Standing System

[Emdash]

@Havoc explain to me what is wrong with my simple idea that people can flag blue (innocent) and play pve... not be able to loot, push, repair, or pvp at all (unless in retaliation to a murder attempt), and in order to be attacked they will have to be purposefully TARGETED (to prevent grief from blue blocking, running in the middle of fights etc), then other people can flag grey which would be open pvp, no penalty, outside of town areas. The penalty for killing a blue would be high. I dunno what it would be, but it would be high. You could change your flag from blue to grey, but once you did, you could not change it back. You would be 'losing your innocence.' That way, we could agree that they are truly innocents (non pvpers) trying to go about their biz, they could be paying mercs and stuff, but they would be nonpvpers, still. The rest can flag open pvp and fight it out.

Seems to make a lot more sense than the previous system and standing system. Seems like it gives everyone what they want. The rest involves some level of 'hiding behind a flag', imo.

The key to a system, I think, is simplicity and lack of exploits. Then you look at if it is going to have unintended consequences on any players outside of the ones its aiming to effect. I think the standing system, as it continues to grow, is going to continue to fail on all of these levels EVEN MORE.

Soldiers and citizens. Explain where I'm going wrong. The only thing left would be to decide the proper punishment for when someone 'murders (which would be a fitting word in that instance) an innocent.

And nah I don't wanna hear anything about blue alts. People been had blue alts, and blues have been gearing reds forever thru selling or whatever. You'd be handicapping yourself on so many levels to flag blue if you were interested in pvp that it would not be worth it.

Some people LEGIT DO NOT PVP. Why put them in the same category as a pvper who hasn't attacked anyone in 120 seconds or whatever? Could even make it a 'war crime' to kill said blues in the context of a war. Again, the only ironing out would be what the punishments would be, hopefully something you couldn't evade by just having a keep, but something fair, too. I dunno if stat loss is the right thing, however. It would have to be something, once they finally got caught and killed.

 

[Albanjo Dravae]

@Havoc explain to me what is wrong with my simple idea that people can flag blue (innocent) and play pve... not be able to loot, push, repair, or pvp at all (unless in retaliation to a murder attempt), and in order to be attacked they will have to be purposefully TARGETED (to prevent grief from blue blocking, running in the middle of fights etc), then other people can flag grey which would be open pvp, no penalty, outside of town areas. The penalty for killing a blue would be high. I dunno what it would be, but it would be high. You could change your flag from blue to grey, but once you did, you could not change it back. You would be 'losing your innocence.' That way, we could agree that they are truly innocents (non pvpers) trying to go about their biz, they could be paying mercs and stuff, but they would be nonpvpers, still. The rest can flag open pvp and fight it out.

Seems to make a lot more sense than the previous system and standing system. Seems like it gives everyone what they want. The rest involves some level of 'hiding behind a flag', imo.

The key to a system, I think, is simplicity and lack of exploits. Then you look at if it is going to have unintended consequences on any players outside of the ones its aiming to effect. I think the standing system, as it continues to grow, is going to continue to fail on all of these levels EVEN MORE.

Soldiers and citizens. Explain where I'm going wrong. The only thing left would be to decide the proper punishment for when someone 'murders (which would be a fitting word in that instance) an innocent.

And nah I don't wanna hear anything about blue alts. People been had blue alts, and blues have been gearing reds forever thru selling or whatever. You'd be handicapping yourself on so many levels to flag blue if you were interested in pvp that it would not be worth it.

Some people LEGIT DO NOT PVP. Why put them in the same category as a pvper who hasn't attacked anyone in 120 seconds or whatever? Could even make it a 'war crime' to kill said blues in the context of a war. Again, the only ironing out would be what the punishments would be, hopefully something you couldn't evade by just having a keep, but something fair, too. I dunno if stat loss is the right thing, however. It would have to be something, once they finally got caught and killed.

By removing non concensual pvp you are changing the basic principles and nature of the game. I don't like that at all MO2 is not ment to be a PVE riskless tourist simulator.

If some people don't pvp they can exercise their dialogue skills, the use of their status, their scaping abilities, their awareness, grouping and more to avoid conflict.

 

[Emdash]

By removing non concensual pvp you are changing the basic principles and nature of the game. I don't like that at all MO2 is not ment to be a PVE riskless tourist simulator.

If some people don't pvp they can exercise their dialogue skills, the use of their status, their scaping abilities, their awareness, grouping and more to avoid conflict.

Nah, THEY CAN'T PVP. They can still be victims. They are blue flag innocents. Pve-rs. You can kill THEM. But if they have no interest in PvP, they should be considered different than those who do. Right...? Those are the people who are 'murders.'

 

[Albanjo Dravae]

Nah, THEY CAN'T PVP. They can still be victims. They are blue flag innocents. Pve-rs. You can kill THEM. But if they have no interest in PvP, they should be considered different than those who do. Right...? Those are the people who are 'murders.'

What would be the benefit for this people if they can still get attacked, i mean theres already a "enable criminal actions" button on the settings.

 

[Havoc]

You think the game would survive after punishing players for participating in its main content?

Your definition of main content for the game is subjective. If you want people who don't want PvP as their main content to stay in the game (MULTIPLE PLAYSTYLES) than yes, there has to be punishment.

I didn't complain about priest camping at all, I am also not complaining about murdering at all. I was a deep red in MO1 and I'll be a deep red in MO2. I will be priest camping for territory control regardless of the consequences, because I also have no interest in playing out of a blue town.

None of this means there should be no consequences- because my playstyle is oppressive to the players who DON'T want PvP to be their primary content, there has to be punishment or you simply end up with the world being a giant arena as Darkfall did. If you need a history lesson, that game has essentially died on at least three occasions.

 

[Albanjo Dravae]

Your definition of main content for the game is subjective. If you want people who don't want PvP as their main content to stay in the game (MULTIPLE PLAYSTYLES) than yes, there has to be punishment.

I didn't complain about priest camping at all, I am also not complaining about murdering at all. I was a deep red in MO1 and I'll be a deep red in MO2. I will be priest camping for territory control regardless of the consequences, because I also have no interest in playing out of a blue town.

None of this means there should be no consequences- because my playstyle is oppressive to the players who DON'T want PvP to be their primary content, there has to be punishment or you simply end up with the world being a giant arena as Darkfall did. If you need a history lesson, that game has essentially died on at least three occasions.

U keep repeating the same shit, nobody is saying there should be no consequences, blue ress to give mc is a dog ass solution to a standing system with severe flaws and i don't think it brings safety to blue players at all, in any case it forces more people to go deep red or to be more selective with blue kills (which ain't precisely bad) but you can still get massive standing loss on mid size fights just by fighting for one side, by the nature of the flagging system.

My initial suggestion about an alive report system i believe it proposes to give the law a higher purpose instead of being an automated mechanic such as ress to give mc, it contemplates and encourages players to become an active asset of the law in the region in many degrees that i've already mentioned before.

I see ress to give mc is hardly a solution for the people that don't want PVP, then again i rather see tools for players to build their own fate instead of automated punishment mechanics.

 

[Havoc]

My initial suggestion about an alive report system i believe it proposes to give the law a higher purpose instead of being an automated mechanic such as ress to give mc, it contemplates and encourages players to become an active asset of the law in the region in many degrees that i've already mentioned before.

You keep repeating this as if anyone will believe you aren't just asking for no consequences.

 

[Albanjo Dravae]

You keep repeating this as if anyone will believe you aren't just asking for no consequences.

The fact you are unable to see the benefit of what im proposing doesn't mean it doesnt have any, my suggestion does pretend to eliminate the ability to report players with the ress and report but a whole new spectrum of activities come along with that. But you can't even have a conversation about it cuz absolutly triggered about me not wanting consequences.

 

[Havoc]

my suggestion does pretend to eliminate the ability to report players with the ress and report but a whole new spectrum of activities come along with that.

You have yet to give any realistic examples to support this "whole new spectrum of activities" - let alone provide something that replaces the punishment you are asking to have removed. You are simply triggered that someone is calling out the bullshit you like to spew.