instance.
Players may only be resurrected by other Outlaws while a Miniboss or Boss fight is ongoing, and there in no "wayshrine respawn point" if the group wipes.

- changed and added these lines in the TL;DR section:

The Justice System remains mainly intact as long as the Outlaw has no bounty. Other PCs cannot interact with or spot Outlaw crimes.
Players have an option to mark themselves as "Outlaws", opting them in for participation in PvP Justice activities. Regular Criminals are opted out.
Only By choosing the "flee" option in the "pay bounty dialogue" can Outlaws can get marked for PvP fights, and that mark is disabled when the Heat (not bounty) is depleted.
Other notable additions are [s[mortal Guards[/s]Hounds (mortal Guard companions), new- PvP mode for Heists and Sacraments, the new Prison instance and a law enforcer storyline.

NeillMcAttack · July 2016

It's too much effort taking all the ridiculous quotes out, with the awfully telling assumptions about the kind of players PvPr's are. So since you are all claiming the same thing i will address them together.

You know, there are actually players out there that would enjoy beating up on lower levels and the under-prepared. I have even met them whilst leveling toons in the Cyrodiil towns. Did it *** me off getting killed by them and losing time on my Ambrosia? It sure did. But do I assume that every, or even a significant amount, of "PvP'rs" are are of this nature. Hardly, that would sound ridiculous. Probably about as ridiculous as claiming that, because a "PvE'r" removed a player from a dungeon for too low DPS, that all PvE'rs are elitist *** bags. Less than 0.1% would fall into these categories.

So just know that these assumptions on what kinds of players "PvP'rs" are will be met with silence due it being the laziest and most immature argument one could make.

Now, to perhaps add to the discussion.

I am not asking to be able to "PvP on PvE'rs". Like, when did anyone ask that people aren't aware of the consequences of the actions they are taking? I am asking to enhance a game system in a way I feel adds tons of depth, excitement, and new avenues of exploration, as ZoS had originally hoped it would.

Dubhliam · July 2016

@Niastissa ,you have been very actively defending the anti-PvP Justice in the last few pages of this thread, but I feel as if your post fail to hit the mark since they have little to do with the concept provided in the original posts.
This is not just another general "I want X" thread.
I urge you to read the full concept before commenting, since most of your concerns are already addressed in the concept.

@Tipsy , your reply did not quite provide the answers I was looking for.
My understanding is that, in your suggestion, every player would have alliance specific bounties. Meaning if I was to gain a bounty in AD, I could simply go to EP zones to avoid AD Enforcers, because I would not have a bounty in EP. Then if I get a bounty in EP, I could then go to DC zones to avoid both AD and EP Enforcers.
Edited, I have now re-read your answer, and I see AD bounties can be collected anywhere, but only by AD Enforcers. This would, in effect, mean that a player can have at least three separate bounties on his head at any time.
This still leaves one question that I have an issue with:
If that is true, then my question is: what happens to those alliance specific bounties when I go to Craglorn? Who can collect it? And which bounty gets increased when I get a bounty in Craglorn?
Also, what happens when a player has AD and DC alliance bounties on his head, and a DC and and AD Enforcers engage him at the same time? The AD Enforcer might have accosted him right before the DC one, and the Outlaw decides to Flee, triggering PvP and raising the AD bounty and heat to Wanted (PvP), does that mean that the DC Enforcer can now also kill on sight, without the DC bounty actually increasing?
As I mentioned before, if getting a bounty inside a neutral zone would mean that bounty can be collected by ALL Enforcers, instead of just one alliance, then it puts all neutral zones (including DLCs) at a disadvantage.

Niastissa · July 2016

Dubhliam wrote: »

@Niastissa ,you have been very actively defending the anti-PvP Justice in the last few pages of this thread, but I feel as if your post fail to hit the mark since they have little to do with the concept provided in the original posts.
This is not just another general "I want X" thread.
I urge you to read the full concept before commenting, since most of your concerns are already addressed in the concept.

@Tipsy , your reply did not quite provide the answers I was looking for.
My understanding is that, in your suggestion, every player would have alliance specific bounties. Meaning if I was to gain a bounty in AD, I could simply go to EP zones to avoid AD Enforcers, because I would not have a bounty in EP. Then if I get a bounty in EP, I could then go to DC zones to avoid both AD and EP Enforcers.
If that is true, then my question is: what happens to those alliance specific bounties when I go to Craglorn? Who can collect it? And which bounty gets increased when I get a bounty in Craglorn?

I don't need to go back and read the first posts. I don't want this PVP crammed down my throat period. If the PVP is 100% opt out even while I continue to play the PVE aspects the exact same way as I do now then fine. However the moment I get flagged for PVP for any PVE action I quit.

I decide when I want to PVP. No one else makes that decision for me.

Samuel_Bantien · July 2016

Niastissa wrote: »

This is also Roleplay Content (and a ton of it in OP's first post) if you care to bash Roleplayers. As the OP has stated that there will be an Opt-Out system so no one is forcing or wedging anything down your throat (Nothing will flag you for PvP unless YOU flag yourself). You can't judge a book by its cover - the title of the post vs the OP's first posts. Please read it before you make any quick assumptions.

[edited to remove quote]

Niastissa · July 2016

Samuel_Bantien wrote: »

This is also Roleplay Content (and a ton of it in OP's first post) if you care to bash Roleplayers. As the OP has stated that there will be an Opt-Out system so no one is forcing or wedging anything down your throat (Nothing will flag you for PvP unless YOU flag yourself). You can't judge a book by its cover - the title of the post vs the OP's first posts. Please read it before you make any quick assumptions.

[snip]

This is about people wanting to force open world PVP. These sorts of unwanted changes come first in the form of little things and they demand people be reasonable. Then once they get their way they push for more and more until they have what they want which in this case is a gank fest open world with PVP in every zone. No thanks.

The Justice system incorporated with PVP is not as you describe. How is it opt out? So opting out is no longer being able to do Dark Brotherhood and Thiefs Guild quests without fear of getting killed by a person who has better gear and more champion points while you are trying to quest?

Again sir, thank you but no thanks.

[edited to remove snipe]

I_killed_Vivec · July 2016

A couple of questions...

PvP justice depends on the idea of "goodies" and "baddies" - the goodies are enforcers, the baddies are thieves/murderers.

In Cyrodiil we already have a similar idea of "baddies" - gankers (mainly waiting for unsuspecting PvEers). How come all those crying out for an enforcing role aren't being the "goodies" in Cyrodiil - clearing out the gankers?

Could it be that most PvPers aren't that interested in going one-on-one against a ganker?

Secondly...

How many PvPers would take an active role in PvP Justice? How many would be enforcers? Tamriel is a big place, I can see enforcers hanging out in the major towns waiting to jump on criminals... while the criminals are running round the countryside, going on gleeful robbing sprees!

And if enforcers and criminals do reach a critical mass in Tamriel, then Cyrodiil is going to be empty!

Or maybe not... it might be full of PvEers looking for a bit of piece and quiet

Divinius · July 2016

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I am not asking to be able to "PvP on PvE'rs". Like, when did anyone ask that people aren't aware of the consequences of the actions they are taking?

And this, right here, is where the whole thing falls apart. There's a world of difference between "being aware of the consequences" and "consenting to them".

Everyone in favor of PvP being added to Justice is running under the assumption that, "as long as the PvE player is aware of the PvP consequences, then he is by definition also consenting to them should he follow through on the PvE actions that will cause him to be flagged."

That's BS right there. I don't want to PvP. I do want to PvE, and do the quests associated with the PvE DLCs that I have access to.

I'm trying to do a TG quest -- the board quests where you have to pickpocket 10 items -- to raise my TG rank. This is a completely PvE activity. I don't want to PvP at all. But with this system in place, I know (am "aware") that if I have to flee from a guard, I'm going to get my face handed to me by a PvP Enforcer. So I'm therefore making sure to only pickpocket people where I have a 100% chance (something I wouldn't bother with if I knew I would only have to escape an NPC guard if caught). I'm on my last one, it goes to 95%. I don't notice, make the attempt, fail, get a bounty, and a guard sees me.

Guard accosts me, I don't want to lost the 9 things I already stole and have to start over from scratch, so I choose to flee. My heat goes up, and I get face-stomped by the PvP Enforcer right next to the guard, who was watching me and waiting for his chance to gank me. Game over, and I start the quest from scratch.

So I was aware of the consequences of this new system, even if I didn't consent to it. I make one small slip-up, and I lose the whole thing to a PvP player that was only there because he wanted to gank a PvE player, where I very likely could have escaped the NPC guard.

I'm "aware" of the possibility of getting ganked in Cyrodiil while trying to do PvE stuff there. So, because I don't want to "consent" to that PvP, I have to avoid doing any of the PvE stuff in Cyrodiil. That's been that way since the game was released, so I've accepted that. Now PvP players want to force me to "consent" to the possibility (read: likelihood) of getting PvP-stomped for doing other PvE quests (namely, just about everything in the TG and DB DLCs) throughout the rest of the game.

The choice I've been given is to be forced to "consent" to PvP, or to be forced to avoid all TG and DB content, which I've already paid for.

And yet, the PvPers still don't see why this is wrong...

EDIT:
I realize that @Dubhliam is working on (and has apparently added) a complete opt-out toggle for his proposed system, and I very much appreciate that. My example above was using the old system, to illustrate to people that don't get it, why the new opt-out system is necessary.

hingarthuub17_ESO · July 2016

I'm absolutely amazed that this puerile vomitus has gone on for 13 pages.

TL;DR

PvP'er: I want to gank PvE'ers because...reasons.
PvE'er. No non-consensual PvP for me, tyvm.

Step away from the keyboard, go outside, and enjoy the outdoors.

Divinius · July 2016

hingarthuub17_ESO wrote: »

I'm absolutely amazed that this puerile vomitus has gone on for 13 pages.

TL;DR

PvP'er: I want to gank PvE'ers because...reasons.
PvE'er. No non-consensual PvP for me, tyvm.

Step away from the keyboard, go outside, and enjoy the outdoors.

Pretty much.

And I'd love to go outside, but I'm stuck at work.

Samuel_Bantien · July 2016

Niastissa wrote: »

This is about people wanting to force open world PVP. These sorts of unwanted changes come first in the form of little things and they demand people be reasonable. Then once they get their way they push for more and more until they have what they want which in this case is a gank fest open world with PVP in every zone. No thanks.

The Justice system incorporated with PVP is not as you describe. How is it opt out? So opting out is no longer being able to do Dark Brotherhood and Thiefs Guild quests without fear of getting killed by a person who has better gear and more champion points while you are trying to quest?

Again sir, thank you but no thanks.

[snip] If you read anything the OP stated, you have two different type of Outlaws: Outlaws that aren't Opted into PvP (this type is what you still don't understand) and the ones that are opted into PvP (Outlaw vs Enforcer). Now that we have this covered let me answer your other question.

Niastissa wrote: »

]The Justice system incorporated with PVP is not as you describe. How is it opt out? So opting out is no longer being able to do Dark Brotherhood and Thiefs Guild quests without fear of getting killed by a person who has better gear and more champion points while you are trying to quest?

Opting out means you do not flag yourself for PvP meaning other Players cannot kill you. Opting out also means you can still do the Darkbrotherhood and Thieves guild quests without fear of any player killing you. Think of it this way; the Original Concept for Enforcers was that you had to wear a tabard to be marked as an Enforcer so that you could hunt Outlaws; if the Enforcer does not have their Enforcer tabard equipped then they could no longer kill players.

Now we are talking about OP's concept; Outlaws are automatically opted out of the PvP justice system (No Outlaws vs Enforcer). You are required to talk to a specific NPC to Opt into the PvP justice system.

Now let me ask you a question: Why is this concept bad? You seem to be only saying no without a reason as to why you say no. Please give a suggestion or atleast explain why you are saying "No". Again, please read the OP before jumping to conclusions it makes yourself (and everyone that is doing the same) look childish and rude. The OP might look long but it is a ton of quick and easy to read bullet points.

If you read the OP and any of my explanations... You are automatically and completely Opted out (you actually have to run and speak to a specific NPC to Opt INTO the PvP portion of the Justice System (Outlaws vs Enforcer).

And what you said about pusing for more and more can be said to just about anything; more crafting opportunity, roleplaying opportunity, more Dungeons and Raids (PvE), Quests, Zones... Endgame, PvP, etc.

[edited to remove quote and reference to quote]

Dubhliam · July 2016

Forgot to add the "once per day" restriction, as @Tandor suggested:

- updated some changes:
[*] Criminals can toggle the Outlaw status by interacting with a Fence. This toggle can happen once every 20 hours. Outlaws are "opted-in" for PvP Justice. Pirharri the Smuggler assistant cannot be used to toggle this status.
[*] Guards and Enforcers cannot be attacked unless getting attacked by them.

These changes are now inside today's change log.

EDIT: for further clarification, changed this line:

Whenever a Fugitive Criminal gains a bounty, there is a chance that a Guard accompanied by two Hounds will be spawned and engage the Criminal. The chance is proportional to the heat (higher heat will have a higher chance). This cannot be triggered by Outlaws (opted-in players).

Niastissa · July 2016

Samuel_Bantien wrote: »

Niastissa wrote: »

Don't try to change the subject or twist my words.

This is about people wanting to force open world PVP. These sorts of unwanted changes come first in the form of little things and they demand people be reasonable. Then once they get their way they push for more and more until they have what they want which in this case is a gank fest open world with PVP in every zone. No thanks.

The Justice system incorporated with PVP is not as you describe. How is it opt out? So opting out is no longer being able to do Dark Brotherhood and Thiefs Guild quests without fear of getting killed by a person who has better gear and more champion points while you are trying to quest?

Again sir, thank you but no thanks.

First of all, it is rude to jump to the conclusion without reading what is being suggested by OP or me. I have not twisted your words, and I have read what you had to say. If you read anything the OP stated, you have two different type of Outlaws: Outlaws that aren't Opted into PvP (this type is what you still don't understand) and the ones that are opted into PvP (Outlaw vs Enforcer). Now that we have this covered let me answer your other question.

Niastissa wrote: »

]The Justice system incorporated with PVP is not as you describe. How is it opt out? So opting out is no longer being able to do Dark Brotherhood and Thiefs Guild quests without fear of getting killed by a person who has better gear and more champion points while you are trying to quest?

Opting out means you do not flag yourself for PvP meaning other Players cannot kill you. Opting out also means you can still do the Darkbrotherhood and Thieves guild quests without fear of any player killing you. Think of it this way; the Original Concept for Enforcers was that you had to wear a tabard to be marked as an Enforcer so that you could hunt Outlaws; if the Enforcer does not have their Enforcer tabard equipped then they could no longer kill players.

Now we are talking about OP's concept; Outlaws are automatically opted out of the PvP justice system (No Outlaws vs Enforcer). You are required to talk to a specific NPC to Opt into the PvP justice system.

Now let me ask you a question: Why is this concept bad? You seem to be only saying no without a reason as to why you say no. Please give a suggestion or atleast explain why you are saying "No". Again, please read the OP before jumping to conclusions it makes yourself (and everyone that is doing the same) look childish and rude. The OP might look long but it is a ton of quick and easy to read bullet points.

Niastissa wrote: »

Because I know for a fact that if you get a little bit you will push for more and more.

No PVP in PVE zones, period without a complete opt out and still be able to do all of the content in the PVE zones while opted out.

If you read the OP and any of my explanations... You are automatically and completely Opted out (you actually have to run and speak to a specific NPC to Opt INTO the PvP portion of the Justice System (Outlaws vs Enforcer).

And what you said about pusing for more and more can be said to just about anything; more crafting opportunity, roleplaying opportunity, more Dungeons and Raids (PvE), Quests, Zones... Endgame, PvP, etc.

The justice system is mingled with the thiefs guild and dark brotherhood. What is proposed still requires PVP to do PVE content. Not interested.

I'm not even interested in saturating the developers time with this feature that most people will leave disabled. I'd rather them fix the issues on the consoles, audio on the Mac and get more PVE content out.

Samuel_Bantien · July 2016

Niastissa wrote: »

The justice system is mingled with the thiefs guild and dark brotherhood. What is proposed still requires PVP to do PVE content. Not interested.

I'm not even interested in saturating the developers time with this feature that most people will leave disabled. I'd rather them fix the issues on the consoles, audio on the Mac and get more PVE content out.

Interesting statement. Where did you read that the Theives Guild and Dark Brotherhood require PvP to do PvE content? The Devs would have to redo those entire DLCs and refund everyones crowns for that. This is why the PvP concept is completely optional.

Stop jumping to conclusions it's bad for you. I'm all up for core fixes and PvE content, but like you said:

Niastissa wrote: »

Because I know for a fact that if you get a little bit you will push for more and more.

No PVP in PVE zones, period without a complete opt out and still be able to do all of the content in the PVE zones while opted out.

You contradicted both sentences in one whole post... [snip]
Having a considerate conversation or debate is hard if the other party ignores everything the other says. This isn't politics, please explain why we should or should not have a completely Optional PvP portion added to the Justice System.

[edited for baiting]