I have no problem with Full Loot, even being a carebear myself I got used to it, and I don't mind at all.

But what Darkfall needs are safe zones for PVE like in EVE, where in safe zones rewards are lower than in unprotected territories (Risk vs Reward).

A 100% PvP game will never work, most people wants to do both things in a MMO (PvE and PvP), but PvE is almost impossible in Darkfall because the lack of safe zones.

I left Darkfall for that reason. PvP was awesome but I could not play any meaningful PvE in Darkfall so in the end I gave up.

I hope Aventurine understand that having safe zones doesn't compromise the PvP nature of the game and will do something to improve the PvE experience in DF:UW

U ll lose your items but u ll never lose your stats and skill points

Originally posted by ste2000

I have no problem with Full Loot, even being a carebear myself I got used to it, and I don't mind at all.

But what Darkfall needs are safe zones for PVE like in EVE, where in safe zones rewards are lower than in unprotected territories (Risk vs Reward).

A 100% PvP game will never work, most people wants to do both things in a MMO (PvE and PvP), but PvE is almost impossible in Darkfall because the lack of safe zones.

I left Darkfall for that reason. PvP was awesome but I could not play any meaningful PvE in Darkfall so in the end I gave up.

I hope Aventurine understand that having safe zones doesn't compromise the PvP nature of the game and will do something to improve the PvE experience in DF:UW

I disagree, I think the only somewhat safe area should be the starting cities.  Otherwise everybody would raise their skills and stats where it is safe. 

I had no problems with FFA loot.  It added a sense of realism to the game, although I think carrying capacities were way too high.  I can't imagine many people would kill someone and then somehow manage to carrying around everything their victim was carrying as well, unless you had a donky or something.

What I did find annoying was the playerbase mentality that seems to be encouraged in PvP and FPS games.  Namely, the complete disregard for anything "RPG" in favor of character or guild names like "lolpwndu."  People talk about the "maturity" of the players, but all I saw was a bunch of name calling and random insults.

Fix that, and I'd play DF1 or DF2, no questions asked.

actually, one of the best ways to handle FFA full-loot is to tweak the carrying capacities to more normal levels; that way, a player would only loot something of real value and not trash items 'just for the lulz'.

Originally posted by phantomghost

Originally posted by ste2000

I have no problem with Full Loot, even being a carebear myself I got used to it, and I don't mind at all.

But what Darkfall needs are safe zones for PVE like in EVE, where in safe zones rewards are lower than in unprotected territories (Risk vs Reward).

A 100% PvP game will never work, most people wants to do both things in a MMO (PvE and PvP), but PvE is almost impossible in Darkfall because the lack of safe zones.

I left Darkfall for that reason. PvP was awesome but I could not play any meaningful PvE in Darkfall so in the end I gave up.

I hope Aventurine understand that having safe zones doesn't compromise the PvP nature of the game and will do something to improve the PvE experience in DF:UW

I disagree, I think the only somewhat safe area should be the starting cities.  Otherwise everybody would raise their skills and stats where it is safe. 

I know you disagree.

You and the other 10 people who still play the game don't like DF having safe zones, but that's why the game is not popular.

Not because the Full loot, but because the lack of areas where to PvE.

 

Of course I disagree on your disagreement.

Safe areas won't mean that everyone will stay there, in particular if PvP areas offers better rewards in terms of mob killing and harvesting nodes (meaning that PvP areas will be rich in rare materials therefore making it worth it to get out of the safe areas)

To be more specific, I believe Dungeons should be PvP free Areas so I can concentrate on the PvE challenge.

Then if on my way back from the dungeon I lose the stuff I looted in a PvP ambush, I won't mind.

But at least I want to be able to focus on the PvE challenge while I am in the dungeon, what happens after I get out of it, it's another matter

 

I will accept pve only zones if there is no loot and no skill ups in em.  Basically, a nice place to stay logged in AFK.

 

Instance stuff does not work.

 

I will give you an example.

 

SWTOR... PvP servers.  I start a fight run into an instance... I am safe.  I run back out throw a dot on the guy run back in... I am safe.  Nope... you attack me I will chase you until one of us die.

Originally posted by helthros

Full loot is part of the charm. In EVE Online there's a saying that somewhat applies to this game - "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose".

 

If you want to walk around in the super badass armor or with tons of coin on your person, then you better be ready to deal with the aftermath of losing it. That risk vs reward plays a HUGE part in any good sandbox.

 

Having said that, the next major part of any good sandbox is the community and aligning yourself with others. That FFA Full Loot has a lot more purpose behind it when you're looting a sworn enemy.

 

In themeparks you send your fallen foe to the grave, he incurs a minor silver penalty in repairs at best, but he's really no worse for the wear other than maybe a bruised ego. In sandbox games with looting it's that much more exciting and brings a whole new meaning to guilds/corps and the alliances/enemies that develop as a result.

The charm...lol.  It's why it failed.

We are in a world today where bullying is a dirty word.  Nobody wants to be bullied in a virtual world either.

Originally posted by Ozivois

Originally posted by helthros

Full loot is part of the charm. In EVE Online there's a saying that somewhat applies to this game - "Don't fly what you can't afford to lose".

 

If you want to walk around in the super badass armor or with tons of coin on your person, then you better be ready to deal with the aftermath of losing it. That risk vs reward plays a HUGE part in any good sandbox.

 

Having said that, the next major part of any good sandbox is the community and aligning yourself with others. That FFA Full Loot has a lot more purpose behind it when you're looting a sworn enemy.

 

In themeparks you send your fallen foe to the grave, he incurs a minor silver penalty in repairs at best, but he's really no worse for the wear other than maybe a bruised ego. In sandbox games with looting it's that much more exciting and brings a whole new meaning to guilds/corps and the alliances/enemies that develop as a result.

The charm...lol.  It's why it failed.

We are in a world today where bullying is a dirty word.  Nobody wants to be bullied in a virtual world either.

Its kill or be killed in my world.

Darkfall is special because it does not compromise and add stuff like safe zones. That is what makes it great, it is also what makes it niche. There is plenty of demand for a game like this, they just have to do it better then they did at the start of the first version. There are also plenty of games that have consensual PvP and no full loot.

I would much rather the game market had more niche games rather then lots of clones that try to please everyone and in doing so never achieve greatness.

Originally posted by phantomghost

I will accept pve only zones if there is no loot and no skill ups in em.  Basically, a nice place to stay logged in AFK.

 

Instance stuff does not work.

 

I will give you an example.

 

SWTOR... PvP servers.  I start a fight run into an instance... I am safe.  I run back out throw a dot on the guy run back in... I am safe.  Nope... you attack me I will chase you until one of us die.

I get your mentality, since I played DF for a year.

But you need to understand that to make DF a success it needs hardcore PvPers, Softcore PvPers and Carebears (which usually are the PvPers favourite prey)

At the moment DF caters only for the hardcore PvPers and that's it.

Fine by me.

But I believe few more people in the servers would make also hardcore PvPers more happy (more people to kill)

At the moment the only time there is any PvP action in DF is when there is a siege, apart for that, there is very little PvP action, because the server is too empty.

Is that what you want?

If the changes they made to the game are not good enough to make the game fun again... then yes that is what I want.

The full-loot pvp isn't a big deal to me. What I didn't like about the first version is that the whole game seemed to revolve around PvP but that there was little depth to it and not much else to do. Those dungeons they implemented were a step in the right-direction, but grinding mobs the same way, in the same spot just gets old.

Originally posted by Ozivois

Originally posted by helthros
 

The charm...lol.  It's why it failed.

We are in a world today where bullying is a dirty word.  Nobody wants to be bullied in a virtual world either.

Killing someones character in a game they have chosen to play, within a ruleset which allows for exactly that to happen. Is somehow bullying now?

 

Oh my.

Originally posted by mrcalhou
The full-loot pvp isn't a big deal to me. What I didn't like about the first version is that the whole game seemed to revolve around PvP but that there was little depth to it and not much else to do. Those dungeons they implemented were a step in the right-direction, but grinding mobs the same way, in the same spot just gets old.

Yes that's exactly what I tried to explain in my previous posts.

Average gamers are not bothered by the Full Loot system, but the fact that there is no alternative to PvP.

In fact PvE was not existent in DF and that was its biggest limit.

Originally posted by ste2000

Originally posted by mrcalhou
The full-loot pvp isn't a big deal to me. What I didn't like about the first version is that the whole game seemed to revolve around PvP but that there was little depth to it and not much else to do. Those dungeons they implemented were a step in the right-direction, but grinding mobs the same way, in the same spot just gets old.

Yes that's exactly what I tried to explain in my previous posts.

Average gamers are not bothered by the Full Loot system, but the fact that there is no alternative to PvP.

In fact PvE was not existent in DF and that was its biggest limit.

You don't suddenly add pve simply by making some areas "safe". What you do is add pve content that sits within the remit of the open pvp, looting model.

 

You are right though, the loot/ffa aspect wasn't the issue, but then neither was the issue a lack of safezones. The main issue was trying to appeal to pvp gamers whilst as the same time forcing them to endure a massively long grind (or sploit) to be competitve.

I actually find Darkfall PvE to be more entertaining then the non-raid PvE in other games because of the aimed nature of the combat. You need to hit the enemy with your arrows/spells/melee and you need to dodge their attacks. This is much more fun then tab targeting a mob and pressing buttons till it dies.

With regards to PvP while PvEing. I have chronic fatigue, I cannot PvP all day because the adrenaline you get in Darkfall PvP is tiring. So when I did PvE I simply ran away if someone attacked. There is always the chance they will get the drop on you and kill you but the loss of that could be mitigated by wearing relatively cheap gear and banking often.

Originally posted by DAS1337

Many other system mechanics within the game would need to be changed to support a PvE server, and would require a significant amount of work and balancing to do.  Wouldn't it kind of defeat the purpose of the whole game?

 

ANd for goodness sakes, it's not hard to figure out what the problem is with people killing each other all over the place.  No, it's not safe areas, althought, I think cities and such should be as close to safe as possible without being coded in as such.  While full loot pushes players to be a bit more opportunistic, is is not a major instigator by itself.  It's not that gamers in general like to kill for no reason, just because they can, even though they do.  Or any other reason you guys can come up with that isn't the problem, which I'm sure, is a lot more than I've listed because people don't have what is called, deductive reasoning.  

 

It seems to be an elusive ability for most, unfortunately.

 

The biggest problem is that when you combine all of those things, you create a very dangerous and unstable environment for the gamer.  And not restricting this via code is the biggest issue of them all.  I'm not saying to remove FFA PvP.  I'm saying, create legitimate consequences for killing people.  Ultima Online's system worked for years, before they went to Trammel of course.  There were no loop holes or exploits.  If you attacked an innocent, you were labeled a criminal, thus attackable by all without punity.  If you killed too often, you became a murderer for significant amount of time.  You were attackable by all, you were locked out of your bank, attack on site in all NPC cities and if death happened, you would take permenent stat loss.

 

Now I would take it a step further and lock out your character for a certain amount of time, based on the severity of your crimes of course.  However, the only way this mechanic would work is if AV allowed us to create multiple characters.  A decision that is baffling me to this day.  Multiple characters allows replayabilty.  But, clearly they went the themepark-carebear route (Which is odd for AV) and they are allowing free respecs (or role changes) at any time, on the fly.  

 

Anyways, the point is this.  If you place a large enough punishment onto players who murder others without a thought in their mind, you will effectively reduce their willingness to make the game play of others uncomfortable.  You'll go a long way in attracting new players and keeping existing players as well.  If you want to siege and fight in large battles, join a guild/clan and go to war with someone.  There is no reason that you can't cater to both styles of play, unless of course, the obvious happens.  AV is too blind to see the real problem

 

Also, fix your dumb combat system.  Stop forcing people in and out of multiple view perspectives.  It's not immersive and completely destroys the flow of combat.  Thanks.

The reason why you can;'t have more than one character is to make it harder to spy. Its really that simple. Also, locking out characters from playing the game is the worst idea ever. If you want real consquences, without adding to grind, for PKing you need a system in place that promotes team work out side GvG/Clan v Clan. ANET could have that with racial wars like I posted in my suggestion thread. Supposedly, they aren't doing it. shame really. 

personally I wont play this game either way because of the first person aspect.

However I dont see why all the hardcore PVP full loot guys get so bent out of shape over the idea of having a seperate server with different rules.  It would add a lot of money to devs, as a lot of people just dont want to have to be on edge 24/7.  It wouldnt effect the hardcore players at all.

Asheron's Call did it well with Darktide, 13 yrs later, it should be relatively easy to implement.  Its also one of the reasons why Shadowbane died out.  The hardcore group is small and kills out the playerbase of the casuals, which help a game succeed long term

 

Originally posted by Myrdynn

Its also one of the reasons why Shadowbane died out. 

You must be joking?  Why would anyone play SB for the PvE aspect?  No quests, Static Spawns, Laughable AI, easily macroed, no dungeons, ect... ( all the crap Carebears get off on) PvE was a joke

 

A PVE Shadowbane server would have been horrible!