Safe Zone....

Am I the only one who thinks the safe zone is a bit too big ? i get the point of wanting PvPers and PvE to co exist but i feel thats a bit much .... and a questions on the safe zone will waring guilds still be able to attack anywhere on the map ? even in safe zones ?
«13456

Comments

  • edited March 11
    what do you think is the ratio of pve vs pvp people? if i was to guess, i'd say they got it right. the pvp zones are big enough to plant worthwhile stuff in it, but not so big that the pvp community would dilute.

    look at eve, lots of null space. can fly for an hour without meeting anyone.
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa
    But can they really claim "open world pvp" when half the map is none pvp ?
  • Depends on what they plan to spawn there. If there's things unique to those zones, there will be people to go there. I want a housing spot in the frozen tundra, for example, but I'm also not afraid of PvP. For people who need certain items or mats from there, that's where trading comes in.
  • @Andi

    I agree. As a resident of "dagger isle" in UO for many years on great lakes I was a protector of the miners there. A player policed land was incredibly fun.
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa
    Less safe zone but more rewards for killing criminals because FFA open pvp doesn't work out if you want to integrate the two playstyles but half the map being pvp free takes the risk out of an mmo .... maybe some sort of advanced bounty system or any criminals head can be turned in for a reward make it fun for those of us who like fighting reds ...
  • SachaSacha [Reino de Aldor]
    Losing your backpack is no real risk, a permadeath or at least losing 10 points of your maximum skill points on each death, that would be risky
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa
    ya losing your items aint a real risk! heck if anything it creates a economy but there needs to be a way of curbing everyone from just being PKs and ruining the game for PvEers .... UOs system worked in a way but could be expanded with harsher penalties and more reward for a justice system promoting anti PKers to kill reds ....... I Guess my thought is arguably UOs best Era was pre trammel and really whats the diffrence between having two mirror facets trammel/Feluca or just having half the map being safe zoned ? ..... ill come into this game with an open mind and try it , but honestly i lost interest in UO shortly after Trammel it changed the whole feel of the game for me and no i wasnt a PK i was in waring guilds and Killing reds
  • @BuckofPac. I totally thought the guard zone of Celador was way to big when I first looked at it... but then it's just Celador, the first land, the "homeland." After thinking about it for a while I figured that the other lands would have a much MUCH less guard zone area. I could be completely wrong, but I don't think (or at least hope) I'm going to be.

    Also, I actually think that having most (maybe all, not sure) of the housing area covered by guards is an excellent thing. It stops (or at least limits) house fighting, griefing, running, etc which I think is wonderful. If Celador is the main housing area and nucleus of all the shards, it makes sense to me that it would have a very large guard presence. Now, hopefully most of the other lands have a much smaller presence.
  • It wasn't Trammel that killed UO, it was how Felucca was implemented. Felucca was basically the same as Trammel, only with open pvp and "in fugly", with dead trees, skulls and blood everywhere just to make it look "badass".

    EVE did it about half-right, with the large core highsec and the fringe nullsec areas, later the wormholes as a means to circumvent bottlenecks for explorers, all on one map. If anything, EVE nullsec is too big. You have hundreds of players in mission hubs like Penirgman (and more in Caldari space), but rarely even 1 player in claimed space. There's not enough exclusive content there that makes going there worthwhile for highsec players though. You're still better off just doing missions, but that's okay, too, because those who enjoy pvp don't need to have better resources on top of that.

    If I was to run a server, I'd probably shut off PVP, except for factions. Would I lose players by doing that? Of course. But it would keep many more from leaving because some random red who pretends to be a pvper but really only ever ganks when they're sure to win just ruined their day. Those who do pvp for a challenge could pick factions, problem solved. It wouldn't weed out pvpers, it would get me rid of the ganker types who, contrary to what they may believe, are not the majority, by a huge margin.
  • I'd love to see pitched PvP battles between towns or what not. Lined up straight up like Braveheart with guilds choosing their side and then the "generals" yelling charge with no rez available for the duration. Holy crap would that be fun. Or maybe it'd be a complete mess, but I think it would be fun (and probably laggy as hell, but whatever).
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa
    I disagree , but i also know i won't change anybodys opinion... i feel adding risk and a solid justice system makes fir better gameplay some ppl just want to be safe zoned , hell might as well just add a pvp switch lol
  • BuckofPac said:

    I disagree , but i also know i won't change anybodys opinion... i feel adding risk and a solid justice system makes fir better gameplay some ppl just want to be safe zoned , hell might as well just add a pvp switch lol

    ^^^ Solid justice system is key. I agree completely
  • I think a safe zone is needed. Not to infringe on PvPers, but to curb grievers. 1 griefer can cause a lot of people to quit or not recommend the game to others. I'm all for PvP and a challenge, but I think it's in the best interest of the game Yo have some areas where people can chill and gain skills (at least to 50 or so) without worrying about grievers.

    That said, the small population playing on Aria right now hasn't had griever problems in the short time I've been playing. I've had the urge to hang someone a few times, but I have a feeling it would just hinder my progress as I'd be hunted down by others. Unfortunately, self-policing won't stop grievers if that's what they really want to do, so some game mechanic needs to be in place.
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa

    I think a safe zone is needed. Not to infringe on PvPers, but to curb grievers. 1 griefer can cause a lot of people to quit or not recommend the game to others. I'm all for PvP and a challenge, but I think it's in the best interest of the game Yo have some areas where people can chill and gain skills (at least to 50 or so) without worrying about grievers.

    That said, the small population playing on Aria right now hasn't had griever problems in the short time I've been playing. I've had the urge to hang someone a few times, but I have a feeling it would just hinder my progress as I'd be hunted down by others. Unfortunately, self-policing won't stop grievers if that's what they really want to do, so some game mechanic needs to be in place.

    im not against safe zones ... just not half the map being safe zoned i could see around the main towns maybe a good sized area around the starting town , but half the map seems a bit too "safe"
  • YorlikYorlik www.arcanima.org
    edited March 13
    I think the size of the safe zone is good, because it's the main map on the main server and having a balanced setting here is a good thing.

    For PvPers there can never be enough PvP areas, for PvEers not enough safezones.

    I think we have a sane compromise now and there will be more maps in the future,
    especially dungeon type maps like Terminus, which will add a bunch of more PvP regions.

    Also, I'm pretty sure there will be player run servers with bigger and smaller safezone/PvP areas.

    We shouldn't start another flamewar here - I think we have that behind us and CS has addressed the issues pretty well.
  • FuddyFuddy California
    @Yorlik @Andi 100% agree with you.
  • FuddyFuddy California
    @Yorlik @Andi 100% agree with you.
  • I definitely think it's too big. I think restricting it to the main island would make the most sense. However, currently it spreads past the main island just a smidge. Reign it back a little and it'd be perfect. Easier for people to remember crossing the river = no longer safe.
  • Starfire3DStarfire3D Auckland, New Zealand
    The problem with these "safe" areas are they aren't "safe". What about 2 wankers that suicide gank with 2 players? One kills the target, gets Guard ganked and the other person loots the corpse.
  • just like in eve highsec
  • SachaSacha [Reino de Aldor]
    To prevent that case it would be easier to just disable pvp in the green areas.
  • Starfire3DStarfire3D Auckland, New Zealand
    Sacha said:

    To prevent that case it would be easier to just disable pvp in the green areas.

    (Duck for cover) PK freaks ATTACK!!
  • Sacha said:

    To prevent that case it would be easier to just disable pvp in the green areas.

    Realistically, that's much easier on the PvP/PKers because you can't accidentally get guard wacked.

    On another note, if a single player can kill someone before the guards come.... wow, congrats! That's one hell of an attack. Well, either that or the target was afk or sleeping or botting or something like that. Also, if the other player looted he would turn gray and be attackable anyways.
  • BuckofPacBuckofPac USA Iowa
    bring on the PKs! photo Buckvsryo.jpg
  • ZagZag
    edited March 15
    Don't forget you can also get robbed in the safe areas, Trammy McTrammelface! Haha, can't wait to create my thief!

    I also think Factions are a nice option for people who think the safe zones are too big. PvP between rival factions gets no interference from the guards, so you can have that hardcore mode on over the entire map!
  • Starfire3DStarfire3D Auckland, New Zealand
    Nogo said:

    Sacha said:

    To prevent that case it would be easier to just disable pvp in the green areas.

    Realistically, that's much easier on the PvP/PKers because you can't accidentally get guard wacked.
    At the moment the PVE settings of the Aria server, you can still attack a player in Guard Zone but you don't damage them but you still get killed by the guards.
  • Yeah, that's almost how things were in UO. Except that in UO the player being attacked (or any bystander) had to call the guards by actually typing "Guards!". I always thought that was a nice touch which added a moderate degree of realism to the game.
  • NPCs call the guards in LOA. They should, would be strange if they didn't.
    On Sanctuary, there's super guards who pop up and level you in one hit. They turned out to be necessary, after reds camped the newbie spawn zones, "testing pvp", lol.
  • Yeah, those sanctuary guards are no joke. We were trying to do a little sparring/experimenting/and magic resist training.... and we got the ka-crap kicked out of us by the star-trek guard crew.
  • Yea, but that was what happened to newbies who just got their fresh chars to the graveyard. Only that they were onehit by reds, not by super guards. The server went to shit when all the blue guilds stopped playing.
This discussion has been closed.