Things you feel we need before map reset

[warrri]

Aahahaha...PFFFT...."bullied by better players". You aren't a "better player". You are "Your kind" of player. He didn't play the game "wrong"..he played it for the fun you intend to stop everyone else from having to "Do it your way". I just don't understand why you think the two cannot play the same game differently...why would you kill him to play your way and ruin his game instead of facing off with another player who plays it YOUR way? Are you afriad of them? Is it a gang mentality where murderers don't murder each other but instead try to impress the other murderers so they are off limits...cause well, then no one would be able to "thumbs up" your latest murder?

From seeing your char on the screen, how can i tell if youre a equally strong fighter or just a farmer?
We searched fights with equal strong fighters, we ran away from stronger fighters, whats the deal? We even got summoned by murder alts.
We fight weaker players because THERE IS NO ONE ELSE.

So why should someone who just farms and lives peacefully be able to defend himself? Hook yourself up with some crazy people and let them defend you.
WV has farmers too, they dont seem to complain about being unable to defend themselves.

Also:

Extended Treatise on That Which Really Should Be Bloody Obvious to Anyone Above A Grade School Level of Mental Development
To further develop on this point, let us make it painfully clear that this relation is so integrated in the very essence of H&H that it is impossible to even play the game without performing an action which is mutually exclusive, at least in time and place, with another action. If you are standing on the tile which I wish to plow, I cannot plow it. This means that the nub who has just created his first character and logged in, by the mere act of existing, is denying other players certain courses of action -- the most obvious one being interaction with that particular tile, but, as said nub starts to play, more and more actions will be denied other players by his act of simply playing. There is no shame in this, the number of potential actions is so great so as to approach the infinite, but, nevertheless: by acting in the H&H game world you are denying other players options that they would have had, had you not been playing the game.

On that note i might add, that every new spawned player drastically reduces my chance to find an X bear, so instead of grinding bears i start grinding players to clear the world from civilisation so i can finally grind bears again.

[flaw]

There's nothing wrong with the framework of the game providing for unlimited crime, murder, whathaveyou. The problem comes in when a person cannot take adequate measure to prevent protect themselves from the predations of others. If you can't protect yourself, things are going to happen to you. As has been said repeatedly, however, the ability to protect oneself simply isn't there. When people who prefer to farm are able to protect themselves from people who want PvP exists, the issues that you (flaw, Rhiannon, et al) have will pretty much just disappear.

It's not really an issue for me (as in "must be changed or I quit" kind of thing), I just think there are other ways to handle PvP than making it universal. Jorb doesn't agree, so fine.

In the current system, I tend to think the lack of adverse consequences for bad actions in all situations is a major force in how PvP shakes out in this game. As I was getting at in my posts with sabatini about the relative lack of PvP between equal characters, if you know someone can kill you, you don't fight them straight up. So if you raid strong, dangerous people, you do it when they aren't around. The scent system attempts to make this dangerous as well.

But, when it comes to newbies and solo peaceful players, there is far less chance of adverse consequences. So newbies and peaceful players apparently get killed in far greater proportion. If I'm reading his posts correctly, this is in keeping with Jorb's design choices.

Now what if the system was such that any character could actually kill any other character (instead of the current system where uber-characters are relatively invincible against newbies)? My peaceful farmer then becomes as much a threat to the raider as the "high level fighter" character. That would certainly change the dynamic of the game. Would that result in more "real" PvP, or less?

[warrri]

There's nothing wrong with the framework of the game providing for unlimited crime, murder, whathaveyou. The problem comes in when a person cannot take adequate measure to prevent protect themselves from the predations of others. If you can't protect yourself, things are going to happen to you. As has been said repeatedly, however, the ability to protect oneself simply isn't there. When people who prefer to farm are able to protect themselves from people who want PvP exists, the issues that you (flaw, Rhiannon, et al) have will pretty much just disappear.

It's not really an issue for me (as in "must be changed or I quit" kind of thing), I just think there are other ways to handle PvP than making it universal. Jorb doesn't agree, so fine.

In the current system, I tend to think the lack of adverse consequences for bad actions in all situations is a major force in how PvP shakes out in this game. As I was getting at in my posts with sabatini about the relative lack of PvP between equal characters, if you know someone can kill you, you don't fight them straight up. So if you raid strong, dangerous people, you do it when they aren't around. The scent system attempts to make this dangerous as well.

But, when it comes to newbies and solo peaceful players, there is far less chance of adverse consequences. So newbies and peaceful players apparently get killed in far greater proportion. If I'm reading his posts correctly, this is in keeping with Jorb's design choices.

Now what if the system was such that any character could actually kill any other character (instead of the current system where uber-characters are relatively invincible against newbies)? My peaceful farmer then becomes as much a threat to the raider as the "high level fighter" character. That would certainly change the dynamic of the game. Would that result in more "real" PvP, or less?

Yea, it would definately result in more real PvP because every highlevel fighter that has 20mio lp wants to lose his char to a freshly made farmer alt!

[flaw]

So why should someone who just farms and lives peacefully be able to defend himself? Hook yourself up with some crazy people and let them defend you.

This is an issue of game design that's been discussed a great deal here on the intertubes, and is what I think Rhiannon was trying to get at. The style of play you are advocating essentially forces everyone else into your style of play.

[flaw]

Yea, it would definately result in more real PvP because every highlevel fighter that has 20mio lp wants to lose his char to a freshly made farmer alt!

So, less real PvP then. What would generate more?

[warrri]

If you want to play Harvest Anno Sim Moon City go play DF (i heard it fits all your requirements, only in singleplayer where no one can harm you)

Yea, it would definately result in more real PvP because every highlevel fighter that has 20mio lp wants to lose his char to a freshly made farmer alt!

So, less real PvP then. What would generate more?

Sparring option for example, im already planning on organizing a tournament with great prices, once this comes online.

[Rhiannon]

There's nothing wrong with the framework of the game providing for unlimited crime, murder, whathaveyou. The problem comes in when a person cannot take adequate measure to prevent protect themselves from the predations of others. If you can't protect yourself, things are going to happen to you. As has been said repeatedly, however, the ability to protect oneself simply isn't there. When people who prefer to farm are able to protect themselves from people who want PvP exists, the issues that you (flaw, Rhiannon, et al) have will pretty much just disappear.

Couldbe true, but as you said, there is none. What protectin is there for a person who tries to participate in the vending system, goes to check their stand or add item, and out of the blue...boom, 1 hit down, 1 hit dead, your GAME IS OVER, go back to start...thanks for playing. So you are "perhaps" correct that is some kind of defense to such actions existed it may be workable...but there is not. The sick decision to allow it then requires such troublesome mechanics to try to balance it that I fail to see how its wrth the trouble for ANY devloper. (Which is why no such things exists in successful games to such a rediculous extent. But in that light, what defense could there be? Aside from the things mentioned such as "get the fuck out", don't play, stay alone in an MMO in the wilderness and "hope" no one ever finds you (until they do, see 1 hit game over statement)...ect. Pretty gruesome choices for an mmo...LOL But yes, I would be curious to know just what poeple could possibly come up with to "defend" against such extreme unbalance as the 1 hit game over...LOL

[flaw]

If you want to play Harvest Anno Sim Moon City go play DF (i heard it fits all your requirements, only in singleplayer where no one can harm you)

Yea, it would definately result in more real PvP because every highlevel fighter that has 20mio lp wants to lose his char to a freshly made farmer alt!

So, less real PvP then. What would generate more?

Sparring option for example, im already planning on organizing a tournament with great prices, once this comes online.

You mean sparring without death. So not real PvP, just playing around?

[warrri]

Depends on how you define "real" pvp. Why would PvP that doesnt imply one character to be dead not real?

As long as there is permanent death and you lose a great amount of your invested time, "real" pvp as you define it wont happen often. This is no suggestion to change it, because i like it that way it is right now.

[flaw]

Depends on how you define "real" pvp. Why would PvP that doesnt imply one character to be dead not real?

I'm trying to define it the way jorb is, which I think includes death.

As long as there is permanent death and you lose a great amount of your invested time, "real" pvp as you define it wont happen often.

I agree. I don't think that is what jorb intends, though.

This is no suggestion to change it, because i like it that way it is right now.

I know you do.