Boy howdy, gee-golly whiz, this turned into a longer post than I meant to write. Please excuse me. 
/belchI see where you're coming from, I just disagree that it's that big of a deal. Saying that 'Mechanics like this
fundamentally change how to defend' and referring to any PvP change as 'a major mechanic' is hyperbole. The 'remove PvP' camp, like most forum-goers, are regularly using hyperbole to lend more weight to their agendas, however noble their intentions might be. You're being dramatic.
You may as well use the same argument to say that
no new weapon, armor, stat bonus, gilding, curiosity, skill, or any other feature should be added until the game world is wiped. I don't know about you, but I'd like for the weekly development patches to continue. Reverting to 1 significant patch every 8-12 months would be extreme.
nokona wrote:What percentage of the player base even has Rage?
And of that group, how many actually play PvP?
From day one, some players built their characters specifically for fighting outside walls. Others didn’t. ... PvP-focused builds, and people already optimized for combat gain an immediate edge.
I'm going to say a lot of stuff here that you already know, but bear with me. There is a point in the game where players are expected to be responsible for their own safety. Traditionally, this game has never held the player's hand (though we can debate that point somewhat). I will assume you're familiar with the
Developer Thoughts on PvP. If you are, you will recognize that PvP as a broad concept is not optional and never has been, despite the best efforts of the devs to make it
seem more optional.
You may argue that combat has been rendered
practically optional for experienced players since the introduction of Visitor Gates; however, this is but a fleeting illusion. All characters inhabiting the game world are necessarily subject to its rules, and that includes combat relations and siege. Player conflict is not a switch that can be toggled on or off -- it is a design pillar which has been inextricably woven into the fabric of the game since its inception. This can be a hard pill to swallow, but players who outright ignore (or skirt around the edges of) core systems, on the basis that the meta favors them at the moment, should not be surprised when they inevitably get dunked on in a subsequent update. PvP is core; ignoring it is not safe.
In other words,
all villages should have a standing militia, i.e. a handful of fighter characters with the Rage skill learned, available as a means of protecting themselves. Hermits and casual players who are not interested in fighting should
seek protection from players who are, or accept the consequence that they will be vulnerable to getting PKed or besieged. Further, players who want to fight, but feel that the game's systems prohibit them from doing so, should
support changes to make participation in combat more accessible.
-----------------------
Again, rather than complaining about their misfortunes, those concerned with making PvP more fair should present their arguments in the Critique and Ideas sub-forum. If a topic does not already exist for their specific suggestion, they should write one. I'll list a few relevant topics below:
To all those dissatisfied with the power imbalance this game has: please
make it easier for those lobbying for fairness in Combat Relations, Siege, Claim Safety, or other related topics by lending us your support in these matters. Help us help you. Alternatively, consider putting real effort into writing suggestions on the forums. 'Remove PvP' does not cut it -- spend a few days thinking about what you want and how to achieve it. Then, put that idea out there so we can +1, Sign, QFT and so-forth.
Occupation: Happily married housewife. Interests: Roleplaying, painting, poetry, and scripture.
Howdy y'all!
by nokona » Sat Feb 14, 2026 4:51 am 
