Originally posted by ShakyMo
I disagree, ffa needs player loot to drive it. Player loot and strong economic drivers push players towards targeting the "big fish", without it you just get people ganking noobs for shits and giggles.

You need a reason to pvp. Whether that is for economic reasons in ffa sandboxes like eve, perpetuum and darkfall or whether that is for faction wide resources and bonuses in open world themeparks like daoc, planetside and war I don't care. Either works for me.

FFA gets you people ganking noobs for shits and giggles. For those people, their victims' tears is incentive enough.

In the system I described there are tons of ways to make PvP interesting and a thriving player economy, without forcing all people to FFA.

Originally posted by meddyck
They tried that in DAOC on the Mordred server. It flopped just like Shadowbane and most other FFA/GvG systems. 

Not on topic, but I beg to differ, I played on Mordred for well over 2 years and it took quite a while for it to ultimately die.  Which isn't surprising since the entire game died and ultmately has been reduced to one RVR rule set server.

The real issue with Mordred was Mythic didn't have the resources to properly correct some of the its major issues, was sort of just thrown together and needed some real attention.

That said, there's nothing wrong with an RVR system really, it's just different and perhaps not to some folks liking, but there's different games for all of us.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
Oh I'm not against safe areas or areas with varying security. But you need player loot to make ffa work.

I'd think it's more required for a working player economy than FFA per se. And not necessarily loot, but the destruction of equipment. Frankly, I like EVE's system where it's random 50-50.

The RVR System is incomplete in my view as a standalone feature.  DAOC was so awesome because there was an expansive world to explore with hidden caves and large pve dungeons to explore.

RVR can be for me a main feature of a game but it cannot be the only main feature for me to enjoy it.  Much like though I play wow, much like that wow focuses too much on pve and instanced pvp.

Originally posted by Harafnir
I am sure during the second world war a lot of people went out on the field wirth a sense of.... meh. "But.. this is not REAL war.. a real war, a meaningful war, I want to be able to join with some nazis and some english, and maybe kill half my own country and save Japan... No, some of japan, because them in the south are flipping asshats..." and so on and so forth... yeah, that sounds like a logical war that really can create a sense of community and belonging. RvR has a lot more talking for it than Sociopath Online... I promise. and more peopple talk about how they want a good solid  R v R concept in a new game than a new FFA gank fest.. Otherwise, if that is not good for you.. Darkfall ---> that way. It is helluva popular game because they use your "complete" PvP system. REAL popular.... and logical... and all those good things you like.

Again, NOBODY here is suggesting FFA.

Player Factions != FFA, can you get that into your small minds already?

Originally posted by nilden

This is about any RvR system from GW 2, DAOC, ESO, or the upcoming Camelot Unchained if done the same way etc. I'll explain why I think this and what system would feel more complete to me.

The reason it is incomplete is because of the faction/realm lock. While some people would cite realm pride or loyalty I would have much more of either in something if it was my guild that I was fighting for. This can be done by having guilds build cities/towns and able to war or ally with other guilds forming alliances, having neighbours, and actual friends or enemies that you get to pick and are not presented to you by the game. See EVE or Shadowbane for the basic premise.

Your not looking for an RvR game your looking for more of an open world sandbox game... there are differences.. and both have their place.