Encourage PvP: Remove LP

[Chakravanti]

That won't happen in this system. Such players would be killed and without a base of operations to produce from they would not be able to rebuild their characters.

Unless they have an alt with resources. Now, if alts were automatically tied together, that could be solved.

Look, no. If they have resources, they can spend them conducting PvP. That's the point. They didn't just magically get those resources. They worked for them.

NOW. If you mean a group of players build two villages. One that's a front for people to track them to and conduct raids upon. And an entire other village where they actually do and have shit. Well then. That's just a fucking genius strategy.

It's also a lot of fucking work.

[Potjeh]

As to the definition of sandbox. I put to you the task of showing me any game considered 'Sandbox' by any reputable review that does not contains some form of PvP.

Second Life

OK, so I can't think of any *good* sandbox MMOs without PvP (could be because H&H is the only MMO I ever played), but I can name dozens of single player sandbox games that don't involve much/any combat.

[Chakravanti]

That's not an MMO, that's a virtual dating site.

[Potjeh]

It's not like there are many sandbox MMO. I can only think of H&H and Wurm. Oh wait, does ATITD count? If so, there's your example.

[Chakravanti]

It's not like there are many sandbox MMO. I can only think of H&H and Wurm. Oh wait, does ATITD count? If so, there's your example.

Meh, not really. atitd is its own game. It does have sandboxish aspects but the lack of a combat system doesn't mean there isn't PvP.

Furthermore, you're getting a bit derailed on terminological debates that I have already settled:

Quintessentially:If the term 'sandbox' is too disputable for you then I will adjust my terminology to be more concrete. If you wish to have a PK anywhere game you cannot play a peaceful character without some form of subservience and taxation toward a violent authority willing to defend your pacifist personal ideals because someone will kill you and steal your shit unless you man the fuck up and defend your claim.

[Potjeh]

And I define sandbox as a game with non-linear gameplay and no set goals. Convince me your definition is more correct.

[Chakravanti]

Furthermore, you're getting a bit derailed on terminological debates that I have already settled:

Still, I assert that your definition does not conflict with mine.

[Potjeh]

Your definition is a subset of my definition. In the OP you are asserting that things that belong to that one specific subset apply to the whole sandbox set, so you can push forward (using bombastic words, no less) a pet theory of yours without providing any proof for it.

I do agree with a lot of your conclusions, but your reasoning leaves much to be desired. Exclamation marks don't have any place in a well-constructed argument (they're there, even if they're not spelled out).

[Chakravanti]

I may not understand you correctly but I believe that you must not understand one of two things:
1) Why the current system shits on peaceful players liek yourself.
2) Why this improvement will make the defense of peaceful players a reasonable possibility.

If you want to play peacefully without fear grief then go play a different game; the devs have made H&H decidedly PvP. If you wish to play peacefully supporting a nation that defend you for a tax of your production then buy all means support this idea. The whole purpose here is to create a balanced margin of development. The permadeth system will create battle attrition that creates an infinite demand for peasant productions.

If you assert that you should somehow be able to play a PvP game, peacefully, without fear of having your peaceful endeavors targeted. Then you have proposed the paradigm paradox that the current development suffers and fails to create because it's just impossible. This fear of alt abuse. You cannot deny alts as a part of the game. Simply put, this game that excessively discourages alts by creating an arbitrary margin of character development simply encourages multibox macroing. It does not actually dissuade alts as it would seem to. It only punishes those who can afford less IRL technology.

You seem to have faile dot take note of this point I made previously. I do not propose to make character development, alts or mains or whatever, cheap by any margin. Rather, that development become %100 based on the acquisition processing and consumption of resources. This significantly shifts the balance in favor of skillers like ourselves.

[Potjeh]

And you're completely missing my argument. Claiming that not brushing your teeth will cause zombie Hitler to enslave the world with his mech dinosaur army is painfully false, no matter how good the intention of the message is. Just drop the demagoguery, especially your "threats" of leaving H&H for SBwhatever. It just weakens your argument.

Oh, and I completely disagree with your self-correcting economy theory. I think that overabundance of raiders will lead to ragequitting of producers, and then the raiders will borequit because they can't get anything done without lowering themselves to doing peasant work (an unacceptable prospect for any ego-tripping raider). No new producers will come, because the game will develop a bad reputation. The playerbase enters a downward spiral, and the game dies.