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

JKorr · November 2016

I_killed_Vivec wrote: »

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...

People who are in Cyrodiil to pvp are using builds made for it, and have good gear specifically for pvp and probably a lot of experience at pvp.

Pve players are there to do content, don't have a lot of pvp experience, have pve builds, and probably aren't using the bis gear.

Now, who do you think the gankers want to go after? Hint: not the other experienced well geared/well built pvp player.

Chances are also good that many of the high bounty people are going to be new to the game. Which would put them at even more of a disadvantage. Which apparently many of the "justice avengers" would be perfectly happy with.

Osteos · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

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.

They wont answer because they are unwilling to give up their easy crime system. We already tried discussing a bounty opt in but apparently that is "forcing" pvp even with warning etc. They shout their "no pvp consequences for pve activities" from their high horses but hypocritically want pve consequences (arrest) for pvp activities (dueling).

DragonBound · November 2016

I just love this generation based on more assumptions then reading comprehension for the 3rd time I did not suggest any forced pvp what so ever.

DragonBound · November 2016

Osteos wrote: »

Riejael wrote: »

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.

They wont answer because they are unwilling to give up their easy crime system. We already tried discussing a bounty opt in but apparently that is "forcing" pvp even with warning etc. They shout their "no pvp consequences for pve activities" from their high horses but hypocritically want pve consequences (arrest) for pvp activities (dueling).

Well said.

STEVIL · November 2016

@CosmicSoul

What do you call it when a pve player, equipped for pve content, playing in a pve zone gets jumped by a pvp attack if not forced?

Consensual?

So far your proposal has been to allow pvp players to attack pve players attacking npcs, maybe for 5 min, and little else regarding specifics.

You comment a coupke times on its creativity and how more interesting it is.

First, no, sorry, letting pvp players jump pve players isnt creative. Its just some pvp players easy kill fantasy.

Second, its not interesting to many. For a pve player who doesnt like pvp, its often game killing. For many respectable pvp players jumping unprepared pve players is dull. Its not competitive. For some, to be sure, its desirable, but thats not the same as interesting.

Seriously, search works. This has been hashed and rehashed and getting some grounding usually helps to discuss.

Riejael · November 2016

JKorr wrote: »

People who are in Cyrodiil to pvp are using builds made for it, and have good gear specifically for pvp and probably a lot of experience at pvp.

Pve players are there to do content, don't have a lot of pvp experience, have pve builds, and probably aren't using the bis gear.

Now, who do you think the gankers want to go after? Hint: not the other experienced well geared/well built pvp player.

Chances are also good that many of the high bounty people are going to be new to the game. Which would put them at even more of a disadvantage. Which apparently many of the "justice avengers" would be perfectly happy with.

Yeah I can imagine some ganker is going to skulk around Black Marsh or Reaper's Marsh waiting for a PVE'r to do enough bad deeds to get ganked. I'm sorry but PVPers aren't going to be sitting there waiting for someone to screw up badly enough to gank them. PVPers are going to be in Cyrodil still, doing PVP. At worst you might have some PVE'rs trying to sloppily try to kill each other. But more than likely, many would ignore each other, as I said in my first response on the first page.

Osteos wrote: »

They wont answer because they are unwilling to give up their easy crime system. We already tried discussing a bounty opt in but apparently that is "forcing" pvp even with warning etc. They shout their "no pvp consequences for pve activities" from their high horses but hypocritically want pve consequences (arrest) for pvp activities (dueling).

You're touching on the issue at hand. My suggestion doesn't even affect players like them. With what I'm suggesting, they'd have it even easier. I think their real issue is they don't want to SEE PVP. Its not participating in it that is the issue, as obviously they wouldn't have to. But the idea of it happening, in front of them, to someone else even irritates them.

I've seen this in other games. Some players are so tripped up by the idea of PVP, they don't even want to see it. Seeing it between even two consenting players (duels) makes them anxious. Hell I've even seen players complain about PVP in Planetside 2 (I'd like that one explained).

I'm going to let someone try to answer my questions with actual numbers again. If no one answers I'll just assume some numbers. And go forward. Anyone who gets anti-PVP edgey with it will simply be reported for being off-topic. I want to have an intelligent discussion about an interesting feature, if they don't want to play along then I'll just let a mods deal with them. I'm a primarily PVE-player myself who likes to keep their options open.

As for the questions, no right or wrong answers, take it as a poll:

1. How much Bounty do people run with normally?
2. How much Bounty do you all get on your normal crime sprees?
3. How high do you let your Bounty get before taking measures to reduce it or stop such crime?

Again no right or wrong answer, just need to know people's personal statistics on the matter.

STEVIL · November 2016

Riejael wrote: »

JKorr wrote: »

People who are in Cyrodiil to pvp are using builds made for it, and have good gear specifically for pvp and probably a lot of experience at pvp.

Pve players are there to do content, don't have a lot of pvp experience, have pve builds, and probably aren't using the bis gear.

Now, who do you think the gankers want to go after? Hint: not the other experienced well geared/well built pvp player.

Chances are also good that many of the high bounty people are going to be new to the game. Which would put them at even more of a disadvantage. Which apparently many of the "justice avengers" would be perfectly happy with.

Yeah I can imagine some ganker is going to skulk around Black Marsh or Reaper's Marsh waiting for a PVE'r to do enough bad deeds to get ganked. I'm sorry but PVPers aren't going to be sitting there waiting for someone to screw up badly enough to gank them. PVPers are going to be in Cyrodil still, doing PVP. At worst you might have some PVE'rs trying to sloppily try to kill each other. But more than likely, many would ignore each other, as I said in my first response on the first page.

Osteos wrote: »

They wont answer because they are unwilling to give up their easy crime system. We already tried discussing a bounty opt in but apparently that is "forcing" pvp even with warning etc. They shout their "no pvp consequences for pve activities" from their high horses but hypocritically want pve consequences (arrest) for pvp activities (dueling).

You're touching on the issue at hand. My suggestion doesn't even affect players like them. With what I'm suggesting, they'd have it even easier. I think their real issue is they don't want to SEE PVP. Its not participating in it that is the issue, as obviously they wouldn't have to. But the idea of it happening, in front of them, to someone else even irritates them.

I've seen this in other games. Some players are so tripped up by the idea of PVP, they don't even want to see it. Seeing it between even two consenting players (duels) makes them anxious. Hell I've even seen players complain about PVP in Planetside 2 (I'd like that one explained).

I'm going to let someone try to answer my questions with actual numbers again. If no one answers I'll just assume some numbers. And go forward. Anyone who gets anti-PVP edgey with it will simply be reported for being off-topic. I want to have an intelligent discussion about an interesting feature, if they don't want to play along then I'll just let a mods deal with them. I'm a primarily PVE-player myself who likes to keep their options open.

As for the questions, no right or wrong answers, take it as a poll:

1. How much Bounty do people run with normally?
2. How much Bounty do you all get on your normal crime sprees?
3. How high do you let your Bounty get before taking measures to reduce it or stop such crime?

Again no right or wrong answer, just need to know people's personal statistics on the matter.

1 none tho 50-100 injustice acts a day.
2 none. Only occurs thru accidents mostly. Have gotten bounties more frequently by errant pickups clicks at vendors or writs than doing injustice. Exceptions: when running tg dlc quests (not the dailies) where you can acquire bounty attacking inside mansions on missions.
3 almost always asap. My chars active in cities, bsnks, vendors etc so not gonna keep live bounty.

So, almost any heat/bounty keyed pvp justice would not affect me if no other changes made.
And i would oppose it fully if proposed and stop all injustice content play if it was introduced.

Now a question for you: if your pc sees my char kill a bounty-sack-npc, but nobody else does, do i get bounty/Heat?

DragonBound · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

@CosmicSoul

What do you call it when a pve player, equipped for pve content, playing in a pve zone gets jumped by a pvp attack if not forced?

Consensual?

So far your proposal has been to allow pvp players to attack pve players attacking npcs, maybe for 5 min, and little else regarding specifics.

You comment a coupke times on its creativity and how more interesting it is.

First, no, sorry, letting pvp players jump pve players isnt creative. Its just some pvp players easy kill fantasy.

Second, its not interesting to many. For a pve player who doesnt like pvp, its often game killing. For many respectable pvp players jumping unprepared pve players is dull. Its not competitive. For some, to be sure, its desirable, but thats not the same as interesting.

Seriously, search works. This has been hashed and rehashed and getting some grounding usually helps to discuss.

Wrong players attacking npcs are the only ones who can be attacked by a player, and I am sure we can come up with a way to keep it from happening all the time, it is creative just because I did not list in detail does not make it not creative. It was just a general idea and you seem to be taking offense because you want to stay on your high horse of non consequence murder sprees. And considering you know the guards will attack you then you should know a player might attack you if your caught it, so the situation is similar other then the fact players might actually be more challenging.

Actually more consequences is very interesting to many regardless of it being pvp or something else. And I really do not care if search function works this does not irrelevant to the topic, there should be no worry about someone posting another thread about it unless you somehow really feel its a threat because you know the justice system is flawed, if you do not like these posts then do not read or involve yourself in them, it is that simple I did not ask you to like my idea.

STEVIL · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

@CosmicSoul

What do you call it when a pve player, equipped for pve content, playing in a pve zone gets jumped by a pvp attack if not forced?

Consensual?

So far your proposal has been to allow pvp players to attack pve players attacking npcs, maybe for 5 min, and little else regarding specifics.

You comment a coupke times on its creativity and how more interesting it is.

First, no, sorry, letting pvp players jump pve players isnt creative. Its just some pvp players easy kill fantasy.

Second, its not interesting to many. For a pve player who doesnt like pvp, its often game killing. For many respectable pvp players jumping unprepared pve players is dull. Its not competitive. For some, to be sure, its desirable, but thats not the same as interesting.

Seriously, search works. This has been hashed and rehashed and getting some grounding usually helps to discuss.

Wrong players attacking npcs are the only ones who can be attacked by a player, and I am sure we can come up with a way to keep it from happening all the time, it is creative just because I did not list in detail it was just a general idea and you seem to be taking offense because you want to stay on your high horse of non consequence murder sprees. And considering you know the guards will attack you then if you know a player might attack you if your caught it is the same thing except players might actually be challenging.

Actually more consequences is very interesting to many regardless of it being pvp or something else. Seriously I do not care if search works there should be no worry about someone posting another thread about it unless you somehow really feel its a threat because you know the justice system is flawed, if you do not like these posts then do not read or involve yourself in them, it is that simple I did not ask you to like my idea.

first bold
Nothing wrong, thats what was stated pve players running pve content open to pvp attack.

Second bold
If you truly believe there is no difference in pve adversaries and pvp adversaries, you are as new as you claim. Its just one example where you would have been served by reading up on several threads before jumpimg to that conclusion.

Example: DLC quests drive players who paid for that content to specific places to kill npcs, bounty-producing kills ssme as killing innocents, and while npc guards can be programmed by the devs in conjunction with the tsrget walk path to make that scenario possible to compete, adding in pc hunters who can stake out the "blind spots" can make those scenarios unplayable.

Finally, last paragraph of yours seems intentionally hostile.have you considered that its more likely you, bring new, have a more vested interest in getting versed in the particulars than its about some worry that your posts might uncover dome hidden meaning?

Your lack of knowledge and seemingly growing determination to stay that way on this topic is no threat to anyone else.

As i have said, the current casual injustice is on par with the other casusl pve content options in terms of risk-reward-time. It also had its own unique elements one of which is its not another fight-and-win, guards cant be killed, must be escaped or avoided.

Its not "flawed" just because its not pvp.

Adding MORE content for injustice or for justice sounds great. I have posted quite a few suggestion on that.

But, taking away certain current pve play by imposing play-in pvp on it is a bad idea, imo.

PS
I must say, i never thought of consensual play vs forced play as a high ground position. I aleeys thought its was presumed that play should be a consensual activity.

TX12001rwb17_ESO · November 2016

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

DragonBound · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

@CosmicSoul

What do you call it when a pve player, equipped for pve content, playing in a pve zone gets jumped by a pvp attack if not forced?

Consensual?

So far your proposal has been to allow pvp players to attack pve players attacking npcs, maybe for 5 min, and little else regarding specifics.

You comment a coupke times on its creativity and how more interesting it is.

First, no, sorry, letting pvp players jump pve players isnt creative. Its just some pvp players easy kill fantasy.

Second, its not interesting to many. For a pve player who doesnt like pvp, its often game killing. For many respectable pvp players jumping unprepared pve players is dull. Its not competitive. For some, to be sure, its desirable, but thats not the same as interesting.

Seriously, search works. This has been hashed and rehashed and getting some grounding usually helps to discuss.

Wrong players attacking npcs are the only ones who can be attacked by a player, and I am sure we can come up with a way to keep it from happening all the time, it is creative just because I did not list in detail it was just a general idea and you seem to be taking offense because you want to stay on your high horse of non consequence murder sprees. And considering you know the guards will attack you then if you know a player might attack you if your caught it is the same thing except players might actually be challenging.

Actually more consequences is very interesting to many regardless of it being pvp or something else. Seriously I do not care if search works there should be no worry about someone posting another thread about it unless you somehow really feel its a threat because you know the justice system is flawed, if you do not like these posts then do not read or involve yourself in them, it is that simple I did not ask you to like my idea.

first bold
Nothing wrong, thats what was stated pve players running pve content open to pvp attack.

Second bold
If you truly believe there is no difference in pve adversaries and pvp adversaries, you are as new as you claim. Its just one example where you would have been served by reading up on several threads before jumpimg to that conclusion.

Example: DLC quests drive players who paid for that content to specific places to kill npcs, bounty-producing kills ssme as killing innocents, and while npc guards can be programmed by the devs in conjunction with the tsrget walk path to make that scenario possible to compete, adding in pc hunters who can stake out the "blind spots" can make those scenarios unplayable.

Finally, last paragraph of yours seems intentionally hostile.have you considered that its more likely you, bring new, have a more vested interest in getting versed in the particulars than its about some worry that your posts might uncover dome hidden meaning?

Your lack of knowledge and seemingly growing determination to stay that way on this topic is no threat to anyone else.

As i have said, the current casual injustice is on par with the other casusl pve content options in terms of risk-reward-time. It also had its own unique elements one of which is its not another fight-and-win, guards cant be killed, must be escaped or avoided.

Its not "flawed" just because its not pvp.

Adding MORE content for injustice or for justice sounds great. I have posted quite a few suggestion on that.

But, taking away certain current pve play by imposing play-in pvp on it is a bad idea, imo.

Yes it was wrong because you said it was non consensual, I did not say there was no difference your putting words into my mouth trying to establish your agenda here of not increasing consequences of murdering npcs, what conclusions did I jump to? I did not jump to any now your either lying or just not reading what I typed before. That makes zero sense why would it be me? You and others clearly got defensive as soon as anyone agreed to it or made any other suggestions, it cannot be any more obvious as to why you are getting defensive.

Another assumption by you, I am sure it will get you far kiddo.

I never said it was not flawed because it was not pvp, wow seriously make some sense here, I said it was flawed period I stated a while back I am more of a pve fan if you took the time to actually read what I typed. Then instead of trying to make me look bad and attack me in the thread you could of linked your suggestion or typed it here instead you acted like this about and try to twist everything I said.

And by the way if I was hostile it would be more obvious, I think your just being to sensitive over my I do not care comment it was the truth I did not care it was not an insult.

DragonBound · November 2016

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

That sounds like a nice improvement of the idea.

STEVIL · November 2016

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

Why not have it that you only get into pvp play if you explicitly choose it?

Why try to add ways for pve players playing pve content in pve areas are opened up for pvp attacks?

What's the benefit of basically taking a golfer and having him tackled by nfl linemen when he misses a 4" tap-in?

Integral1900 · November 2016

It's never going to work, no matter how you set it up pve with pvp justice system will never work, it will be abused to hell and back, starter islands will be knee deep in cp 561 try hard scumbags ganking every newbie that dares enter this game. The whole thing is ludicrous, saying it could be regulated is like trying to clear up the clap in a nineteenth century cat house

DragonBound · November 2016

Integral1900 wrote: »

It's never going to work, no matter how you set it up pve with pvp justice system will never work, it will be abused to hell and back, starter islands will be knee deep in cp 561 try hard scumbags ganking every newbie that dares enter this game. The whole thing is ludicrous, saying it could be regulated is like trying to clear up the clap in a nineteenth century cat house

Maybe you are right but there is likely ways to keep it from being abused.

TX12001rwb17_ESO · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

Why not have it that you only get into pvp play if you explicitly choose it?

Why try to add ways for pve players playing pve content in pve areas are opened up for pvp attacks?

What's the benefit of basically taking a golfer and having him tackled by nfl linemen when he misses a 4" tap-in?

Because if you go around ruining the game for other people by killing NPCs and breaking their immersion then you deserve to be punished by getting killed, honestly the only people who would try to defend this justice system as it is now are the same people who are going around killing NPCs and not giving a damn what their bounty is, maybe they are just afraid they wouldn't beable to do it without a care since others players aren't as stupid as the NPC guards are.

DragonBound · November 2016

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

Why not have it that you only get into pvp play if you explicitly choose it?

Why try to add ways for pve players playing pve content in pve areas are opened up for pvp attacks?

What's the benefit of basically taking a golfer and having him tackled by nfl linemen when he misses a 4" tap-in?

Because if you go around ruining the game for other people by killing NPCs and breaking their immersion then you deserve to be punished by getting killed, honestly the only people who would try to defend this justice system as it is now are the same people who are going around killing NPCs and not giving a damn what their bounty is, maybe they are just afraid they wouldn't beable to do it without a care since others players aren't as stupid as the NPC guards are.

It really does break immersion and some people just do not get that, I am just sitting there turning in a quest and bam someone just walks up and starts attacking everyone.

Tandor · November 2016

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

TX12001rwb17_ESO wrote: »

Why nor have it so you can only go after players with 10k or more bounty, most good players wont get a bounty that high unless they act "stupid".

Why not have it that you only get into pvp play if you explicitly choose it?

Why try to add ways for pve players playing pve content in pve areas are opened up for pvp attacks?

What's the benefit of basically taking a golfer and having him tackled by nfl linemen when he misses a 4" tap-in?

Because if you go around ruining the game for other people by killing NPCs and breaking their immersion then you deserve to be punished by getting killed, honestly the only people who would try to defend this justice system as it is now are the same people who are going around killing NPCs and not giving a damn what their bounty is, maybe they are just afraid they wouldn't beable to do it without a care since others players aren't as stupid as the NPC guards are.

So, on that basis are you also in favour of NPC guards being able to punish duelers who are running around ruining the game for other people by killing players and breaking their immersion?

People talk about how unrealistic it is to have the guards doing very little when players are committing theft and murder in cities, yet they don't seem to see anything unrealistic in the guards standing by while they're killing each other in cities!

STEVIL · November 2016

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

DragonBound · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

All those points are simply reaching and just shows how much you want your one sided justice system, no one said they wanted those things to stay the same, we are simply discussing one thing at a time here so your point is completely void.

NewBlacksmurf · November 2016

JKorr wrote: »

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.

All of this

alexkdd99 · November 2016

Cencewolf wrote: »

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!

You go on about others attacking the post but you have done enough attacking for all of us.

Can you not put your point forward without attacking those who don't agree with you?

STEVIL · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

All those points are simply reaching and just shows how much you want your one sided justice system, no one said they wanted those things to stay the same, we are simply discussing one thing at a time here so your point is completely void.

I do want the current injustice system, one sided as you say, or as I say - pve. It's somewhat unique content and on par with the other casual play options.

I also want a robust pve justice system, with a full dlc level justice pve addition with main quests, delves, dens/world bosses, skill line, etc etc for players taking the role of Enforcers going after NPC criminals and organizations. I want two sets of dailies - one escorting convoys across tamriel and one hunting down criminals in towns. All pve.

I don't want but don't care if a pvp-only justice was added at the same time or later. I suggested a guild based cops-robbers group play model using dueling.

All this you could have known had you bothered.

That brings us to a key point: None of what I want requires taking anything away, stopping any current play, but adds to and expands what is there.

It's a different outlook from taking pve content others run and turning it to pvp whether they like it or not.

And you tred again familiar well worn rhetorical paths... your specific immersive issue deserves pvp addition but every other is to be deemed completely void.

But the "Immersion demands pvp vs pve but only for one cause" position lacks any credible foundation in this very rich game.

Speaking of one-sided... in your self-proclaimed "creative" just let players attack those killing npcs for 5min or so, I notice no option to attack those do-gooder enforcers. Why not let pcs kill other pcs who might be in position to witness the crime? Your courageous PVPers wanting to jump pve players also need first strike?

DragonBound · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

All those points are simply reaching and just shows how much you want your one sided justice system, no one said they wanted those things to stay the same, we are simply discussing one thing at a time here so your point is completely void.

I do want the current injustice system, one sided as you say, or as I say - pve. It's somewhat unique content and on par with the other casual play options.

I also want a robust pve justice system, with a full dlc level justice pve addition with main quests, delves, dens/world bosses, skill line, etc etc for players taking the role of Enforcers going after NPC criminals and organizations. I want two sets of dailies - one escorting convoys across tamriel and one hunting down criminals in towns. All pve.

I don't want but don't care if a pvp-only justice was added at the same time or later. I suggested a guild based cops-robbers group play model using dueling.

All this you could have known had you bothered.

That brings us to a key point: None of what I want requires taking anything away, stopping any current play, but adds to and expands what is there.

It's a different outlook from taking pve content others run and turning it to pvp whether they like it or not.

And you tred again familiar well worn rhetorical paths... your specific immersive issue deserves pvp addition but every other is to be deemed completely void.

But the "Immersion demands pvp vs pve but only for one cause" position lacks any credible foundation in this very rich game.

Speaking of one-sided... in your self-proclaimed "creative" just let players attack those killing npcs for 5min or so, I notice no option to attack those do-gooder enforcers. Why not let pcs kill other pcs who might be in position to witness the crime? Your courageous PVPers wanting to jump pve players also need first strike?

If you want the current system changed then why not tell us your suggestion you had before? And I did not try that, there you go assuming again about someone you do not know. And I never suggested anything against it and your still avoiding the fact that all these other points you keep trying to bring up are void since they have nothing to do with the topic and justice system itself, we are simply talking about the one sidedness to the system here, and yes there could be something for do gooders, but then again your the one attacking an npc within that city or in that area, therefor the do gooders are already there protecting the innocent.

Also why do you keep calling them do gooders? It sounds a little like your trying to be insulting, this is just a game after all, its a bit silly to have some bias against what you call do gooders.

Vrienda · November 2016

sirston wrote: »

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

Because ganking lowbies who are just trying to play around with the justice system is SO hard, am I right?

MMO's don't cater exclusively to PvP. You might be more interested in a moba or first person shooter if that's what interests you.

STEVIL · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

All those points are simply reaching and just shows how much you want your one sided justice system, no one said they wanted those things to stay the same, we are simply discussing one thing at a time here so your point is completely void.

I do want the current injustice system, one sided as you say, or as I say - pve. It's somewhat unique content and on par with the other casual play options.

I also want a robust pve justice system, with a full dlc level justice pve addition with main quests, delves, dens/world bosses, skill line, etc etc for players taking the role of Enforcers going after NPC criminals and organizations. I want two sets of dailies - one escorting convoys across tamriel and one hunting down criminals in towns. All pve.

I don't want but don't care if a pvp-only justice was added at the same time or later. I suggested a guild based cops-robbers group play model using dueling.

All this you could have known had you bothered.

That brings us to a key point: None of what I want requires taking anything away, stopping any current play, but adds to and expands what is there.

It's a different outlook from taking pve content others run and turning it to pvp whether they like it or not.

And you tred again familiar well worn rhetorical paths... your specific immersive issue deserves pvp addition but every other is to be deemed completely void.

But the "Immersion demands pvp vs pve but only for one cause" position lacks any credible foundation in this very rich game.

Speaking of one-sided... in your self-proclaimed "creative" just let players attack those killing npcs for 5min or so, I notice no option to attack those do-gooder enforcers. Why not let pcs kill other pcs who might be in position to witness the crime? Your courageous PVPers wanting to jump pve players also need first strike?

If you want the current system changed then why not tell us your suggestion you had before? And I did not try that, there you go assuming again about someone you do not know. And I never suggested anything against it and your still avoiding the fact that all these other points you keep trying to bring up are void since they have nothing to do with the topic and justice system itself, we are simply talking about the one sidedness to the system here, and yes there could be something for do gooders, but then again your the one attacking an npc within that city or in that area, therefor the do gooders are already there protecting the innocent.

Also why do you keep calling them do gooders? It sounds a little like your trying to be insulting, this is just a game after all, its a bit silly to have some bias against what you call do gooders.

Not sure if your non-specificity is intentional tactic or just accidental.

its makes it tough to reply accurately.

First bold: And you did not try that... what is that? hard to tell what part of the reply you are referring to so hey cannot easily respond.

Second bold, top be clear, yes MY CHARACTER is attacking NPCs.

In case you dont know, PVE is about attacking NPCs. practically every quest in the game that is PVE is involving attacking NPCs. Sometimes they are giants, sometimes they are dominion, sometimes they are undead, sometimes they are merchants, sometimes they are sacrifices. The game system is built around that and outside of cyrodil there are never ever any PC on PC attacks allowed for killing NPCs. Whether you like the NPCs i kill or not. whether you think the killing is justified or not, whether you think its good or evil - you dont get to attack my PC with your PC over it.

You seem to have an idea that because i attack an NPC I deserve to be attacked by PVPers. But in this game with multiple DLCs and many many quests with shades of gray good and bad make your choice options and none of them opening you up for PVP attacks - that conclusion seems out of place and lacking foundation.

PVP is not about good vs evil, right vs wrong, justice vs injustice - its simply player-vs-player. Whatever roleplaying you want to wrap it in thats between you and the other players who want to play that game with you.

Valethar · November 2016

CosmicSoul wrote: »

why don't you relax?

Looking at your reaction to posts here, one might be tempted to point out the irony of that statement.

DragonBound · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

What about my vamp in east March seeing murderous thugs killing my vamp telatives? Shouldn't I be allowed to pvp them?

What about my law and order character seeing a pc choose to execute someone in custody instead of turning them over to authorities? Why not let me pvp them.

The "I get to pvp folks playing content a way I don't like" immersion fails to apply if you accept that what other pcs do in pve is not yours to judge and it turns the game world into open pvp if you don't accept it because in this game world that is so rich and varied there are many many "offenses" one can take within "immersive" reason.

All those points are simply reaching and just shows how much you want your one sided justice system, no one said they wanted those things to stay the same, we are simply discussing one thing at a time here so your point is completely void.

I do want the current injustice system, one sided as you say, or as I say - pve. It's somewhat unique content and on par with the other casual play options.

I also want a robust pve justice system, with a full dlc level justice pve addition with main quests, delves, dens/world bosses, skill line, etc etc for players taking the role of Enforcers going after NPC criminals and organizations. I want two sets of dailies - one escorting convoys across tamriel and one hunting down criminals in towns. All pve.

I don't want but don't care if a pvp-only justice was added at the same time or later. I suggested a guild based cops-robbers group play model using dueling.

All this you could have known had you bothered.

That brings us to a key point: None of what I want requires taking anything away, stopping any current play, but adds to and expands what is there.

It's a different outlook from taking pve content others run and turning it to pvp whether they like it or not.

And you tred again familiar well worn rhetorical paths... your specific immersive issue deserves pvp addition but every other is to be deemed completely void.

But the "Immersion demands pvp vs pve but only for one cause" position lacks any credible foundation in this very rich game.

Speaking of one-sided... in your self-proclaimed "creative" just let players attack those killing npcs for 5min or so, I notice no option to attack those do-gooder enforcers. Why not let pcs kill other pcs who might be in position to witness the crime? Your courageous PVPers wanting to jump pve players also need first strike?

If you want the current system changed then why not tell us your suggestion you had before? And I did not try that, there you go assuming again about someone you do not know. And I never suggested anything against it and your still avoiding the fact that all these other points you keep trying to bring up are void since they have nothing to do with the topic and justice system itself, we are simply talking about the one sidedness to the system here, and yes there could be something for do gooders, but then again your the one attacking an npc within that city or in that area, therefor the do gooders are already there protecting the innocent.

Also why do you keep calling them do gooders? It sounds a little like your trying to be insulting, this is just a game after all, its a bit silly to have some bias against what you call do gooders.

Not sure if your non-specificity is intentional tactic or just accidental.

its makes it tough to reply accurately.

First bold: And you did not try that... what is that? hard to tell what part of the reply you are referring to so hey cannot easily respond.

Second bold, top be clear, yes MY CHARACTER is attacking NPCs.

In case you dont know, PVE is about attacking NPCs. practically every quest in the game that is PVE is involving attacking NPCs. Sometimes they are giants, sometimes they are dominion, sometimes they are undead, sometimes they are merchants, sometimes they are sacrifices. The game system is built around that and outside of cyrodil there are never ever any PC on PC attacks allowed for killing NPCs. Whether you like the NPCs i kill or not. whether you think the killing is justified or not, whether you think its good or evil - you dont get to attack my PC with your PC over it.

You seem to have an idea that because i attack an NPC I deserve to be attacked by PVPers. But in this game with multiple DLCs and many many quests with shades of gray good and bad make your choice options and none of them opening you up for PVP attacks - that conclusion seems out of place and lacking foundation.

PVP is not about good vs evil, right vs wrong, justice vs injustice - its simply player-vs-player. Whatever roleplaying you want to wrap it in thats between you and the other players who want to play that game with you.

I am done trying to help you understand it is pointless with you, I am aware of the questing, and I am simply talking about murder sprees, anyways not need to continue with this further agree to disagree.

DragonBound · November 2016

Valethar wrote: »

CosmicSoul wrote: »

why don't you relax?

Looking at your reaction to posts here, one might be tempted to point out the irony of that statement.

Considering that has been with one person and I was far calmer then them sure buddy whatever you say.

Riejael · November 2016

STEVIL wrote: »

1 none tho 50-100 injustice acts a day.
2 none. Only occurs thru accidents mostly. Have gotten bounties more frequently by errant pickups clicks at vendors or writs than doing injustice. Exceptions: when running tg dlc quests (not the dailies) where you can acquire bounty attacking inside mansions on missions.
3 almost always asap. My chars active in cities, bsnks, vendors etc so not gonna keep live bounty.

So, almost any heat/bounty keyed pvp justice would not affect me if no other changes made.
And i would oppose it fully if proposed and stop all injustice content play if it was introduced.

Appreciate it.

Now a question for you: if your pc sees my char kill a bounty-sack-npc, but nobody else does, do i get bounty/Heat?

No. Archeage tried this with a 'report crime' system and it just wasn't fun.

STEVIL wrote: »

I love the PVPers in immersion cloaks.

How about the immersion of seeing vampires walking around unattackable? Shouldn't a char devoted to killing undead get to pvp them in auridon?

Nowhere did I ever indicate anything I've said was for immersion. If a guard doesn't care about a transformed werewolf or a stage iv vampire, neither should a player. Don't be facetious. I haven't attacked you, I've engaged you fairly, and haven't entirely disagreed with you.

PVP at its very nature is nasty. Most 'PVPers' who spend their time in Cyrodil or dueling couldn't handle real PVP as it would be in a game like say Planetside, or the three-quarters PVP in Archeage. Its because of this I'd like to propose an interesting system that could work for the benefit of all. And largely wouldn't affect players who DON'T want to PVP.

My intent is not to bring immersion. Quests do that already (and quite well compared to other MMOs).
My intent is not to punish players for crime. We're playing a game, its meant to be fun.
My intent isn't to force players into a playstyle that even PVPers couldn't handle.
My intent is to provide options for players who want to utilize it.
My intent is to add a level of risk, on top of the levels we already have. NOT a replacement.

I have no hidden agenda. I have nothing against anyone who doesn't like PVP. I don't like PVP either as a playstyle, especially not in a game not designed around it. But it has a useful avenue as a tool or mechanic. If this was a game designed for it, like Planetside 2, or some parts of Archeage, we'd be having a different discussion and you'd see a different side. I'm just being honest. To put it shortly, I'm not hiding things between the lines.

If those others are trolling, ignore them.