Non-Consensual PvP for the new Legacy Shard

I just wanted to see what everyone thought about the way PvP would be handled on the new Legacy shard. A few things to point out is that when I say "PvP"; I not only mean combat like Order vs Chaos but also all other aspects like thieving and the "leechers" who wait for people to die to take their stuff from their corpse. 

  1. How would you like to see PvP & looting work on the Legacy Shard?37 votes
    1. 100% consensual and item insurance (pretty much like it is on live shards)
      35.14%
    2. 100% consensual with no insurance (if you die fighting a monster you can be looted)
      10.81%
    3. Non-Consensual but with insurance (you might die but you keep your stuff)
        0.00%
    4. Non-Consensual with no insurance (exactly like it was pre-Trammel)
      54.05%
«13

Comments

  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 195
    My thoughts are that for me to want to leave my home shard to play a new (temporary) shard that is for "nostalgia" it would truly need to be like it was 20 some years ago (no insurance and it's a free for all). That means the only safe zones are in the town limits (even then thieves are lurking but are typically caught and items returned) but we also don't have the insane sets of armor & skills we have today so resuiting could literally be done from an NPC until you can get some better pieces (or have a GM crafter help you). Anything other than this completely defeats the purpose of creating that nostalgic feel the Devs were talking about where "a gate opens and a bunch of murderers come piling out". It would just create the same divide we have on prod shard where all people just flock to the same safe hunting grounds with nothing to lose and those that want to play the shard for that PvP type of interact will quickly lose interest and leave.

    If we are going to just get another candy land then to me it just feels like any other shard (which actually has less to do).

    Anyone else??
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,147
    If it is just like UO was Pre-Tram it will run off every new player, we do not need a comeback of a fail experiment that if Tram were not created would have closed UO many many years ago.
  • actually thats something i never thought of

    If you die in a nonconsensual pvp zone can you be looted? I would hope so but that would encourage griefing.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 195
    I personally think they need to at least do away with 1 of the 2 (I think they are set on the consensual thing). 

    There seems to be a strong majority of people who would basically want candy land remade on this classic shard (from what I've read elsewhere) which I can see because there are some people that love to grief... that said... isn't that just another legacy to play? Or how about murderous pirate? If everyone has to "opt in" then what's the point of playing a bad guy? On the flip side, if there is no evil then what's the point of making a "protector" or "avenger" type Legacy char?

    That's one reason I'm for non-consensual PvP because you obviously see the bad side of people there but can also see the good side. I did make a few friends over the years (long ago) just by standing up with them against a murderer to help the underdog so it really isn't all doom and gloom. We didn't always win (but we did win our share) but usually had fun either way.
  • Play Siege.  Also, UO survived the pre-Trammel era only due to a relative lack of competition.  That no longer is the case now.
  • SethSeth Posts: 708
    edited September 29
    Suddenly I thought of a pvp server where everyone logged in, select a profession and gets equipped to the same gear and skill sets for that selection. 

    It is like Counterstrike, log in pick a weapon and thats it, the rest is up to your real skills. 

    So no more training, whining about looting, disadvantage items, etc.

    Login, pick, equip, jump in and start attacking. If die, can re-equip immediately and fight straight away.
    You and Several Others like this wishlist:
    Making wearable artifacts shard bound is the worst idea in entire UO history.


  • CookieCookie Posts: 612
    edited September 29
    Play Siege.  Also, UO survived the pre-Trammel era only due to a relative lack of competition.  That no longer is the case now.

    Not true at all.

    UO created it's true legacy at that point in time, which was crushed and turned soulless by becoming commercialised.

  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 195
    I do think the Legacy shard (depending how the do it) might be a bad thing for the UO store. You don't really get the same nostalgia by buying a set of Tokuno dyes (they didn't even exist at that point) or any of the other 100% vanity items from the store (no need for house deco packages on a shard that is going to be blown up).

    It will be further perpetuated by allowing for non-consensual PvP / no insurance (who wants to wants to use a forged tool charge on an item that is likely going to be lost). That makes me think they will continue the Candyland play where people won't ever lose anything... a major reason I'd have no reason to start over from scratch.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 195
    I also think it's weird that there have been 150 views of this thread at this point and only 14 votes. So either there is some major options I forgot or not enough people care about the legacy shard to even cast a vote.
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,147
    What is the difference between your #4 and SP, isn't that what SP is right now (Non-Consensual with no insurance (exactly like it was pre-Trammel)).  Why isn't SP that packed if you think that rule set is so great.
  • psychopsycho Posts: 164
    edited September 29
    What I want on new legacy:   Order versus Chaos, if you join it theres no hiding place or safe zone.

    Red PKs that can pk everywhere except inside towns which has guardzone. This means guards should autokill PKs on sight, regardless of they attack anyone or not.

    You can loot me, take my armor and everything I have.
    But let 100% resisting spells offer some protection phys resist etc, so you can play without armor at all.   (I wont log on a crafter and make new armor everytime I die, then id be playing 90% crafter 10% other char)   I rather want this solution with resisting spells than allowing item insurance.

    If they went with Order versus Chaos they could have events, rewards and alot of items with the Order versus Chaos theme, pretty cool for the shattering, allowing anyone xfer the items to prod shards afterwards.    (and, no faction system.  cant have competing pvp systems there like O/C Faction and VvV,  

    Order v Chaos and PK v AntiPKs is more than enough.


  • PawainPawain Posts: 3,180
    I think they said they were going to update VvV.
  • psychopsycho Posts: 164
    Pawain said:
    I think they said they were going to update VvV.
    This is fine by me, if they replace Order versus Chaos with VvV,
    however I really dont see how VvV fit into the history-theme of UO

    Sometimes going back to the roots is the best.

  • Arnold7Arnold7 Posts: 120
    Think the worlds you have now are fine. A place for pvp players, a place for pvm players, and for those that like both, the ability to go back and forth.  Do not really think you need a new shard.  There are already plenty of places for new players to explore.  But, do think that you need to rethink your overall attitude towards new players.  They need a reason to play, reasonable advancement of their character and meaningful goals.  Do not think requiring new players to train for a year before being transferred to a production shard is going to cut it.  
  • I think non-consensual PVP on this server is not what the game needs.
    I mean, if you want the game to survive more years, you have to attract new players. You can't only rely on you old aging playerbase.

    I don't think nowadays players are ready to be chain kill by other player, and being ganked each time the put a toe outside town. Loosing hours of playing time (mining, farming, fishing). If you don't want pvp, being killed by a blood thirsty player is not what i call fun.

    Sure this server needs Pvp, and pvp is an UO root,
    You need some zones with great rewards pvp only.
    Or if you join a faction (your choise) you enter the blood game.

    You need room for PVM and PVP player.

    But make PVP like SP will not attract new players.

    My 2 cents...
    Sombrerose/Fishlover
  • Arnold7Arnold7 Posts: 120
    Agree with Sombrerose, you need to attract new players.  I have met many older, some even older than me, players that have been playing for years in my travels that are really dedicated to this game.  I am sure that some of them would be more than happy to help with finding a way to attract new players. 
  • poppspopps Posts: 1,794
    psycho said:
    Pawain said:
    I think they said they were going to update VvV.
    This is fine by me, if they replace Order versus Chaos with VvV,
    however I really dont see how VvV fit into the history-theme of UO

    Sometimes going back to the roots is the best.

    How about, instead, bringing back FACTIONS !

    https://www.uoguide.com/Factions

    Lots of people had tons of fun playing Factions.... never understood why they stopped them.

    Steal the sigils, plant traps in town, guard the Alamo and all that.
  • keven2002keven2002 Posts: 195
    Arnold7 said:
    Think the worlds you have now are fine. A place for pvp players, a place for pvm players, and for those that like both, the ability to go back and forth.  Do not really think you need a new shard.  There are already plenty of places for new players to explore.  But, do think that you need to rethink your overall attitude towards new players.  They need a reason to play, reasonable advancement of their character and meaningful goals.  Do not think requiring new players to train for a year before being transferred to a production shard is going to cut it.  
    I agree with you. If they are just going to kind of do what we have now using an "updated VvV" system then essentially we are just going to get more of what we already have; in that case they don't even need a new shard. Sombrerose said:
    I think non-consensual PVP on this server is not what the game needs.
    I mean, if you want the game to survive more years, you have to attract new players. You can't only rely on you old aging playerbase.

    I think think it is what the game needs for the same reason. The aging player base are the people that are saying they don't enjoy PvP and they won't play a shard that has non-consensual PvP. If they want to attract a new younger player base then they really need to look at what other games have such huge draws (I don't play Xbox anymore but would say Fortnite and Call of Duty represent a good amount)... these games are based mainly on PvP. Therefore the new shard should really be more PvP zones with chance at Legacy with just a few safety zones where people who don't like that stuff can do more grindy content (small risk small reward). That would be a very unpopular idea among the current player base but that goes back to the question of what the actual point of the shard was for (bring in more people or create another new shard for old players).
  • Ok boys calm down.  
    First off, the minute one of you dippys go for a romp in this new land and start to kill and loot the players this will be the end of the game.  This is meant to bring new up to date and feel more a part of what our world is now.  Those who come here thinking this is call of duty or Wow will be sadly looking for the door.  Not that pvp or pking  wont be there but tell me this.  Why do you think all the players moved to TRAM??? 
    Those players were tired of it, the test crew told the Dev of that era this.. did they listen?
    Hell no. 
    They were blood gore good... mongo like.   
    Thieves made the time a living hell. 
      How many of you lost your house keys or runes??  The thief would ask for so much gold that it was nearly impossible to pay to get it back.  I can't tell you how many times people left UO mad or hurt that all they worked hard to get was shuffled off to some hidden players pocket who trashing most of it to spite the player it belonged to.
    You think new kids will come to play that?????
  • AragornAragorn Posts: 141
    run 2 seasons with 2 most voted options (and probably cut the season to 6 months instead of 1 year) and see which one is more popular then run it more regularly. sometimes ppl just need to experience it and sometimes they will change their mind. 
  • BilboBilbo Posts: 2,147
    Well said @Lady_Storm
    We already have a Non-Con Shard and they refuse to play it so why would we make another Non-Con shard just to appease a select few. If you want PvP then join VvV and kill all the other VvV people, stop asking for more SHEEP
  • this idea is a massive waste of time,  there is thousands of players waiting for updates on shards they play everyday.   there is no way they could make any version of this game that will be worth even trying.
  • WessWess Posts: 8
                   What made UO work back then was the teamwork, not the PvP. Like the White Knights guarding the crossroads waiting on those greys to inevitably run by, or the groups train calling guards for the thieves. This took numbers, lots and lots of numbers to keep it alive and playable. Thank god for those player villages taking in noobs like me.
                  Had Tram not arrived UO would have been dead far sooner. Literally overnight Brit Fell was a ghost town, not even the forges survived Tram. It was a fail then, it's a fail now. Put your money on PvP and lose your money.
                 Legacy is not a save all either in my opinion, see Wurm Online. Not enough players now, and you want to separate this even further? In my opinion we need to be combining servers, not separating them.New players don't mind the grind when there is twenty other new players on their screen. This game needs numbers to survive. In the week that I have been back i have seen three people, three, Lake Superior. If it were not for friends and memory lane I would have rolled out already 6 days later, all three of us.

    Here is some of my suggestions. (My Opinion)

    * Combine, i know it's hard to do, but it's honestly about survival at this point. Start combining servers. Possibly start a "transfer only server" for all dead servers, free house deeds, free land matching current resident? Can only transfer if on existing "closing" server, in the beginning at least. Use the modified tokens for transfer at no cost to the new "transfer server"...? One new clean server could probably combine many dead servers at this point.

    Get out of this dated monthly fee. Don't bother with Steam until this happens, 100% will fail. Possibly offer 30 day playtime tokens that can be bought with gold bought by other players to sell?  Redistributes wealth, makes buying gold in-house and gives players the option to play for free without restriction....UO keeps her income....

    Clean up UO. All these patched buttons are horrid. I know, light years better, but that's how we remember it, not how a new player will see it. Inventory, two choices, bad or worse. half the time it doesn't even work. That store is like navigating DOS. Seriously, it don't take much, just clean it up. Make sure it works. Left click menus, think MUD, they need to go, all of them.

    At this point we have less but more populated servers, a cleaner UO UI, and an option to really play for free. Time for Steam, go where the gamers are.

    Or, you can dump more time and money into PvP, Listen to your dedicated player base, all twenty of them and continue down this dark dead road. Again, this is just my opinion.


  • Arnold7Arnold7 Posts: 120
    Really think UO needs to spend some time identifying its potential player base.  I prefer adventure games that offer a mix of exploring and combat.  I am playing this game because it does not make the physical demands on my hands that controller based games do.  I can play this game pretty well using just a mouse and the keyboard, and, if need be, using just a mouse.  That’s the player base I belong too.  The advertising for this game talks more about living in a virtual world than pvp.  I think If Ultima Online does more to address the needs of newer players, it has a lot to offer to the right audience.
  • SethSeth Posts: 708
    edited September 30
    I have not played other mmo rpg pvp, but only those shooter games.

    I think the main issue with UO pvp is afraid of losing items. And those items are hard to get or cost millions. 

    Again, I think its best to totally think out of the box.

    Think pure pvp, cut down item reliance and shorten or remove training. Just login, dress up and equip like in Test Center style.

    Then have active moongates for current pvp area. Step in and appear randomly in a pvp area and start hammering away. Reward with scores and items that can be transferred back to prodo shard. 

    If there is any need to do training or hunting for hard to get items on legacy shard every year after it is reset... are u kidding me...? 

    If Legacy shard is going to be another Trammel, then there are many other games to play then the old uo graphics.
    You and Several Others like this wishlist:
    Making wearable artifacts shard bound is the worst idea in entire UO history.


  • Seth read the latest news from the team in your e mail. 
       It will not be ether tram or fel but a new land with a way to catch up from start to be able at the end to merge to a prodo shard and keep up with the rest of us or at least close enough to have fun. 
    That is the reason we play UO is to have fun.    I dont come in to UO to plot some poor guys death and dry loot him.  I play what feels good that day, sometimes its a crafter, other days a tamer with my pets.  Other days I go hunting...  I can no longer pk or pvp due to my strokes.. just dont have the speed.   I dont miss it.  I have just as much fun doing other things in the game
  • SethSeth Posts: 708
    Seth read the latest news from the team in your e mail. 
       It will not be ether tram or fel but a new land with a way to catch up from start to be able at the end to merge to a prodo shard and keep up with the rest of us or at least close enough to have fun. 
    That is the reason we play UO is to have fun.    I dont come in to UO to plot some poor guys death and dry loot him.  I play what feels good that day, sometimes its a crafter, other days a tamer with my pets.  Other days I go hunting...  I can no longer pk or pvp due to my strokes.. just dont have the speed.   I dont miss it.  I have just as much fun doing other things in the game

    If everyone loves and agrees with the Legacy server concept, there would not be so many posts talking about it and offering alternative ideas. Maybe just one thread of accolades for the idea would suffice.
    You and Several Others like this wishlist:
    Making wearable artifacts shard bound is the worst idea in entire UO history.


  • JepethJepeth Posts: 125
    I truly think the Legacy shard concept has a ton of potential and I would offer accolades for what it can bring to the game. https://forum.uo.com/discussion/7382/thoughts-on-our-new-legacy#latest
  • SmootSmoot Posts: 290
    a pvp toggle is basically tram.  the rewards for having pvp on would have to be extremely good for it to be worthwhile.   like really good.  like basically not worth playing without it.

    if the goal is to attract players from the free shards, and old time vets who remember the first days of UO, a pvp toggle, vice vrs virute opt in or out, or consensual pvp system isnt going to cut it.

  • SmootSmoot Posts: 290
    edited September 30
    without full pvp, all the problems that pvp solves will still go on.   spawn camping.  unattended macroing.  multibox farming. 

    i foresee 10-20 character multibox account groups (pvp toggle off) farming mobs for gold, filling the housing with castles within the week, then selling those castles and other items for cash.
This discussion has been closed.