Who else likes the idea of players able to attack anyone attacking an npc?

sirston · November 2016

*sigh* people wanting an easy pve when there skyrim for $9

AzuraKin · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

I think the there should be more consequences but also incentive to attack an opposing city or defending your home city/lands,

I think something like this would be interesting. It'd have to be limited to a timeframe right after the deed. And perhaps only after a certain level of bounty. However I think they should tone down the guards to normal elite status if they do this. Since you'd have droves of player 'guards' on standby.

As for incentives.. the players who participate in taking down the wanted criminal get an equal share of the bounty. Since this is taken directly from the criminal, there's no way to glitch the system to produce gold. For example if someone's bounty is 2000, they have 1000 gold, and 4 people help take him down. Each gets 250 (not 500). And then the target moves to a level where he's not attackable (prevent camping).

Making it to an area with fences makes the target unattackable.

it would be cool seeing raids of people fighting each other over this.

Unfortunately this level of PVP doesn't happen in MMORPGs anymore. It was a cultural-social shift among the gaming community around 2006 that changed.

sure only if we also get a skill line that gives a summon tank dragonknight guard, summon magicka sorcerer dps guard, summon stamina nightblade dps guard, and summon healer templar guards.

Darethran · November 2016

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

Works fine in a game designed for that. This game would require an opt out and would mostly render the idea moot. Devs have made this clear that it will not happen as described in the OP and likely not at all.

It would be horrible for this game since it was not designed or billed as such.

This game's open world, with the entire story hinging around war between the alliances.

Make the non-Cyrodiil PvP opt-in, and everybody's happy; PvE players won't be affected, and people who want to fight in something other than hilly forestland will be able to take part in a kickass part of the game.

NewBlacksmurf · November 2016

Only if PvP was it's own server. Think of it as NA and eu but where you can log the same char in NA-PvP or NA-normal (no PvP)

Valethar · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Haha shadowbane anyone? I just think the justice system is very one sided.

Shadowbane was, at it's heart, a PvP game. There were no quests, missions, etc.. that required PvE. In fact, you could easily level to cap without ever having to kill an NPC/Mob of any sort.

You're comparing apples and oranges here.

bebynnag · November 2016

as part of the justice system its a no for me

but then someone mentioned sieging the cities.....
I have now fallen in love with the idea of having city seiges but only as an event (maybe annually on the anniversary of the games release),
1 week of pure carnage in the capital cities, you can defend your capital or attack anothers.
a limited number of siege weapons will be pre set in tactical locations

NB for the week when choosing to travel to any capital city you will be asked which instance you want to travel to War or Peace (so people who do not want to participate dont have to & can pick up their pledges/quests in peace)

DragonBound · November 2016

Valethar wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Haha shadowbane anyone? I just think the justice system is very one sided.

Shadowbane was, at it's heart, a PvP game. There were no quests, missions, etc.. that required PvE. In fact, you could easily level to cap without ever having to kill an NPC/Mob of any sort.

You're comparing apples and oranges here.

It was a reference to someone's comment I am not comparing anything at all, I am very aware of what shadowbane is and did not suggest anything on the scale of shadowbane why don't you relax?

Osteos · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

I think the there should be more consequences but also incentive to attack an opposing city or defending your home city/lands,

I think something like this would be interesting. It'd have to be limited to a timeframe right after the deed. And perhaps only after a certain level of bounty. However I think they should tone down the guards to normal elite status if they do this. Since you'd have droves of player 'guards' on standby.

As for incentives.. the players who participate in taking down the wanted criminal get an equal share of the bounty. Since this is taken directly from the criminal, there's no way to glitch the system to produce gold. For example if someone's bounty is 2000, they have 1000 gold, and 4 people help take him down. Each gets 250 (not 500). And then the target moves to a level where he's not attackable (prevent camping).

Making it to an area with fences makes the target unattackable.

it would be cool seeing raids of people fighting each other over this.

Unfortunately this level of PVP doesn't happen in MMORPGs anymore. It was a cultural-social shift among the gaming community around 2006 that changed.

Haha shadowbane anyone? I just think the justice system is very one sided.

That's easily fixed by balancing the penalty side of the equation. Making the PvE Justice System tougher so that crime doesn't pay so easily and adding PvP to the Justice System are two entirely different matters.

I've yet to see anyone who claims simply to be motivated by a desire to see the PvE Justice System toughened up a bit put forward a proposal for that, if they did so I've no doubt it would get a lot of support. Instead, all we see is an endless series of doomed proposals for open world PvP masquerading as an extension of the Justice System so that PvPers can gank PvEers who are ill-equipped in PvE areas to take on experienced PvPers who've got bored with Cyrodiil and Imperial City, and who are probably already bored with dueling, just as they'd soon be bored with playing Enforcers v Criminals.

Look I'm still new to the game its just a flaw I have noticed and was thinking of a creative way to make it different, also if someone proposed a way pve wise it would likely sound boring to people and most would be against it, I think adding the pvp thing is way more interesting and by the way I am mostly a pver I'm just being objective about it.

Its a touchy subject. Originally there was supposed to be a pvp part of the justice system along with more pve elements. They only released about 1/3 of what they intended. A lot of us want a more interactive justice system. What we have is rather lame and without consequence. Honestly, the Savior of Nirn should be able to save an npc from a thief or murderer, its just plain silly we can't. Mention it on the forums though and some people lose their minds.

zuto40 · November 2016

FoolishHuman wrote: »

Maybe the guards should then arrest duelers in cities for "disturbing the peace"?

id like to see the law against that, hmm whats this? cant find a single document banning dueling in a city in eso? shame, guess it has to stay

White wabbit · November 2016

IMO . Open PvP= Game dead

DragonBound · November 2016

Osteos wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

I think the there should be more consequences but also incentive to attack an opposing city or defending your home city/lands,

I think something like this would be interesting. It'd have to be limited to a timeframe right after the deed. And perhaps only after a certain level of bounty. However I think they should tone down the guards to normal elite status if they do this. Since you'd have droves of player 'guards' on standby.

As for incentives.. the players who participate in taking down the wanted criminal get an equal share of the bounty. Since this is taken directly from the criminal, there's no way to glitch the system to produce gold. For example if someone's bounty is 2000, they have 1000 gold, and 4 people help take him down. Each gets 250 (not 500). And then the target moves to a level where he's not attackable (prevent camping).

Making it to an area with fences makes the target unattackable.

it would be cool seeing raids of people fighting each other over this.

Unfortunately this level of PVP doesn't happen in MMORPGs anymore. It was a cultural-social shift among the gaming community around 2006 that changed.

Haha shadowbane anyone? I just think the justice system is very one sided.

That's easily fixed by balancing the penalty side of the equation. Making the PvE Justice System tougher so that crime doesn't pay so easily and adding PvP to the Justice System are two entirely different matters.

I've yet to see anyone who claims simply to be motivated by a desire to see the PvE Justice System toughened up a bit put forward a proposal for that, if they did so I've no doubt it would get a lot of support. Instead, all we see is an endless series of doomed proposals for open world PvP masquerading as an extension of the Justice System so that PvPers can gank PvEers who are ill-equipped in PvE areas to take on experienced PvPers who've got bored with Cyrodiil and Imperial City, and who are probably already bored with dueling, just as they'd soon be bored with playing Enforcers v Criminals.

Look I'm still new to the game its just a flaw I have noticed and was thinking of a creative way to make it different, also if someone proposed a way pve wise it would likely sound boring to people and most would be against it, I think adding the pvp thing is way more interesting and by the way I am mostly a pver I'm just being objective about it.

Its a touchy subject. Originally there was supposed to be a pvp part of the justice system along with more pve elements. They only released about 1/3 of what they intended. A lot of us want a more interactive justice system. What we have is rather lame and without consequence. Honestly, the Savior of Nirn should be able to save an npc from a thief or murderer, its just plain silly we can't. Mention it on the forums though and some people lose their minds.

Exactly, you took the words right from my mind.

Vipstaakki · November 2016

They just get sneakier with trying to force their PvP in our PvE, eh?
Your plot has failed.

DragonBound · November 2016

Vipstaakki wrote: »

They just get sneakier with trying to force their PvP in our PvE, eh?
Your plot has failed.

For crying outloud it is not forcing anyone can you people stop making assumptions and actually read my suggestion please? All it would do is give any player the option to attack the ones attacking the npcs, it may not be a great suggestion but regardless it is not forcing anyone, sounds to me you just want to kill npcs all day without any real consequence and that's why people are really being defensive. At least this way you can make sense of duels that are constantly happening since they added it, it wont likely be much different then what you are seeing now.

Agobi · November 2016

MajinCry wrote: »

With all of it's faults, Age Of Wulin did this right. http://www.ageofwushu.com/material/view/37

That MMO has open world PvP, where you can attack other players anywhere. The problem? Do that, and other players get to kill you for a monetary reward; there's a real incentive to slay criminals, and if you're a criminal, you get right buggered over.

The result? No chaos in the cities, but the potential of getting held up by a bandit gang is there.

Black Desert Online had a more barebones system. Hit level 50, then you can participate in no holds barred, open world PvP. The only safe zones are the cities and towns; everywhere else, you're fair game. To be able to enter/exit the open world PvP, you just click a wee button that has a ten minute cooldown; the open world PvP is completely optional.

Give me that. Give me the possibility of laying siege to Wayrest. Gimme the possibility of committing genocide on the Bosmer. And hell, if we are able to siege...Oh my.

Oh aye, another great game with open world PvP was Ultima Online, before it was butchered later in it's development. Felucca was an anything-goes land, and oh boy oh boy was it good.

How are those games doing btw? ;D

Agobi · November 2016

Vipstaakki wrote: »

They just get sneakier with trying to force their PvP in our PvE, eh?
Your plot has failed.

Funny how all these "hardcore" pvp players aren't all that interested in their own pvp server

But ganking pve players ...ooh how "realistic" and "challenging" that would be

FoolishHuman · November 2016

Osteos wrote: »

Honestly, the Savior of Nirn should be able to save an npc from a thief or murderer, its just plain silly we can't. Mention it on the forums though and some people lose their minds.

Should the "Savior of Nirn" then also be able to pickpocket and blade of woe other adventurers? Because that would only be fair then - if you can punish me for crimes, I should be able to commit crimes against you.
Just face it - you can't mix PvP and PvE like that in this game. Open world PvP is in Cyrodiil and the Imperial City, the opt-out is to not go there.
Two of the big DLCs require you to commit crimes, who would buy that if all the quest locations were camped by PvPers to kill you the instant you show up?

Tandor · November 2016

Osteos wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Tandor wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

I think the there should be more consequences but also incentive to attack an opposing city or defending your home city/lands,

I think something like this would be interesting. It'd have to be limited to a timeframe right after the deed. And perhaps only after a certain level of bounty. However I think they should tone down the guards to normal elite status if they do this. Since you'd have droves of player 'guards' on standby.

As for incentives.. the players who participate in taking down the wanted criminal get an equal share of the bounty. Since this is taken directly from the criminal, there's no way to glitch the system to produce gold. For example if someone's bounty is 2000, they have 1000 gold, and 4 people help take him down. Each gets 250 (not 500). And then the target moves to a level where he's not attackable (prevent camping).

Making it to an area with fences makes the target unattackable.

it would be cool seeing raids of people fighting each other over this.

Unfortunately this level of PVP doesn't happen in MMORPGs anymore. It was a cultural-social shift among the gaming community around 2006 that changed.

Haha shadowbane anyone? I just think the justice system is very one sided.

That's easily fixed by balancing the penalty side of the equation. Making the PvE Justice System tougher so that crime doesn't pay so easily and adding PvP to the Justice System are two entirely different matters.

I've yet to see anyone who claims simply to be motivated by a desire to see the PvE Justice System toughened up a bit put forward a proposal for that, if they did so I've no doubt it would get a lot of support. Instead, all we see is an endless series of doomed proposals for open world PvP masquerading as an extension of the Justice System so that PvPers can gank PvEers who are ill-equipped in PvE areas to take on experienced PvPers who've got bored with Cyrodiil and Imperial City, and who are probably already bored with dueling, just as they'd soon be bored with playing Enforcers v Criminals.

Look I'm still new to the game its just a flaw I have noticed and was thinking of a creative way to make it different, also if someone proposed a way pve wise it would likely sound boring to people and most would be against it, I think adding the pvp thing is way more interesting and by the way I am mostly a pver I'm just being objective about it.

Its a touchy subject. Originally there was supposed to be a pvp part of the justice system along with more pve elements. They only released about 1/3 of what they intended. A lot of us want a more interactive justice system. What we have is rather lame and without consequence. Honestly, the Savior of Nirn should be able to save an npc from a thief or murderer, its just plain silly we can't. Mention it on the forums though and some people lose their minds.

Yes, but they made it clear at the time that the concept came with a lot of caveats and therefore wasn't set in stone. Matt Firor reminded us of that here:-

http://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/news/post/2016/01/12/eso--the-year-ahead

People don't lose their minds, they simply express opposition to being rail-roaded into PvP while doing PvE content in PvE areas. Tossing insults at them only hardens their opposition.

DannyLV702 · November 2016

Would be pretty awesome. I'd be stealing and killing just for fun fights

JKorr · November 2016

sirston wrote: »

*sigh* people wanting an easy pve when there skyrim for $9

Great idea. You get started on the complete overhaul mod to replace everything in Skyrim with the world setting of ESO. You know, because the reason people are playing ESO instead of Skyrim is because they want to play in the ESO world. Let everyone know when you're done. In the meantime however, most of us will keep playing the game we bought that we intended to play.

:sigh: People who know the game isn't open world pvp and keep trying to change it all when there are other games that are out there.

Seriously; if you and others are so intent on open world pvp, try asking for a open world pvp server. Everyone who goes there would know what it means.

Or is that why the open world pvp people don't want it? In one of the many threads about this, one of the people who wanted it admitted they reason they were against a pve instance for Cyrodiil so players who don't want to pvp could go and complete pve content because there wouldn't be any pve players they could gank. And that some of the people who were in Cyrodiil because they had no choice would leave immediately for the pve instance since they didn't really *want* the pvp but it was the only way to complete the content. The poster was afraid that the pvp instance would become a ghost town with only capable pvp players there, who wouldn't be easy targets.

Riejael · November 2016

This is a dumb question, but just for the sake of argument, how much bounty do some of you normally run around with? Specifically those who do crime sprees? How high do you let it get before holding back on more actions? Do any of you just let it run up and avoid guards entirely? Think of this as a bit of a focus group thing, I'm not judging anyone and these are not rhetorical questions.

Fudly_budly · November 2016

FoolishHuman wrote: »

Osteos wrote: »

Honestly, the Savior of Nirn should be able to save an npc from a thief or murderer, its just plain silly we can't. Mention it on the forums though and some people lose their minds.

Just face it - you can't mix PvP and PvE like that in this game. Open world PvP is in Cyrodiil and the Imperial City, the opt-out is to not go there.
Two of the big DLCs require you to commit crimes, who would buy that if all the quest locations were camped by PvPers to kill you the instant you show up?

Yeah. And they'd use their @#$%$#@ Blade of Woe. LMAO at this nonsense. PvP in Cyrodiil.. go there! Look two dlc's require crime. Get real. Zos please chuckle and shake your head at this really, really bad idea.
BTW... my Dueling is "auto declined" and, frankly, I think should be restricted from towns.

JKorr · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

This is a dumb question, but just for the sake of argument, how much bounty do some of you normally run around with? Specifically those who do crime sprees? How high do you let it get before holding back on more actions? Do any of you just let it run up and avoid guards entirely? Think of this as a bit of a focus group thing, I'm not judging anyone and these are not rhetorical questions.

I've gotten to kill on sight levels on more than one character.

I try not to, too many things I want to do in town to run around with a huge bounty. If players could take potshots at me because of it, it would totally kill the game for me. Guards are in town, sometimes patrolling other areas. I can go to wilderness areas or Coldharbor if I want to let the bounty drop over time. If players who can go anywhere I go were able to follow and hound me so I wouldn't be able to play in peace, I'd either not do the content [which I paid for] or simply drop the game. I play the game to enjoy the content.

MattT1988 · November 2016

sirston wrote: »

*sigh* people wanting an easy pve when there skyrim for $9

There's no co-op in Skyrim. Pve isn't all about solo play.

STEVIL · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

This is a dumb question, but just for the sake of argument, how much bounty do some of you normally run around with? Specifically those who do crime sprees? How high do you let it get before holding back on more actions? Do any of you just let it run up and avoid guards entirely? Think of this as a bit of a focus group thing, I'm not judging anyone and these are not rhetorical questions.

What does it matter?

Currently there is a casual PVE injustice system with its own PVE consequences, rewards and time expenditures that are in sync (mid to bottom net reward for same difficulty) with the other casual pve content including delving, questing and grinding (even at the crime spree level) assuming each are not exploiting a bug somewhere. in fact, after 1T with set drop upgrades delving is even further ahead in terms of time-risk-reward than it was.

Whether someone enjoys the stealth approach or the other approaches is just a matter of taste.

But for your answer, not sure what you consider spree.

I normally have character commit between 50-100 injustice acts a day in ESO. (Acts that would spawn bounty if witnessed.)
I normally run with no bounty whatsoever.
I can normally escape guards if and when it is necessary.
i can also normally beat grind targets, run delves in minutes, complete quests no hitch. In terms of gains-per-time, injustice is less profitable than the others on average.

i once did a massive bounty grab murder kill spree as part of a test of the gains.. not worth it. but it did let me burn my grand leniency writ.

Riejael · November 2016

JKorr wrote: »

I've gotten to kill on sight levels on more than one character.

I try not to, too many things I want to do in town to run around with a huge bounty. If players could take potshots at me because of it, it would totally kill the game for me.

I'm looking for actual numbers so players like you would largely be unaffected.

STEVIL wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

This is a dumb question, but just for the sake of argument, how much bounty do some of you normally run around with? Specifically those who do crime sprees? How high do you let it get before holding back on more actions? Do any of you just let it run up and avoid guards entirely? Think of this as a bit of a focus group thing, I'm not judging anyone and these are not rhetorical questions.

What does it matter?

I'm looking for actual numbers to put in a amicable proposal to everyone. Something that would be more of a feature than a punishment.

I made a post earlier in the thread suggesting a system where you would flag for PVP, but only in such a case if you racked up enough bounty. Furthermore it would ONLY be in affect till a certain level of 'heat' I think its referred to. In other words if you managed to get enough bounty, for the next couple of minutes you'd be attackable, but not after. Furthermore it would only be in areas where bounties could accrue anyway.

If there is NO witnesses. Then no bounty. Which means no PVP at all. The other suggestion was to lower the stats of guards to elite type mobs (basically 130-150k health) to compensate for the fact that there would be so many 'deputies' on standby. You'd still need a high enough bounty level (again no one is giving numbers to what is 'normal' so I can't give a good place to start) to be attackable.

So in essence you could keep your bounty down, have a better chance of escaping guards, and possibly make illicit activity a little more lucrative. With the caveat that you need to keep your bounty in check so you don't get player attention.

To put it shortly, you'd be able to keep your playstyle (in fact it might even be a bit more rewarding over time), not have to engage in PVP. But you'd have the option to push your luck if you're feeling lucky or greedy.

alexkdd99 · November 2016

sirston wrote: »

uh oh! you made the PVE players angry with the idea of Open world pvp; and summoned the" Im a PVE player and I want no consequences for my actions response". Tread carefully you should of made a trigger warning.

It has more to do with how long this game has been out. Large changes that could possibly alienate a very large group of players is not a good idea.

I think it will only become harder to implement mainly because it seems most of the pvp only people seem to be playing less and less.

I also don't understand why you would want to attack someone who doesn't want to fight with you when there is plenty of people who do. Unless of course you just want to gank new players.

Cencewolf · November 2016

Yup,

Love the idea of open PVP,
Also love the idea of strengthening greatly consequences in the "justice system"
And no, i dont think either of things will happen in ESO,

Basic logic dictates the bigger battle is not in Cyrodil, it lies in a boardroom where developers strive to increase the sales of their product in any way possible. unfortunately there are many more "no dont hurt me" kids than guys like me who turn up the settings to "hurt me plenty". if i was a stockholder, id be encouraged to withdraw my investments if i saw any reasonable change that would increase the value of my gameplay or restore (more like create) the integrity of the justice system. there are just way more "customers" who want to buy the easy than the hard. Its sad, but its a shift in product placement for which the larger gaming community is at fault, not simply (or just) Zos, they cant be blamed for the "demand" they can only cater to it.

This is also why you see panting angry vicious attacks to these threads every time somone suggests one. They want to establish whole heartedly the dominance of the community if any weary dev should visit the post in order to ensure their game cant and wont change. Yes, these generationally removed cretins will come with cute names to attack this larger proposal while taking backhanded swipes at the individual who proposed them? Now, in Regard for people like me, (dare i say us) they will continue to toss labels like "elitist" and ensure that no challenge can befall them in their safe spaces.

still, i love the scenery, the graphics, the reactive battle system... So im still here. But we will see what the future brings.
god bless, and happy holidays to you all reading this. (Mic drop) outtie!

I_killed_Vivec · November 2016

Just a couple of quick questions...

1. Guards no longer immortal? Seems like someone can't remember the original justification for immortal guards - to stop mobs slaughtering all the guards, and then all the npcs, in a village. Make a guard CP150 level and I will kill every one I see (especially Ordinators... I hate Ordinators).

2. Who gets to join in? Say someone sees me kill and npc, they jump in to fight me... and so do ten other people. I know zerglings like the comfort of big numbers, but that's a little unfair isn't it?

3. As an assassin my weapon of choice is the Blade of Woe - guaranteed one-shot instant death. It's what I use when I'm on a contract, it's what I'll use on anyone who tries to stop me...

4. I need to kill an npc to complete a quest. You know it, your mates know it. There's five of you standing next to him waiting for me to strike. Why are you allowed to interfere with quests from a DLC that i paid good money for and was bought with the understanding there was no PvP element to Justice?

4a. I need to kill an npc to complete a quest. You know it. You're standing next to him waiting for me to strike. Can I go preemptive on your ass? From stealth. With the Blade of Woe.

5. Why do gankers want to kill PvEers doing quests in PvE zones? Isn't that what the quests in Cyrodiil are for?

6. Please don't give me the nonsense about not wanting to watch people slaughter the innocent townspeople of your faction... "Oh no, they are killing the people I bravely defend in Cyrodiil". I'm EP. I've spent a lot of time alone with Ayrenn. I have the Blade of Woe...

STEVIL · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

This is a dumb question, but just for the sake of argument, how much bounty do some of you normally run around with? Specifically those who do crime sprees? How high do you let it get before holding back on more actions? Do any of you just let it run up and avoid guards entirely? Think of this as a bit of a focus group thing, I'm not judging anyone and these are not rhetorical questions.

What does it matter?

I'm looking for actual numbers to put in a amicable proposal to everyone. Something that would be more of a feature than a punishment.

I made a post earlier in the thread suggesting a system where you would flag for PVP, but only in such a case if you racked up enough bounty. Furthermore it would ONLY be in affect till a certain level of 'heat' I think its referred to. In other words if you managed to get enough bounty, for the next couple of minutes you'd be attackable, but not after. Furthermore it would only be in areas where bounties could accrue anyway.

If there is NO witnesses. Then no bounty. Which means no PVP at all. The other suggestion was to lower the stats of guards to elite type mobs (basically 130-150k health) to compensate for the fact that there would be so many 'deputies' on standby. You'd still need a high enough bounty level (again no one is giving numbers to what is 'normal' so I can't give a good place to start) to be attackable.

So in essence you could keep your bounty down, have a better chance of escaping guards, and possibly make illicit activity a little more lucrative. With the caveat that you need to keep your bounty in check so you don't get player attention.

To put it shortly, you'd be able to keep your playstyle (in fact it might even be a bit more rewarding over time), not have to engage in PVP. But you'd have the option to push your luck if you're feeling lucky or greedy.

Ok so a few point...

you really need to search on pvp justice.

there are already dead threads often closed aplenty.

many of them plan for or start out as exactly what you are proposing.

its anything but amicable.

See, for some of us PVE players, taking what is currently PVE play (even high bounty high heat) and attaching PVP consequences is not amicable, it is not optional, it is TAKEOVER of PVE play. it is forcing PVP play onto folks playing PVE.

its not for PVP players to decide which PVE activities they find should justify PVP consequence - any more than i can decide that PVP players who lose should be forced into maelstrom before they can PVP again.

I mean, my vampire PC might take a lot of offense at player characters killing vampires and bloodfiends... so when do i get to pvp them in play?

My Covenant player might take offense at players opting for the "kill the hunters" option in Rivenspire quests - can i pvp them too?

There is no appropriate number of bounty level or heat where all PVE players will be happy with PVP play. There is nothing magical about clumsy theft that makes it a PVP opening. heck, i can be attacking mudcrabs in malbor and hit a guard who wasn't able to be hit a split second ago... for that you PVP me?

Not gonna happen.

PLAY-IN options like you suggest where some type of current PVE play suddenly throws you to the PVP wolves wont happen, wont be amicable, wont be done.

For good reason.

all IMO

Delta1038 · November 2016

ArchMikem wrote: »

Delta1038 wrote: »

Personally I wish I could just heal the NPC and prevent the player from being able to kill them.

You can actually. The Templar healing abilities also affect NPCs. I realized this early on in Stonefalls, during a quest there's a group of injured NPCs by default in a ruined home , they have like 10% of their health gone. Fired off a Breath of Life and I healed them all to full.

I've also tried hiding up in a Resource Tower in Cyrodiil and heal the Mage Guard while an enemy player attacked it.

I meant healing NPC's that are being attacked by actual players, I have tried in the past and it doesn't work. And more often than not I get in trouble from guards for healing a player on accident that they are attacking for a crime.