PvP Flagging Mechanic, Lets make the best of it

[WarMachine]

Ok, so cross faction PvE is pretty much set in stone. There is just too much in each zone for the opposite faction (see maps with the RvR zones in the middle of PvE areas), cross faction dungeons in opposing players zones, and zone construction.

Instead of sulking in the corner and complaining to Mythic, or claiming victory you have more PvP, lets discuss ways to improve on the system that Mythic is putting in. We know other games have made a mockery of this feature, But Mythic has the power to currently improve this feature.

I've add a poll of things that we disscussed in this topic..... (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20403) But, at 38 pages they get burried by posts that only read the first 10 or so pages, and its more of a topic to discuss the update, not going over the feature improvements.

So lets have a civil dissucssion.

EDIT:
Other features brought up:

Force Flagging (see below for expanation)
Warning system (for entering oposing faction's PvE area if there is an autoflag system)
Not being able to target an opposing player (for buffs or heals) untill flagged (possibly haveing a selection that will show Name Rank/level and possibly guild)
Possible Bonus (buff or Exp) for PvEing flagged.
Spam Flagging (if someone spams emotes they become flagged)

[ImixZinz]

How do we improve a system we don't know anything about, we don't know any details beyond

You can enter cross realm pve, you can flag pvp... pfft to any other info


Im betting our lovely newsletter will release some kind of information pertaining to "Zone layout" or some crap like that.

[Feigro]

I'm indifferent. Though I'd rather not have the option to flag. If people want to RvR they should be in the RvR areas. That's what they're there for. I understand why they'd want to implement flagging. To allow for more random encounters or for people to try and PvP during certain quest types. It makes sense, but I'd rather the PvP be as centralized as possible as to maximize the potential for enemy encounters in the existing RvR areas.

People could get to a point where they're so frustrated about not being able to attack the enemy (in a PvE area) that they spend the rest of the night in the RvR area looking to smash face - this is a good thing to me. I want the RvR areas bursting at the seams.

[WarMachine]

How do we improve a system we don't know anything about, we don't know any details beyond

You can enter cross realm pve, you can flag pvp... pfft to any other info


Im betting our lovely newsletter will release some kind of information pertaining to "Zone layout" or some crap like that.
We might not know much about it, but we can sure post some options (that may even be inthere already) that maybe are not in. Its not about what we don't know, but what we would like to see.

I would also prefer a forced flagging system.....

Force flagging is a good option. L2 did this and removed pretty much all flag greifing. If the players wants to PvP, they have to manually select the option, there isn no auto option (cept for spcial occasions, RvR, attacking a city gaurd, and such). It removed duel glitches, doesn't matter if a flagged player is running infront of you, as they are an "invalid teaget" untill you flag.

Then add leashed and directed aggo mobs. This removes the option of training someone. Pretty much, the person training the mobs drops aggro or the leash runs out, the mobs return to a reset state, returning to their home spot ignoring eveything but an attack on their way home.

KSing is left as the only option to greif, but in all fairness, you can be greifed like this by your own side if they don't like you. But removing all other options will lessen this by the opposit faction to almost non existant. And one more add a system that will "grey" the mob so eveyone knows he's been tagged, and they go into reset ofter 10 to 20 seconds after aggro has been dropped.

[ImixZinz]

We might not know much about it, but we can sure post some options (that may even be inthere already) that maybe are not in. Its not about what we don't know, but what we would like to see.


Ok well then the thread is a little misleading then, should be like... what would you like to see in it or something, you describe the PvP flagging as if we already know it.


Since we're playing a Fantasy Football of sorts in this poll, i'll take

Auto Flagging
War Effort Quests
Chaos Chicken
Patroling Guards
Guarded Gravyard
Friendly Respawn only
And some other yummy pastry.


Forcing to RvR area respawn doesn't seem fair if they died from some fluke and only want to PvE. Delayed flagging time also just increases how lame the flagging system already is by making that "are you ready, are you ready, are you ready" overly apparent, no tooltip either for same reason as delay flag.

[Bear]

It's just a real bad decision, regardless of all the scrambling they'll be constantly having to do to rectify all the problems that it'll cause. It should be a feature that's only for RP servers since that's where the people that seeing the other realm's players and not being able to attack them will break their immersion will be playing.

Other than them, it's just people using "immersion" as a convenient excuse for getting to PvP everywhere.

It appears there's nothing to be done about it though, except just not flag when in PvE areas, put up with all the griefing and annoying behavior that'll now with out a doubt be going on, and maintain respect for the people that wanted to be away from PvP at all times, or are taking a break from it.

[Frein]

I don't really like this poll. The first option makes no sense as there are no faction specific PVE zones, just PVE zones and RVR zones.

Many of the other options on the other hand I feel have very little to do with flagging. I suppose I'd vote at least for the flag warning to prevent cheap shots, though the idea of flagging altogether is so repulsive that I have a hard time answering what I'd like to see in the flagging system.

I'd prefer full time forced flagging to everyone, everywhere. Or possibly sealed off PVE areas if they really insist on safe PVE, though I don't really see the point in intentionally making the game less exciting.

Hmm, I suppose this poll just isn't for me. Just as this game possibly isn't for me if there won't be PVP servers. Flagging is that bad.

[Loekii]

It should be a feature that's only for RP servers since that's where the people that seeing the other realm's players and not being able to attack them will break their immersion will be playing.


Actually many NON-RPers dislike the idea of not being able to attack your enemy on site.

Its a PvP issue.

[sb220]

Immersion is what puts the rpg in mmorpg.

[ImixZinz]

It's just a real bad decision, regardless of all the scrambling they'll be constantly having to do to rectify all the problems that it'll cause. It should be a feature that's only for RP servers since that's where the people that seeing the other realm's players and not being able to attack them will break their immersion will be playing.

Other than them, it's just people using "immersion" as a convenient excuse for getting to PvP everywhere.

It appears there's nothing to be done about it though, except just not flag when in PvE areas, put up with all the griefing and annoying behavior that'll now with out a doubt be going on, and maintain respect for the people that wanted to be away from PvP at all times, or are taking a break from it.


Yes yes yes, im blue in the face from that thread and everyone else is.

They all believe it can work, so apparently its all about "making it work" and not about "making it right".

But you can bet, me and many others, will go out of our way to abuse this system when it is in place, when i go PvEing, my goal will be to hover around enemy's until they're at 10 HP, when i see a quest mob for the other realm I'll camp it, when i get a tell from someone with another account begging me to leave them alone so they can PvE, that till be my incentive to do whatever i can to make his life as miserable as possible until he quits the game.


Oh yes, good times lie ahead fellas.

[ImixZinz]

This poll is turning out beautifully, looks like a rainbow! :o

[Bear]

Immersion is what puts the rpg in mmorpg.heh ya, for @ 1/20 to 1/25 of any game's total population, if you go by the RP/regular server ratio for games that even bother to add separate RP servers.

[dutch_gamer]

Once you enter the PvE area of the enemy, it should flag you after 10 seconds, it should however not show any kind of flashing to the other side. I don't like instant flagging, because you can't even tell if you are entering someone's PvE area, there are no real boundaries.

See:

http://tiamat.gotdns.org/~rafe/pqcrossrealm.jpg

Or one could opt to watch the very first podcast on Warhammeralliance.com. Or the times that people did show the actual in-game maps, like in a video on this very site from the GD in Toronto (if I am right made by Kilrogg) and possibly even at Baltimore.

So since there are no real boundaries, you can't have instant flagging, someone just moving one inch over an invisible line can't be instantly flagged, because they may have had no intention to even get into PvE area of his enemy.

Also I see no reason for the enemy to be able to grief the other side into hitting them. Don't allow the other side to be able to target you, unless they flag themselves. Sure, you can still kill their mobs, but they can also still report you for downright griefing/harassment. If people intend to do that kind of crap, only because they are put of by a feature they don't even understand, it is my right to report you for it. This feature truly shows that the community for WAR is heading into the wrong direction. If some people intend to destroy the fun of the game for others, then they don't belong in this game. There is no need to be a total prick.

[sb220]

It doesnt matter...GW doesnt care how many people playing care about their ip. They do want it done right regardless.

And immersion isnt necessarily an rp thing either....realm pride is an immersive aspect

[Frein]

heh ya, for @ 1/20 to 1/25 of any game's total population, if you go by the RP/regular server ratio for games that even bother to add separate RP servers.
I'm not a role player, yet I appreciate immersion. However, this issue goes deeper than immersion. It's about competition. Not competition as orcs versus dwarves, but as us versus them.

I find your claims quite ridiculous to be honest. I suppose according to you, 90% of the player base would be fine with no realm structure at all. They're playing Progress Quest after all; only the stats of their characters matter, and only increasing said stats is what they look for in a game.

[WarMachine]

Once you enter the PvE area of the enemy, it should flag you after 10 seconds, it should however not show any kind of flashing to the other side. I don't like instant flagging, because you can't even tell if you are entering someone's PvE area, there are no real boundaries.
Just out of curiosity, why would you not want flag warnings?


Also I see no reason for the enemy to be able to grief the other side into hitting them. Don't allow the other side to be able to target you, unless they flag themselves. Sure, you can still kill their mobs, but they can also still report you for downright griefing/harassment. If people intend to do that kind of crap, only because they are put of by a feature they don't even understand, it is my right to report you for it. This feature truly shows that the community for WAR is heading into the wrong direction. If some people intend to destroy the fun of the game for others, then they don't belong in this game. There is no need to be a total prick.
Thats called force flagging, you can see that one of my above posts (page one) desctibes it. I wish I would have though to put it in the poll, but to late and not enough slots.

[Loekii]

Once you enter the PvE area of the enemy, it should flag you after 10 seconds, it should however not show any kind of flashing to the other side. I don't like instant flagging, because you can't even tell if you are entering someone's PvE area, there are no real boundaries.

See:

http://tiamat.gotdns.org/~rafe/pqcrossrealm.jpg (http://tiamat.gotdns.org/%7Erafe/pqcrossrealm.jpg)

Or one could opt to watch the very first podcast on Warhammeralliance.com. Or the times that people did show the actual in-game maps, like in a video on this very site from the GD in Toronto (if I am right made by Kilrogg) and possibly even at Baltimore.

So since there are no real boundaries, you can't have instant flagging, someone just moving one inch over an invisible line can't be instantly flagged, because they may have had no intention to even get into PvE area of his enemy.

Also I see no reason for the enemy to be able to grief the other side into hitting them. Don't allow the other side to be able to target you, unless they flag themselves. Sure, you can still kill their mobs, but they can also still report you for downright griefing/harassment. If people intend to do that kind of crap, only because they are put of by a feature they don't even understand, it is my right to report you for it. This feature truly shows that the community for WAR is heading into the wrong direction. If some people intend to destroy the fun of the game for others, then they don't belong in this game. There is no need to be a total prick.

Good point about the zone line and how it needs to be handled. I like your solution as well -- 10 second delay with a system message alerting YOU about your impending change.

However, I do disagree about not letting others know you are becoming a threat. I think it is only fair that the opposing team should be informed that you are about to become a potential threat in 10 seconds. I don't think there should be a timer on their UI, but I do think that they need to know that you WILL be able to attack them.

I also like your idea about not being able to target someone if they are not PvP, but wouldn't that be difficult to code?

Either way, both are good suggestions.

[WarMachine]

I also like your idea about not being able to target someone if they are not PvP, but wouldn't that be difficult to code?
Not really. It shoul be easy to put in, as it just disableds an auto attack on opposing players untill you force flag.

[Loekii]

I'm not a role player, yet I appreciate immersion. However, this issue goes deeper than immersion. It's about competition. Not competition as orcs versus dwarves, but as us versus them.



I agree. While I do enjoy RP, I also enjoy RvR and PvP -- and on that level, this has more to do with competition, than with RP.

As I have stated before, I personally dislike the idea of 'safe-leveling' -- although I feel better after hearing some of the responses here and how it will be less of an impact to competition than I feared.

[Loekii]

Not really. It shoul be easy to put in, as it just disableds an auto attack on opposing players untill you force flag.

If it is an easy change, then I would think it would be a good addition.

Is there a reason to target a PvE Enemy Player? I am sure there are, but I think that the need to remove such potential exploits might outweigh those reasons.

I need to amend my poll answers to include the following Write-in:


X - INABILITY TO TARGET PVE ENEMY PLAYERS IN PVE ZONES :D

[sb220]

Yeah flag warnings would help...say I am flagged for pvp but this orc following me is not. I get bored with him and start pulling a mob and then he pops his flag on and basically I get tag-teamed. So it helps to reduce the use of that tactic.

Oh nm, in relation to instant flagging upon entering an enemy zone? No I dont see the need for any kind of warning. Me being there is warning enough isnt it?

[WarMachine]

Actually, come to think of it, it should completey disable and type of targeting of opponet players, with maybe just a selection that shows name and Rank/Level and possibly guid.

[Evil_Sandwich]

What about not allowing an enemy attack your mob once you have tagged it? Lots of problems with that idea, but yah.

[Mutters]

To prevent ganking, what the game could do is save your character at the max level of each chapter with the tactics/skills/spells/armor available to you at that time. Then, when you drop back into the lower chapters, you can RvR at a reasonable level with no undue advantages (though it costs more in server database space to keep 3 more copies of your character)

The easier way to do this is make players into chickens, which just involves an animation.

As a lifetime PvPer from Everquest and WoW, I enjoy open world PvP. I think that the disadvantage of being in an area filled with the opposite faction with guards and all that, would be enough disincentive. Like in WoW, make your quest mobs yell out to guards and have the PvE faction guards pwn face on the PvPer.

I think they can have PvE "safe" areas, and I'm ok with that. Its a broad spectrum appeal to those that don't have the guts to hack killing people. I'm moving from WoW b/c the PvP sucks, my entire guild is transferring to WAR. But I think that Ganking isn't going to happen, and people spilling into PvE areas and killing quest mobs isn't going to happen either.

The core reason is that most of your PvPers will be too busy pushing towards the capitol in chapter 4 to really care what happens in the first three chapters.

I'm also wondering if there will be inter faction crossover, like dwarves helping empire push towards chaos capitol and dark elves helping greenskins capture dwarfs capitol. This would give some variety to the endgame PvP and if the areas are quite large enough, would make players busy enough that they wouldn't need to screw around in the lower chapters.

Just a thought.
Mutters

[Loekii]

Yeah flag warnings would help...say I am flagged for pvp but this orc following me is not. I get bored with him and start pulling a mob and then he pops his flag on and basically I get tag-teamed. So it helps to reduce the use of that tactic.

Oh nm, in relation to instant flagging upon entering an enemy zone? No I dont see the need for any kind of warning. Me being there is warning enough isnt it?

That depends, are you alive or dead. :p

Seriously thought, your point is exactly why there should be a waring about someone changing from PvE to PvP.

Now, I don't think that is necessarily griefing -- following you until you are engaged with a mob -- because the delay (assume 10 seconds) would be simular to as if the Orc player was already flagged, saw you in the distance, and arrived 10 seconds after you started fighting the NPC/Mob.

[Bear]

I'm not a role player, yet I appreciate immersion. However, this issue goes deeper than immersion. It's about competition. Not competition as orcs versus dwarves, but as us versus them.

I find your claims quite ridiculous to be honest. I suppose according to you, 90% of the player base would be fine with no realm structure at all. They're playing Progress Quest after all; only the stats of their characters matter, and only increasing said stats is what they look for in a game.I find it ridiculous that they're implementing a mechanic with a broad stroke and effecting everyone when it's only needed on RP servers. For the people that PvP and "need to kill the opposition on sight all the time" there was already plenty of places to do it, and they could stay in those places throughout their entire leveling. Now they can encroach upon the PvE areas, so the game is entirely open for PvPers, but PvEers can't enter the PvP areas without being flagged automatically, so in effect they now have nowhere to play without having to deal with PvP.

Where once there was the commitment to offer content free of PvP to those that didn't want to participate in it, nor put up with all the silly minutial annoyances and game ruining behavior that goes along with PvP that isn't focused RvR PvP, the door has now been firmly slammed in their faces. Where once all the PvP was focused on the RvR efforts, now that focus is going to lost to a very large degree and PvP will become just as meaningless as it is in most games. Just epeen measuring contests between individuals and guilds, with the RvR battles becoming secondary and probably mostly forgotten.

Yup, this is a good idea alright.

[sb220]

That depends, are you alive or dead. :p

Seriously thought, your point is exactly why there should be a waring about someone changing from PvE to PvP.

Now, I don't think that is necessarily griefing -- following you until you are engaged with a mob -- because the delay (assume 10 seconds) would be simular to as if the Orc player was already flagged, saw you in the distance, and arrived 10 seconds after you started fighting the NPC/Mob.

Well its not exactly fair play, but yes whats fair in war, i know. Difference between those two scenarios is the first orc knows exactly what he is trying to do. Which is attack you while your already engaged or just after so your hp is a bit diminished.

Anyways my post depends on auto flagging in enemy zones.

Auto-flagging = no to warnings, me being there is warning enough

Choice flagging = yes to warnings

[Nerissa]

The ability to flag for PvP in a PvE area = Neon sign that says "KILL ME NOW".



Some people like that, I guess. I know I wouldn't indulge in it, but I'd certainly indulge in 'reminding' people that they are indeed flagged.


(I tend to kill people after they get done fighting a mob. Lame, but if you didn't want lame, you wouldn't be flagged, would you?)

[sb220]

The ability to flag for PvP in a PvE area = Neon sign that says "KILL ME NOW".



Some people like that, I guess. I know I wouldn't indulge in it, but I'd certainly indulge in 'reminding' people that they are indeed flagged.


(I tend to kill people after they get done fighting a mob. Lame, but if you didn't want lame, you wouldn't be flagged, would you?)


See this is the problem with choice flagging...whats the point? Its a hotbutton /duel basically. Nobody is going to flag while they are PVEing. Its why there has to be a buff or bonus or something to help you pve that would entice you to use it. Increased regen rates mabye.

[Nerissa]

Its why there has to be a buff or bonus or something to help you pve that would entice you to use it.



Then you create..... a PvP area out of the PvE area if the buff is good enough.


Brilliant idea, Holmes! Let's just remove one of the selling points of the game, just like that!

[Feigro]

See this is the problem with choice flagging...whats the point? Its a hotbutton /duel basically. Nobody is going to flag while they are PVEing. Its why there has to be a buff or bonus or something to help you pve that would entice you to use it.

That's the thing. Initially you weren't allowed to flag. So flagging in itself is the bonus. The ability to potentially get some PvP going on in the PvE areas. So when you're doing that "conflict" PQ, you can flag up and hope you're enemy is itching for a fight just as bad as you are, so you can duke it out.

There should be no bonus for being flagged in the PvE areas. The bonus for PvPing lies in the RvR areas.

[Loekii]

The ability to flag for PvP in a PvE area = Neon sign that says "KILL ME NOW".



Some people like that, I guess. I know I wouldn't indulge in it, but I'd certainly indulge in 'reminding' people that they are indeed flagged.


(I tend to kill people after they get done fighting a mob. Lame, but if you didn't want lame, you wouldn't be flagged, would you?)

Speaking for myself, I actually enjoy the 'neon sign', as it adds to the challenge - and the victory.

And Bear, for the nth time, being able to fight enemy players is a PvP issue, not an RP issue. You are free to have your opinion, but you are incorrect to assume that PvPers that dislike RPing do not want to be able to attack enemy players on sight.

[Loekii]

See this is the problem with choice flagging...whats the point? Its a hotbutton /duel basically. Nobody is going to flag while they are PVEing. Its why there has to be a buff or bonus or something to help you pve that would entice you to use it. Increased regen rates mabye.

I always run /flagged. It is one of the first things I do when I create a character where that option is allowed.

I am sure that I am not the only one, especially as I tend to run into other pre-flagged players a lot of the time.

It is simply a matter of choice and playing style. Some like to hedge their bets (wont flag until its the best time for them), but other players like to challenge themselves put themselves at the disadvantage (flag first to attract PvP).

[sb220]

Then you create..... a PvP area out of the PvE area if the buff is good enough.


Brilliant idea, Holmes! Let's just remove one of the selling points of the game, just like that!

How so? If you dont want to use it dont...Holmes. Why do you think that because someone is PVEing with a (dangerous) edge over you...that you are somehow at a disadvantage?...Its PVE. You arent competing with the people that are also PVEing

[Bear]

Speaking for myself, I actually enjoy the 'neon sign', as it adds to the challenge - and the victory.

And Bear, for the nth time, being able to fight enemy players is a PvP issue, not an RP issue. You are free to have your opinion, but you are incorrect to assume that PvPers that dislike RPing do not want to be able to attack enemy players on sight.It is an RP issue, a few exceptions don't make a rule, and as I said there was already plenty of places to go about attacking enemy players on sight. One can level all the way to max in them and never leave as a matter of fact. They were called the PvP areas.

[Loekii]

I believe the devs said PvE is there as on option for those that don't want to PvP or want to take a break from PvP. They said you could level up only by PvEing, but you will miss out on most of the content and the better gear.

[Bear]

How so? If you dont want to use it dont...Holmes. Why do you think that because someone is PVEing with a (dangerous) edge over you...that you are somehow at a disadvantage?...Its PVE. You arent competing with the people that are also PVEingYes you are.

I believe the devs said PvE is there as on option for those that don't want to PvP or want to take a break from PvP. They said you could level up only by PvEing, but you will miss out on most of the content and the better gear.You have a link to this statement? Because all I've ever read is that the best gear will come from city sieges, but that those sieges will also have a PvE element as well, so those rewards would be available to everyone.

[sb220]

How do you compete against other players in player-versus-environment?

Seriously grow a pair...this is WAR. Lotro is offering a free trial

[Bear]

How do you compete against other players in player-versus-environment?

Seriously grow a pair...this is WAR. Lotro is offering a free trialYes, real matture there. Have you actually done any research into the features of this game?

[Dreadon]

I think we all are asuming that once you enter into a enemy pve zone you will be flaged automaticly. what if that is not the case then they might be puting in the flag effect so you can do battle in the pve zones where preveisly you could not do it at all.

Also i am in the camp that always walked around with my flag turned on starting at lv 1. gives you the thrill of not knowing what will be coming at you can will bring people out that would not normaly want to start a fight.

[WarMachine]

You have a link to this statement? Because all I've ever read is that the best gear will come from city sieges, but that those sieges will also have a PvE element as well, so those rewards would be available to everyone.
I'd think they have ever said the best gear comes from PvPing, just the best gear for PvPing comes from PvP, and The best gear for PvEing comes from PvE, and Bounty Hunter gear is a combo of both, gain in both types of play.

[sb220]

Yes, real matture there. Have you actually done any research into the features of this game?

Yes I have and dun worry....we will keep your city unsacked for you so you can bank all yer pelts. And if you try to say that pve will have a big effect on the outcome of city sieges...stop

[Loekii]

You have a link to this statement? Because all I've ever read is that the best gear will come from city sieges, but that those sieges will also have a PvE element as well, so those rewards would be available to everyone.

I don't have the link handy, but I am sure others may have it. I will look for it when I get a chance.

Also, perhaps I am misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding me.

City Sieges are PvP -- in the sense that they are RvR. Players involved in city sieges are PVP flagged, with no option to remain PvE and participate in the siege.

From the FAQ:
Campaigns The invasion of enemy lands culminating in the assault on their capital city. The ultimate level of RvR where you can sack one of the enemy's capital city, kill and pillage their residents for special loot. There will be safe-zones in the capital cities that cannot be taken over, in order to provide the "essential" services to the defenders. Once a capital is taken, NPC guards will gradually spawn and help push back the attackers and reset the capital.

[br00tal]

I think we all are asuming that once you enter into a enemy pve zone you will be flaged automaticly. what if that is not the case then they might be puting in the flag effect so you can do battle in the pve zones where preveisly you could not do it at all.

Also i am in the camp that always walked around with my flag turned on starting at lv 1. gives you the thrill of not knowing what will be coming at you can will bring people out that would not normaly want to start a fight.

Wrong. Played the game before at gamesdays, and I've read interviews. When you enter an enemies PVE grounds, you are not autoflagged for PVP. Both players have to be /flagged in order for them to attack each other anywhere outside of RVR zones. Also at tier 4, only around 50% of the zone is RVR and 50% is PVE. The majority of players will not flag for PVP either, because theres no bonus to being flagged. Its stupid, and its pointless.

Huge dissapointment. They aren't changing their stance on this either.

[Loekii]

I'd think they have ever said the best gear comes from PvPing, just the best gear for PvPing comes from PvP, and The best gear for PvEing comes from PvE, and Bounty Hunter gear is a combo of both, gain in both types of play.

I was too vague, as this is basically what I was implying -- talking for a PvPer stance.

[Loekii]

Wrong. Played the game before at gamesdays, and I've read interviews. When you enter an enemies PVE grounds, you are not autoflagged for PVP. Both players have to be /flagged in order for them to attack each other anywhere outside of RVR zones. Also at tier 4, only around 50% of the zone is RVR and 50% is PVE. The majority of players will not flag for PVP either, because theres no bonus to being flagged. Its stupid, and its pointless.


I would say that you played potentially only the first pass at the flagging system, and that there is the possibility to see auto-flagging incorporated -- just like it occurs when you cross over into an RvR area (ala the FAQ).

Hopefully they will improve upon it, rather than going with the basic old system.

[Feigro]

I don't have the link handy, but I am sure others may have it. I will look for it when I get a chance.

Also, perhaps I am misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding me.

City Sieges are PvP -- in the sense that they are RvR. Players involved in city sieges are PVP flagged, with no option to remain PvE and participate in the siege.

While that may be the case, the "looting" phase is certainly implied to have no PvP actions required at the moment.

If you read the first quote in this post (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showpost.php?p=510376&postcount=28), with the highlights, it definitely alludes to PvE exclusive actions within enemy capital cities.

[Dreadon]

Wrong. Played the game before at gamesdays, and I've read interviews. When you enter an enemies PVE grounds, you are not autoflagged for PVP. Both players have to be /flagged in order for them to attack each other anywhere outside of RVR zones. Also at tier 4, only around 50% of the zone is RVR and 50% is PVE. The majority of players will not flag for PVP either, because theres no bonus to being flagged. Its stupid, and its pointless.

Huge dissapointment. They aren't changing their stance on this either.

That is what i was trying to say, that when your in an enemy pve zone your not flagged. Before this change you could not be flagged ever in a pve zone, no mater what side your on. So you had a bunch of orcs running around in your pve zone killing your mobs and you could not attack then and they could not attack you and there was nothing you could do about it.

Edited

[br00tal]

That is what i was trying to say that when your in an enemy pve zone your not flagged and before this you could not be flagged so you had a bunch of orcs running around in your pve zone and you could not attack then and they could not attack you and there was nothing you could do about it.


Even with flagging, theres still nothing you can do. Both players have to be flagged for PVP for them to attack each other

[Loekii]

While that may be the case, the "looting" phase is certainly implied to have no PvP actions required at the moment.

If you read the first quote in this post (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showpost.php?p=510376&postcount=28), with the highlights, it definitely alludes to PvE exclusive actions within enemy capital cities.

I am not sure that means it turns into a PvE zone, but rather it sounds to me like the RvR quests finish, but the area is still PvP hot -- ie the losing side may continue to 'defend' the lost city before the 'recapture dynamic' intiates.

I will definately be bummed if I not only lose my capitol city, but it suddenly becomes one big Care-Bear playground. :(

:: please make some PvP servers::

[Feigro]

I am not sure that means it turns into a PvE zone, but rather it sounds to me like the RvR quests finish, but the area is still PvP hot -- ie the losing side may continue to 'defend' the lost city before the 'recapture dynamic' intiates.

Well no, it doesn't necessarily turn into a PvE zone. But if the defenders can't enter the city, then no PvP is going to take place there. Which means strictly PvEers would be capable of entering to help out with PQs and boss fights.

[sb220]

Actually this quote makes it seem like there will be pvp going on...for instance those that are still inside the city when its locked down Im guessing. The "response" group just says pvp to me. Or is this in reference to the actual "seiging"

You may have a guild that's going into a city, and they want to cover all their bases. So they may have a response group for fighting greenskins. There may be an average group. There may be a group that's built for PvE and they'll be taking care of the NPCs

[Feigro]

I'm talking about the victory. Once RvR is over and it's declared Destruction conquered an Order capital (for example). Jeff states the Order defenders are locked out of the city while Destruction reaps the benefits of being the victor. He goes on to suggest what this kind of content would be, such as PQs, Boss fights, Tome unlocks, etc.

At the point I'm discussing, the battle for the capital is over. One side won and took the opponents capital. It's during this time that there's suggested PvE content (This doesn't mean there isn't NPC activity during the actual siege as well).

So what I'm saying is that it would appear there is a point in time during the siege where people who don't want to PvP can come and take part in content without PvPing. When the defenders are allowed to take back the city, I'd imagine those players would either leave... or perhaps they'd get caught in the swing of things and want to hold the city longer.

[sb220]

HAR! Those hippies better kill somebody before they run in thar fer the loot

When the capitol changes hands, does that spawn an instance? Otherwise what happens to them if they are inside of the capitol when its taken...couldnt they still fight?

[ManiaCCC]

Paradoxly..allowin pvp flagging in PvE zones (of course, if opposite faction enter into enemy PvE zone, he/she should be flagged) cause less pvp and more griefing. I like idea concentrating PvP in certain zones.. much better than pvp spreaded all over the world.

[Loekii]

HAR! Those hippies better kill somebody before they run in thar fer the loot

My feelings exactly.

[Bear]

Yes I have and dun worry....we will keep your city unsacked for you so you can bank all yer pelts. And if you try to say that pve will have a big effect on the outcome of city sieges...stopObviously you missed the part where the PvE quests completed in a zone contribute to each side's overall RvR effort, and also missed the info describing the conflict PQs in the PvE areas where each side competes with the other to "win" the PQ.

Btw I'm a PvPer, so best shelve your assumptions. Just because someone can think about an issue objectively without selfishly scrambling to justify interfering with other player's game time just so they can have their preference take precedence throughout the entire game, eventhough they had plenty of space to do their thing as it was, doesn't make them a carebear, or any of the other childish labels people seem to need to hang on each other.

[Feigro]

When the capitol changes hands, does that spawn an instance? Otherwise what happens to them if they are inside of the capitol when its taken...couldnt they still fight?

No one knows, what I imagine would happen would be similiar to Darkness Falls. During the Siege, defenders would likely be able to rez at locations within the city. After they loose however, Players would probably be able to linger. But I'd imagine if they were to be killed they'd spawn outside of the city now - unable to go back in.

[Loekii]

Also, the FAQ states that there will be PvE protected areas for city essentials -- at least until the fall of the city.

[Loekii]

No one knows, what I imagine would happen would be similiar to Darkness Falls. During the Siege, defenders would likely be able to rez at locations within the city. After they loose however, Players would probably be able to linger. But I'd imagine if they were to be killed they'd spawn outside of the city now - unable to go back in.

Or the city could simply be over run by enemy NPCs and thus the remaining losing players are simply slaughtered outright.

[sb220]

Obviously you missed the part where the PvE quests completed in a zone contribute to each side's overall RvR effort, and also missed the info describing the conflict PQs in the PvE areas where each side competes with the other to "win" the PQ.

Btw I'm a PvPer, so best shelve your assumptions. Just because someone can think about an issue objectively without selfishly scrambling to justify interfering with other player's game time just so they can have their preference take precedence throughout the entire game, eventhough they had plenty of space to do their thing as it was, doesn't make them a carebear, or any of the other childish labels people seem to need to hang on each other.

I didnt say PVE wouldnt contribute...I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did.

I woulda never guessed you were a PvPer though...ya just seemed scared of it. Flagging, nor auto-flagging hurts the pve game one bit. You never have to flag. If your worried about people annoying you, thats gonna happen anyways.

This is what I dont think people are not understanding. We dont want some FFA thing. We want to be able to protect your mobs from enemies. Its your race's zone...why let your enemies come kill your rares, mobs or whatever else ya wanna call em.

[Bear]

I didnt say PVE wouldnt contribute...I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did.

I woulda never guessed you were a PvPer though...ya just seemed scared of it. Flagging, nor auto-flagging hurts the pve game one bit. You never have to flag. If your worried about people annoying you, thats gonna happen anyways.What about PvP is there to be scared about? It's a computer game for crying out loud.

Do you seriously attribute such real world emotions and motivations to a computer game? You're actually walking around thinking that people that don't like PvP are somehow less brave than you?

Oh god, sorry not meaning to sound rude, but how old are you anyway?

.and btw, just to remind you, this is what you asked. Not "I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did."

How do you compete against other players in player-versus-environment?

[sb220]

What about PvP is there to be scared about? It's a computer game for crying out loud.

Do you seriously attribute such real world emotions and motivations to a computer game? You're actually walking around thinking that people that don't like PvP are somehow less brave than you?

Oh god, sorry not meaning to sound rude, but how old are you anyway?

Im old....Ive been in pve grinds since EQ and Im damn tired of em. Almost every other game caters to pve...cant I just have one that is everything I ever hoped for?

[Bear]

Im old....Ive been in pve grinds since EQ and Im damn tired of em. Almost every other game caters to pve...cant I just have one that is everything I ever hoped for?Sure, get $30 000 000 and make your own.

[Thoden Firehammer]

What about PvP is there to be scared about? It's a computer game for crying out loud.

Do you seriously attribute such real world emotions and motivations to a computer game? You're actually walking around thinking that people that don't like PvP are somehow less brave than you?

Oh god, sorry not meaning to sound rude, but how old are you anyway?

.and btw, just to remind you, this is what you asked. Not "I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did."


This is an ad hominem post and you know it, you also know that he is merely communicating using descriptive words that are ment to help convey his message, and you're nit picking through an ad hominem proccess that contibutes nothing to the current argument.

[sb220]

Oh and your edit is wrong bear.....Go up and see what you quoted with that reply

[Heno]

What about PvP is there to be scared about? It's a computer game for crying out loud.

Do you seriously attribute such real world emotions and motivations to a computer game? You're actually walking around thinking that people that don't like PvP are somehow less brave than you?

Oh god, sorry not meaning to sound rude, but how old are you anyway?

.and btw, just to remind you, this is what you asked. Not "I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did."

You don't have to play FPS/LARP/RP/PnP or any other made up system before you soon realise people can be bizzarely attached to thier non existant personnas. Whether it being a stubborn refusal to rush a flag for fearing of being shot, to running from danger jsut to stay alive in a system where you can respawn and be back in the fight far, far quicker. So yes, I do believe people can reflect emotions in an MMO being a wuss one of them.

[Frein]

You don't have to play FPS/LARP/RP/PnP or any other made up system before you soon realise people can be bizzarely attached to thier non existant personnas. Whether it being a stubborn refusal to rush a flag for fearing of being shot, to running from danger jsut to stay alive in a system where you can respawn and be back in the fight far, far quicker. So yes, I do believe people can reflect emotions in an MMO being a wuss one of them.
Exactly what I wanted to say. Bear, you seem to be a very unique person, completely detached from the rest of the world.

[sb220]

Anyways Bear...Convince me. How is Flagging such a pve killer.

My view is you dont have to flag in the first place. Secondly when an enemy swoops in and steals your rare how will that make ya feel.

[Thoden Firehammer]

* Edited for Content *

[Bear]

This is an ad hominem post and you know it, you also know that he is merely communicating using descriptive words that are ment to help convey his message, and you're nit picking through an ad hominem proccess that contibutes nothing to the current argument.There's no "ad hominem" about it.

This person made a statement that inferred, as is very often done to belittle and debase people that don't share a preference for PvP, that anyone not wanting to PvP is scared of it. In other words inferring that non PvPers are less "manly" in hopes that the person they're casting these childish aspersions on will slink off and shut up. It's nothing different from every other PvP vs PvE debate that goes on anywhere. It's simply resorting to childish name calling.

[sb220]

Nah Bear is just doing what we are at the opposite side of the spectrum. Convince me Bear, I wanna hear it.

[Thoden Firehammer]

There's no "ad hominem" about it.

This person made a statement that inferred, as is very often done to belittle and debase people that don't share a preference for PvP, that anyone not wanting to PvP is scared of it. In other words inferring that non PvPers are less "manly" in hopes that the person they're casting these childish aspersions on will slink off and shut up. It's nothing different from every other PvP vs PvE debate that goes on anywhere. It's simply resorting to childish name calling.

The only childish name calling I see here is you...

By scared, he could have conveyed many other things and you know it, he could have suggested thet they just don't the compeditiveness, or the fact that they just don't like vs players in general...

I didnt say PVE wouldnt contribute...I just implied it wouldnt compare to what PvP/RVR did.

I woulda never guessed you were a PvPer though...ya just seemed scared of it. Flagging, nor auto-flagging hurts the pve game one bit. You never have to flag. If your worried about people annoying you, thats gonna happen anyways.

This is what I dont think people are not understanding. We dont want some FFA thing. We want to be able to protect your mobs from enemies. Its your race's zone...why let your enemies come kill your rares, mobs or whatever else ya wanna call em.

Now he never said PvP was manly, you just got all emotional from what I could tell(which is ironic, it appears you have a soft spot now) and you took his post personaly, and as such assumed and inferred alot of things, from his post.

[Bear]

Exactly what I wanted to say. Bear, you seem to be a very unique person, completely detached from the rest of the world.Completely detached from people that so identify themselves by how they play a computer game that they actually believe that by preferring PvP it makes them somehow a braver person? Well then. yes, I'm very proud to say that I am, and if I ever started displaying such idiotic behavior I hope someone will shoot me and put me out of my misery.

[Anglakhel]

This is actually a fairly productive poll question that attempts to deal with the design intention of WAR as relayed to the Community by the Developers.

Let's try and avoid personal attacks and name calling so that the thread remains constructive and doesn't get locked.

If someone is inappropriately attacking other posters rather than their arguments, or otherwise trolling, let's report them to the Moderators and let them deal with. Please refrain from launching back at them with the same tactics they are employing. It just lowers the discourse for everyone and leads to locked topics.

It seems clear from EA Mythic's announcements that WAR is an RvR game that incorporates PvE and PvP. Both are vital aspects of the RvR effort and the Core Ruleset will feature both.

EA Mythic's design philosophy seems focused on Consensual Participation in PvP. You will not be forced to participate in PvP Content. This does not, however, mean that you can go anywhere or do anything with no PvP consequences. Certain actions and traveling to certain areas will put you at risk for PvP. But you must chose to undertake these actions.

Safe PvE is a feature of the Core Ruleset. You can PvE through the game without participating in PvP, but that does not mean you will never witness PvP. It simply means you will always have the option whether or not you wish to participate.

Those calling for being able to always attack enemy players will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never seeing enemy players that you cannot attack will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never having to witness PvP will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those willing to accept that all players should have Consensual options about if/when they will participate in PvP should find the proposed rules satisfying.

Giving further suggestions about how to tune proposed flagging mechanics to enhance the Consensual nature of participation in PvP for WAR is far more productive than clamoring to have all players subject to one playstyle or another.

[sb220]

Completely detached from people that so identify themselves by how they play a game that they actually believe that by preferring PvP it makes them somehow a braver person? Well then. yes, I'm very proud to say that I am, and if I ever started displaying such idiotic behavior I hope someone will shoot me and put me out of my misery.

flag...my engineer will do it.

Nah Im sorry Bear, I just have a vision of what I want from the game and you and your opinions attack that vision. I do however want to understand how flagging hurts pve.

[Bear]

This is actually a fairly productive poll question that attempts to deal with the design intention of WAR as relayed to the Community by the Developers.

Let's try and avoid personal attacks and name calling so that the thread remains constructive and doesn't get locked.

If someone is inappropriately attacking other posters rather than their arguments, or otherwise trolling, let's report them to the Moderators and let them deal with. Please refrain from launching back at them with the same tactics they are employing. It just lowers the discourse for everyone and leads to locked topics.

It seems clear from EA Mythic's announcements that WAR is an RvR game that incorporates PvE and PvP. Both are vital aspects of the RvR effort and the Core Ruleset will feature both.

EA Mythic's design philosophy seems focused on Consensual Participation in PvP. You will not be forced to participate in PvP Content. This does not, however, mean that you can go anywhere or do anything with no PvP consequences. Certain actions and traveling to certain areas will put you at risk for PvP. But you must chose to undertake these actions.

Safe PvE is a feature of the Core Ruleset. You can PvE through the game without participating in PvP, but that does not mean you will never witness PvP. It simply means you will always have the option whether or not you wish to participate.

Those calling for being able to always attack enemy players will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never seeing enemy players that you cannot attack will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never having to witness PvP will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those willing to accept that all players should have Consensual options about if/when they will participate in PvP should find the proposed rules satisfying.

Giving further suggestions about how to tune proposed flagging mechanics to enhance the Consensual nature of participation in PvP for WAR is far more productive than clamoring to have all players subject to one playstyle or another.Yes let's conveniently disregard all the numerous ways that many different people, in a few different threads, have clearly shown how having players flag themselves for PvP in the PvE areas can interfere with those choosing to only PvE. Which in essence forces players to deal with PvP whether they want to or not.

Nice......

[sb220]

You need to explain how? because nobody gets it...just dont flag

Your enemies are going to be there annoying you regardless if there is flagging or not...at least now ya have the means to do something about it...if you want to

[davver]

http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20505

Please vote, it's important.

[WarMachine]

This is actually a fairly productive poll question that attempts to deal with the design intention of WAR as relayed to the Community by the Developers.

Let's try and avoid personal attacks and name calling so that the thread remains constructive and doesn't get locked.

If someone is inappropriately attacking other posters rather than their arguments, or otherwise trolling, let's report them to the Moderators and let them deal with. Please refrain from launching back at them with the same tactics they are employing. It just lowers the discourse for everyone and leads to locked topics.

It seems clear from EA Mythic's announcements that WAR is an RvR game that incorporates PvE and PvP. Both are vital aspects of the RvR effort and the Core Ruleset will feature both.

EA Mythic's design philosophy seems focused on Consensual Participation in PvP. You will not be forced to participate in PvP Content. This does not, however, mean that you can go anywhere or do anything with no PvP consequences. Certain actions and traveling to certain areas will put you at risk for PvP. But you must chose to undertake these actions.

Safe PvE is a feature of the Core Ruleset. You can PvE through the game without participating in PvP, but that does not mean you will never witness PvP. It simply means you will always have the option whether or not you wish to participate.

Those calling for being able to always attack enemy players will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never seeing enemy players that you cannot attack will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those calling for never having to witness PvP will be disappointed by the Core Ruleset.

Those willing to accept that all players should have Consensual options about if/when they will participate in PvP should find the proposed rules satisfying.

Giving further suggestions about how to tune proposed flagging mechanics to enhance the Consensual nature of participation in PvP for WAR is far more productive than clamoring to have all players subject to one playstyle or another.
Thank you.

Keep the thread on topic, and leave the debate in here. (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20403)

This is an attempt to discuss inprovements to what we currently have.

[ImixZinz]

Thank you.

Keep the thread on topic, and leave the debate in here. (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20403)

This is an attempt to discuss inprovements to what we currently have.

Discussing improvements on a system not finalized... and nobody can claim it is until the game releases, there is still the possibility of it being completely removed.

[WarMachine]

Discussing improvements on a system not finalized... and nobody can claim it is until the game releases, there is still the possibility of it being completely removed.
But there is no possiblity of cross faction PvE being removed. The option boils down to flagged PvP or no flagged PvP. Personally, I made this topic for those that chose to work on features for the flagged PvP that would reather see flagged PvP as opposed to nothing.

[ImixZinz]

But there is no possiblity of cross faction PvE being removed. The option boils down to flagged PvP or no flagged PvP. Personally, I made this topic for those that chose to work on features for the flagged PvP that would reather see flagged PvP as opposed to nothing.


There IS a possibility, only a Dev could say differently and last i heard :

Currently, yes - there is, in some cases, content for players to do in their enemies territory as well.


Which can only lead to believe that the system CAN in fact CHANGE.

[sb220]

How great it would be to have a day in the beta boards.

[ImixZinz]

How great it would be to have a day in the beta boards.


Lolz LF1M SL Healer.... apparently :-?

[davver]

How great it would be to have a day in the beta boards.

Hookers and blow as far as the eye can see man.

[Loekii]

Yes let's conveniently disregard all the numerous ways that many different people, in a few different threads, have clearly shown how having players flag themselves for PvP in the PvE areas can interfere with those choosing to only PvE. Which in essence forces players to deal with PvP whether they want to or not.

Nice......

Or more correctly, lets recognise that this is MMO, designed with Massive Multiple Players' opinions in mind -- and thus understand that you cannot please everyone.

Again, its a 6 chair setting for 7 people.

Unfortuantely, in this case, your the 7th person, just like sb220 is the 7th person in the 'Include Pve content' case.

[ImixZinz]

Or more correctly, lets recognise that this is MMO, designed with Massive Multiple Players' opinions in mind -- and thus understand that you cannot please everyone.

Again, its a 6 chair setting for 7 people.

Unfortuantely, in this case, your the 7th person, just like sb220 is the 7th person in the 'Include Pve content' case.


Apparently everyone but 5 people on this forum is the 7th person.....

[Loekii]

How great it would be to have a day in the beta boards.

Having been in betas, I think it would be a mixed blessing -- as well as mandate a 'read only' format -- so people do not detract for what is factual and in the game, with tangets that don't apply to beta (which happens anyway).

From a marketing standpoint, I think it would be a bad idea, simply because people would take things the wrong way, blow things out of proportion, and judge the game before it is complete.

I would prefer to have more community rep involvement, but not at the expense of delaying the process.

- pays fine for tangent.

[sb220]

Or more correctly, lets recognise that this is MMO, designed with Massive Multiple Players' opinions in mind -- and thus understand that you cannot please everyone.

Again, its a 6 chair setting for 7 people.

Unfortuantely, in this case, your the 7th person, just like sb220 is the 7th person in the 'Include Pve content' case.


Hey, I do my share of pve. I just want to do it with "us" and not beside "them".

[ImixZinz]

I think the worst thing of all about this, is the people who are with pro- flagging, don't even agree with it, they are presenting ideas about the system they do like, and not even supporting the current system.

I think if you laid it all out without so many assumptions flying, like what you THINK it will be like, and just showed the information we know the split between Con and Pro would be probably 80-20 if not worse.

[Loekii]

Hookers and blow as far as the eye can see man.

Funny, but I can also see that the down side is likewise parallel - an empty wallet, a few diseases, and a real bad withdrawl/come down. :p

[sb220]

My view is the choice flagging system is just a /duel between factions. Doesnt really impact anything at all, but its a start.

[Loekii]

Hey, I do my share of pve. I just want to do it with "us" and not beside "them".

Okay, my mistake.

I hate 'invisible' walls, more than 'safe-zones', which is why I think an auto-flag for enemy is better -- but that is just my opinion.

I see auto-flagging as an acceptance to what should seem as an obvious understanding of the 'additional risks' involved with taking a mission in enemy territory - which represents the acceptance to be flagged in the PVE area.

I can accept those that are questing in their territory, operating under a more secure setting -- ala M*A*S*H -- which would reflect the voluntary flag.

[sb220]

Okay, my mistake.

I hate 'invisible' walls, more than 'safe-zones', which is why I think an auto-flag for enemy is better -- but that is just my opinion.

I see auto-flagging as an acceptance to what should seem as an obvious understanding of the 'additional risks' involved with taking a mission in enemy territory - which represents the acceptance to be flagged in the PVE area.

I can accept those that are questing in their territory, operating under a more secure setting -- ala M*A*S*H -- which would reflect the voluntary flag.

I agree auto flag is the way to go. Id even give in as much and say that if you had a current quest log requiring you to do something in enemy lands = safe passage. As soon as you were done though and without a quest log...flagged.

I think the problem folks are thinking with cross-faction quests and auto flagging is basically you and your group would just be sitting ducks to the entire force of the enemy in that tier while trying to complete a pve encounter. You cant attack them but they can mass an unbeatable force against you and attack at dire times. So mabye quest log = toggle flag, no quest log = auto flag is the compromise needed

Because after the game has aged a bit and you see a group of enemies heading in a certain direction, folks will know exactly what quest they are trying to do and where they are going. Shouts go out and basically the griefing begins, meaning no cross-faction quests get done unless your lucky.

[WarMachine]

I agree auto flag is the way to go. Id even give in as much and say that if you had a current quest log requiring you to do something in enemy lands = safe passage. As soon as you were done though and without a quest log...flagged.

I think the problem folks are thinking with cross-faction quests and auto flagging is basically you and your group would just be sitting ducks to the entire force of the enemy in that tier while trying to complete a pve encounter. You cant attack them but they can mass an unbeatable force against you and attack at dire times. So mabye quest log = toggle flag, no quest log = auto flag is the compromise needed

Because after the game has aged a bit and you see a group of enemies heading in a certain direction, folks will know exactly what quest they are trying to do and where they are going. Shouts go out and basically the griefing begins, meaning no cross-faction quests get done unless your lucky.
I hear what your say'n, But I do believe that going into opposing factions zones reqquire some level of danger. Most of the quests that bring you across the border are speciffically designed to make a confrontation agenst the enemy faction. And if they want to mount a massive force to stop a PQ, then they are leaving their RvR zone open.

[sb220]

I hear what your say'n, But I do believe that going into opposing factions zones reqquire some level of danger. Most of the quests that bring you across the border are speciffically designed to make a confrontation agenst the enemy faction. And if they want to mount a massive force to stop a PQ, then they are leaving their RvR zone open.

Yeah I know, but compromises always go further down the line.

[Sturmer]

10sec name flashing if player comes from friendly PvE area to enemy PvE area. (if that is even possible)
When coming from RvR area to enemy PvE area, 10sec flashing not needed. (Your already flagged)

Spawning:
If you die in enemy PvE area -> closest RvR grave yard.
Spawning in enemy GY would be suicide and guarded faction GYs would be camped 24/7 and really bad for IP.

[Sonork]

I voted auto-flagging with quests to raid the enemy zones. Unfortunatly since there IS flagging in this game, I guess... this would suffice.

The last thing, i ever... EVER want to see is Order and Destruction sitting side by side unwilling to flag... Although I garuntee thats what it will be like if you enter an enemies PVE zone (if you can) You go in with 5 people, your enemy will continue milling around watching you until 10 of his buddies show up, then attack.

Cause WAR is everywhere, but only when they want it in their zone...

[Fiaryn-Kilif]

Man do I hope we get either auto-flagging flat out or a PvP server, because otherwise this could kill the game for me. :(

There really just is nothing about the idea of a Chosen being able to prance about in Empire zones without having to fend off Warrior Priests and Witch Hunters that I can buy. Heck, I'd say it even adds something more to the game if quests that take you into enemy zones have that extra danger. Makes you go D: in a good way at the prospect of having to go there.

[Frein]

The last thing, i ever... EVER want to see is Order and Destruction sitting side by side unwilling to flag... Although I garuntee thats what it will be like if you enter an enemies PVE zone (if you can) You go in with 5 people, your enemy will continue milling around watching you until 10 of his buddies show up, then attack.

Cause WAR is everywhere, but only when they want it in their zone...
Yeah, I'm very concerned about this. I'm 100% certain we will have situations where faction A meets faction B in a PVE zone and one of them refuses to flag and avoids conflict for whatever reason. Most likely because the non-auto-flagged side decided their odds weren't good enough.

This will happen even if they manage to actually split PVE zones into faction specific sides (currently PVE zones are shared areas with no affiliation to either faction) and implement auto-flagging for those visiting hostile PVE areas.

[Dreadon]

What do you think is better a system that says that says your enemy can walk around in your pve area and never be attacked because he is not in a pvp zone. Or allow flaging so you at least can tempt him into attacking you and get him self flaged?

[WarMachine]

Alittle info for those not keeping up in the main debate.

Originally Posted by James_EAMythic
Hey folks,

We hear your feedback and concerns, not everyone is expected to agree with these changes, and guess what? If they don't work we will remove them. We wanted to share these beta updates with everyone, but you have to remember - the game is still in beta, and when it comes back up in December we'll receive new feedback in response to the changes we have made, and thusly will re-evaluate the changes if need be.

However, many of these changes help to resolve issues you have brought up, such as enemies tagging PQ mobs - many of these may in fact cause you to become PvP flagged. Also bare in mind that every zone, even the PvE sections, are bound by the same anti-griefing mechanics. So a higher tier player cannot flag PvP and actually gank/grief you. PvP is still restricted by tier and remains very consensual. The only difference is instead of having to run into a pvp area get flagged and then run back out you can now flag and remain flagged anywhere in a zone or be flagged by certain "PvP enabled" NPC's.

Thanks all


Originally Posted by James_EAMythic
It's very important to understand the way zones work and the realize that you are in part assaulting your enemies territory when in "their PvE space"

The content flows and is designed for much more direct contact than in say Dark Age. They are two very different games using very different models of zone design and content.

PvE is part of RvR and "War is Everywere". Whether you never participate in PvP your actions in PvE can in fact have an impact on the RvR and PvP goals of your realm.

We appreciate that many of you have yet to see the game, which is necessary to be able to fully understand the way content integration and leveling flow works.

Hope that clarifies, thanks


Highlighted some high notes.

[sb220]

Another mechanic concerning choice-flagging that should be implemented if its not already.

If an enemy flags in your zone, he cannot unflag without reaching his "friendly" area. Once he flags in "Your" zone, the only safety he should ever regain is leaving.

[Kridak]

i'm hoping it works like WoW. if you're in RvR zones, you flag. if you're in enemy PvE zones, you flag. it's simple, why is everyone pissing themselves about this subject. :confused:

[ImixZinz]

i'm hoping it works like WoW. if you're in RvR zones, you flag. if you're in enemy PvE zones, you flag. it's simple, why is everyone pissing themselves about this subject. :confused:


Because PvE is supposed to be PvE... not some gimmicky dueling ground where you rub cheeks with the enemy all day.

[ningrim]

First I want to say that as a DAoC player since 2002, I love the fact that Mythic is willing to listen to our feedback and is not secretive or defensive about their game development. I'm going to piggyback some on what Drusain has said in the closed flagging thread.

PvP in an MMO brings about the problem of griefing, but if you set up a flagging system to prevent it, you end up with enemies PvEing side-by-side with each other, which ruins the immersive "WAR is everywhere" dynamic. In that sense flagging seems like a bandaid type fix. Something that doesn't seem to fit with the overall spirit of the game.

What bothers me is that DAoC had such an elegant mechanism to resolve this problem. The separation of zones into RvR and PvE. I can't stress how this helped to create immersion and a sense of realm pride. It was the crowning achievement of their game and what made it stand out from the rest.

My home realm was my homeland, I was safe there, I wasn't going to see enemies running around. But when I went through those giant border keep gates, I new I was entering the "danger zone", contested areas. I was on alert, looking around for the enemy.

My enemy was always my enemy. "Red is dead" as we like to say in DAoC. I would never ever PvE along side my enemy or communicate with him short of emotes. I grew to hate my enemy and love my realmmates.

If you take away the importance of the battlefront and let people venture into enemy PvE areas, the sense that there is a WAR, a fight for territory, is diminished significantly.

[Bear]

What my sig says is what I know I'll be doing quite often now.

[Galain]

I see no reason for flagging.

If I see an enemy, I should either be able to attack him, or be a chicken.

One or the other. For the love of all that is holy, Myhtic, don't turn this into WoW, where you could have an enemy circling you /spitin and you couldn't touch him. If we're going to have PvE zones, make them entirely separate, no PvP allowed.


I want to be able to attack any enemy my lever or higher, dammit.

[Xplicitt]

Well i think with flagging that it could be ok.

I think that people who flag in a PvE zone and do PvE should get a experience buff. so if they are pvP flagged while doing quests it will help them and allow others to take advantage of him recieving a buff .

With this though i also think that people who PvP Flag in a pvE area and are doing quests and pvE etc would not be worth any renown and alos less experience. This would help people to figh tin the RvR areas liek everyone wants but still allow people to kill people in pvE since alot of people would flag to level faster etc..

Not exactly those ways but you know what i mean and would work sorta like that.

[Rime]

guess I'll weigh in

Order enters Destruction PvE area and they are automatically perma-flagged for PvP the whole time they are in that area. Destruction can choose to attack or not attack...attacking will flag Destruction for PvP.

If Destruction attacks they will stay flagged for PvP and only unflag after 5 minutes of no PvP combat.

Destruction could /pvp and stay flagged the entire time they are in their own PvE area if they want to.

same goes for Destruction in Order PvE areas of course

[Ranti]

I am just going to stay permenantly (after rank 1-8ish) in the RvR zone and pretend this flagging stuff just doesn't happen

[mongoose]

I agree auto flag is the way to go. Id even give in as much and say that if you had a current quest log requiring you to do something in enemy lands = safe passage. As soon as you were done though and without a quest log...flagged.

I think the problem folks are thinking with cross-faction quests and auto flagging is basically you and your group would just be sitting ducks to the entire force of the enemy in that tier while trying to complete a pve encounter. You cant attack them but they can mass an unbeatable force against you and attack at dire times. So maybe quest log = toggle flag, no quest log = auto flag is the compromise needed


I could agree with this if and only if all the available PQs/Quests and other forms of PvE in any particular area required you to cross over into enemy territory, but the fact is they wont. If you dont want to cross over into enemy territory to finish a particular quest...... DONT DO IT (or wait until you have control of the enemy zone before completing them) I would hope the quest giver would make it very clear what would be required to complete the task; Your PvE area, RvR only, cross over, etc. There will still be plenty of other PvE options that you can safely do in your own zone. Remember that they did say the best way to level up would be through a combination of RvR and PvE. I see these cross over Quests as best representing that ideal.

Walking about in the opposing factions zone should NEVER = a free ticket. I dont care what you are doing. Just accept that yes, if you do this quest you might very well be a "sitting duck". Such would be the risk in trying to complete such a difficult task but remember that with greater risk come greater reward (or it should be :rolleyes:)

[dutch_gamer]

Walking about in the opposing factions zone should NEVER = a free ticket. I dont care what you are doing. Just accept that yes, if you do this quest you might very well be a "sitting duck". Such would be the risk in trying to complete such a difficult task but remember that with greater risk come greater reward (or it should be :rolleyes:)

I can agree with that, but you don't enter the opposing factions zone, but merely an area. Case in point, Norsca/Nordland (I have shown that picture many times) shows exactly that nobody completely owns both zones, but merely areas. Order and Destruction will have a cross over area. The letters CH, stand for Chapters, quests hubs. If you can't do those without the fear of getting flagged, half of your questing for that Tier would be about forced PvP. We have known for quite some time that chapters are quest hubs. I just saw a picture of that on my computer from a long time ago (from a German convention, from last year, apparently).

Order enters Destruction PvE area and they are automatically perma-flagged for PvP the whole time they are in that area. Destruction can choose to attack or not attack...attacking will flag Destruction for PvP.

I am only partially in agreement with this. Destruction, in this situation, should only be able to get flagged when they turn on the flag, before they do damage. Why? Otherwise the Order guy can go around trying to get people to hit him, which would then automatically turn on the flag of the Destruction player. The last thing I want to see in this game is people going around harassing people who only want to do some PvE.

There is a reason why I don't understand all the negativity towards being able to see the enemy in their own PvE areas. It would seriously make even less sense that the whole world would be separated by stupid walls and gates. Why would, for example, the Dwarfs build walls around their entire empire? And even if they would do that, why on earth would they not be able to get through their own gates to get to the areas where the Greenskins are questing? Additionally, why would a Dwarf have to even be fighting against Greenskin mobs in their own PvE areas, if they had a wall. How on earth did those Greenskins even get inside their land when their lands are supposedly surrounded by walls and gates?

Warhammer is pretty much an open world. The forces of Order and Destruction are pushing into one another's lands, with separated PvE areas, would kill that open world aspect. When mobs of your own faction would be able to breach walls and gates, if they would have had them, then players should be able to as well. The areas not being separated makes far more sense than having them separated.

As Mythic has made clear in the past days, PvP flagging is just a first step, yet some people see it as the final implementation. People either accept the fact the way the zones are set up now, or they don't. But do understand that this is not going to change. There is no way that Mythic will change the open world aspect now, because it would involve far too much time to change this. It isn't a matter of just a month or two but most likely far more. And then you would end up with a separation that makes even far less sense. It only made sense in DAoC because of the fight taking place outside of the actual kingdoms. Yet WAR takes place INSIDE kingdoms, empires, whatever. The enemy is there pillaging your lands, in PvE areas and in the PvP areas. That is the reason why they use the phrase "war is everywhere". War is taking place inside your lands as far as your capital city. Because of that alone, you are bound to have PvE areas that aren't separated through some magical boundary.

[mongoose]

I can agree with that, but you don't enter the opposing factions zone, but merely an area. Case in point, Norsca/Nordland (I have shown that picture many times) shows exactly that nobody completely owns both zones, but merely areas. Order and Destruction will have a cross over area. The letters CH, stand for Chapters, quests hubs. If you can't do those without the fear of getting flagged, half of your questing for that Tier would be about forced PvP. We have known for quite some time that chapters are quest hubs. I just saw a picture of that on my computer from a long time ago (from a German convention, from last year, apparently).

Well this is something Im not quite understanding because Ive never been to a convention or played in the Beta. Hell I have never touched the game. :-?

So are you saying that the issue with insta flagging is because the zones are seemless so knowing where th exact zone 'edge' is is impossible to know? If this is the case its easily remedied with simple text messages....."you are approaching the border to Norsca"......."You are about to cross over into Norsca"....."you have crossed over into Norsca". Pretty simple really and they did something similar in DAoC. I would say that maybe give someone a 1-2 sec flagging delay to compensate for not knowing EXACTLY where the boundary is but you should know with messages close enough that you certainly dont need 10 full secs. You can run for quite some distance in a mere 10 secs.

I was also under the impression that there were a LOT of PQs. Am I to assume then that there is really only one PQ per race per zone? If such is the case then that changes things considerably. If not however and there are more PQs, then you just dont do those that cross over if you dont want to be flagged.

[Loekii]

I can agree with that, but you don't enter the opposing factions zone, but merely an area. Case in point, Norsca/Nordland (I have shown that picture many times) shows exactly that nobody completely owns both zones, but merely areas. Order and Destruction will have a cross over area. The letters CH, stand for Chapters, quests hubs. If you can't do those without the fear of getting flagged, half of your questing for that Tier would be about forced PvP. We have known for quite some time that chapters are quest hubs. I just saw a picture of that on my computer from a long time ago (from a German convention, from last year, apparently).

I apply the term 'enemy zone/area' to those areas that are part of the primary Tier stucture to the opposing side.

I thought that each race had their own set of zones with RvR and PvE areas -- so the Teir 2 Greenskin area is different to the Tier 2 Dwarf area.

So the Greenskin/Dwarf front has 2 seperate Teir2 zones (basically there are two maps, two RvR areas, and two PvE areas).

Or do they now share the same map?

[Rime]

I am only partially in agreement with this. Destruction, in this situation, should only be able to get flagged when they turn on the flag, before they do damage. Why? Otherwise the Order guy can go around trying to get people to hit him, which would then automatically turn on the flag of the Destruction player. The last thing I want to see in this game is people going around harassing people who only want to do some PvE.

Yeah, I see where you're coming from. That was sometimes a problem in WoW with Horde coming and doing that in Westfall and Alliance doing it in Barrens. I played on a PvP server so low level zones were the only zones in which both factions weren't perma-flagged.

I suppose on some PvE WoW servers it could have been much worse.
Example: Horde rogue sees alliance mage AoE grinding in a high level area. Rogue types /pvp, runs into the Blizzard, Vanishes, and destroys mage.


apologies for WoW comparisons

[sb220]

There is a reason why I don't understand all the negativity towards being able to see the enemy in their own PvE areas. It would seriously make even less sense that the whole world would be separated by stupid walls and gates. Why would, for example, the Dwarfs build walls around their entire empire? And even if they would do that, why on earth would they not be able to get through their own gates to get to the areas where the Greenskins are questing? Additionally, why would a Dwarf have to even be fighting against Greenskin mobs in their own PvE areas, if they had a wall. How on earth did those Greenskins even get inside their land when their lands are supposedly surrounded by walls and gates?

Warhammer is pretty much an open world. The forces of Order and Destruction are pushing into one another's lands, with separated PvE areas, would kill that open world aspect. When mobs of your own faction would be able to breach walls and gates, if they would have had them, then players should be able to as well. The areas not being separated makes far more sense than having them separated.

Well thats the point, those mobs that have ultimately have made their way into your lands are in fact killable. If players can do the same then they too should be killable, which is still unclear. Lore and immersion wise, sworn to the death enemies shouldnt just pass by eachother on the road.
Seperated pve areas is one way to solve this. The only other ways I can think of is auto flagging or relating access to enemy areas to your factions push in rvr. Basically give folks the means to keep them out somehow and you create another way to instill realm pride and immersion.

I am unclear if enemy access is not already only available to them through a rvr "push". The more I read the more it seems enemies can roam everywhere as long as they dont get close to your guards...which kills the atmosphere for me. I dont even need them to be flagged pk in my lands as long as an rvr effort can prevent them from being there.

[Frein]

I find it puzzling how almost everyone finds it of paramount importance that you can attack enemies invading "your" (note that there still aren't technically separate PVE zones for different factions) PVE zones but not the other way around.

When you're on your way to a quest near an enemy village and see an enemy player, you want to kill them, right? What if they don't want to fight? Why is this acceptable in so many posters' eyes? To me it's just as bad as not being able to attack an "invader".

[sb220]

I find it puzzling how almost everyone finds it of paramount importance that you can attack enemies invading "your" (note that there still aren't technically separate PVE zones for different factions) PVE zones but not the other way around.

When you're on your way to a quest near an enemy village and see an enemy player, you want to kill them, right? What if they don't want to fight? Why is this acceptable in so many posters' eyes? To me it's just as bad as not being able to attack an "invader".

Everyone realizes that pve'ing within your realm shouldnt be interrupted with pvp unless the pve'ers choose to do so. If I were to run into an enemy zone, Id expect to be a target, but that is up to them.
They wont turn the game into a ffa. Hopefully they will meet somewhere halfway with an idea to make it always feel like us vs them

I believe there are "racial owned" areas....and then there are limbo areas. At least one podcast I watched made it clear to me there were racial owned areas/zones

[Loekii]

Yeah, I see where you're coming from. That was sometimes a problem in WoW with Horde coming and doing that in Westfall and Alliance doing it in Barrens. I played on a PvP server so low level zones were the only zones in which both factions weren't perma-flagged.

I suppose on some PvE WoW servers it could have been much worse.
Example: Horde rogue sees alliance mage AoE grinding in a high level area. Rogue types /pvp, runs into the Blizzard, Vanishes, and destroys mage.


apologies for WoW comparisons

I think that issues like this could be solved with a 'pop-up' warning (do you want to engage in PvP?), where a 'yes' flags you, and a 'No' leaves you PvE -- and prevents the enemy player from taking damage

Or simply treat all non-PvP Flagged players as 'friendly players', and thus immune to offensive spells (but keep them immune from friendly spells as well).

That way, the only way you could damage an enemy, is AFTER you intentionally flag PVP.

[sb220]

Actually I dont see how this could be a problem if you are required to manually flag before you are capable of doing any damage to an enemy. Just because one person is flagged doesnt mean the person not flagged can hurt him until he also flags.

err what Loekii said

[Loekii]

I see actively having to 'accept' the PvP flag, as taking responsibility for it.

It is one thing to be 'tricked' into flagging by having someone run through an AOE spell, and it is quite another to say [yes] when asked if you want to go PvP.

No one can type [yes] for you, so if you never want to PvP, you never will.

Saying [yes] because:

He made you mad.
You thought it would be a fair fight
You thought it would be an easy fight
He promised he wouldn't hit youare just examples of poor decision making, and not 'grief'.

[sb220]

I think it would just be easier to say that you cannot hurt another player....or heal a flagged friendly unless you are flagged yourself. Just do not allow actions to have an effect on others unless the system checks and finds both flags on.

[Loekii]

I think this might all already be intended.

The FAQ talks about crossing from a PvP zone into a PvE zone.

From that information, I would think the Mythic would have to already consider how the mechanics work between a PvE player standing on the PvE side, casting at a PvP Player standing on the RvR side.

I would really be surprised if Mythic overlooked the chance of someone casting an AOE spell on a mob near the RvR zone line (and thus the AOE spills into the RvR area); or a PvE player casting a Heal/buff on a Player standing in the RvR area.

[Baron Khaine]

Ok, from what I can understand, this PvP flagging mechanic is so that people who are in PvE zones have to flag themselves for PvP? Well if thats so I can only see this as a good thing.

For starters, the PvE players out there, though few and far between I admit, will be jumping up and down with joy. Secondly, this really doesn't affect the "big" battles such as the ones in the Neutral zone, as from what I can understand, the Tier 4 Zones are gonna be 80% PvP Areas (for which you will instantly be flagged for PvP) an 20% PvE Area, for which you can quest, meet up with your clan, get ready to go out into the PvP zone, stuff like that.

Sure a pure PvP zone would be nice, where people were permanently flagged for PvP, no matter what zone or area they are in, but its just not feasible.

Imagine this, you've just spent like an hour or so doing a quest in a PvE zone, now for this example we'll say that in PvE zones you have to be flagged for PvP, someone comes along and kills you, the quest resets, and you've just lost like an hour of work. I for one would be incredibly miffed off, and anyone here who says they wouldn't be is a liar.

Flagging is a good mechanic, everyone is just thinking back to WoW where it destroyed World PvP, but in WAR there will be massive areas where you have to go and you'll be flagged for PvP when you go in them.

Flagging is a good thing.

And where is it said that you'll need to flag when your in the enemy PvE zone? I was under the impression that you needed to flag in your own, but in the enemies you are instantly flagged.

[Bear]

First you might want to rethink the whole PvE players being few and far between thing. I'm afraid the evidence as far as most mmorpgs go is heavily stacked in favor of that being wrong.

Second, maybe explain why they would possibly be happy that now where before they were assured that they would be able to level up throughout the entire game without ever having anything to do with PvP, and do so in areas free from PvP, they now have to put up with it in their faces pretty much everywhere in the game, and put up with the myriad of possible ways that they can have their positive gaming experience radically diminished due to players PvPing in the same areas they are? I enjoy PvP as much as the next person, although I enjoy PvE just as much, but I just can't see it

I'd say that no matter how it's dealt with in game, just finding out that it's now the way things are is going to actually have people that were excited to play the game now change their mind. As well since an attractive selling point for many potential customers has now been eroded to such a great extent, in the future it will be something that when many potential customers of this game simply read is a feature, will have them pass the game up for something else. Flagging has never been a very popular feature in very many games, in fact none that I can think of, no matter what side of the PvP/PvE coin people are on.

[Baron Khaine]

First you might want to rethink the whole PvE players being few and far between thing. I'm afraid the evidence as far as most mmorpgs go is heavily stacked in favor of that being wrong.

I'm talking about this game, with it being a PvP game, it shouldn't attract a large amount of PvE players, surely you could work that one out.

Second, maybe explain why they would possibly be happy that now where before they were assured that they would be able to level up throughout the entire game without ever having anything to do with PvP, and do so in areas free from PvP, they now have to put up with it in their faces pretty much everywhere in the game, and put up with the myriad of possible ways that they can have their positive gaming experience radically diminished due to players PvPing in the same areas they are? I enjoy PvP as much as the next person, although I enjoy PvE just as much, but I just can't see it

So they have to see some people fighting in there zone? They don't have to participate at all, only on RP servers can I see it being a problem tbh, and thats an issue for the Roleplayers to deal with, not myself. Once again however, this is a PvP game, its a game for PvPers, PvPers enjoy PvE occasionally, but I personally would love it if I saw a battle going off in a PvP zone and I could choose to join or not.

I honestly don't see your point about having PvEers having there experience ruined by some people PvPing in the PvE zone, I can see all of one person complaining about that, and its you, and if your complaining about stuff like that, this game isn't for you.

I'd say that no matter how it's dealt with in game, just finding out that it's now the way things are is going to actually have people that were excited to play the game now change their mind. As well since an attractive selling point for many potential customers has now been eroded to such a great extent, in the future it will be something that when many potential customers of this game simply read is a feature, will have them pass the game up for something else. Flagging has never been a very popular feature in very many games, in fact none that I can think of, no matter what side of the PvP/PvE coin people are on.

Once again, I don't see your point, with flagging PvP players can enjoy there game by PvPing in the PvP zones, and PvE players can enjoy there game by playing in the PvE zones without flagging themselves for PvP, so they won't be attacked by any PvP players. If a PvP player wants a break, they can go to the PvE zone, drop there flag, and just quest for a lil bit, if a PvE player wants to do some PvP he can just run into the RvR zone and bam he's flagged and into the battle.

This feature was brought in at the phase where Mythic have said that they are changing things on how the beta testers have seen things, and how they've reacted to thing. This feature has been brought in because beta testers have obviously have a problem with the previous system, and Mythic have changed it.

[Montbrun]

This whole "flagging" thing reminds me of an old Reese's Peanut Butter Cup commercial:

"You got peanut butter in my chocolate!"
"No - you got chocolate in my peanut butter!"

With the ToK, I think that there is going to be alot more PvE than alot of people think. There will be numerous PvE quests in order to unlock the ToK abilities, and titles. If we aren't going to have "safe" PvE zones, then, IMHO, If the PQ areas are themselves "safe," then the areas surrounding them should be auto-flagged for PvP.

[Bear]

I'm talking about this game, with it being a PvP game, it shouldn't attract a large amount of PvE players, surely you could work that one out.



So they have to see some people fighting in there zone? They don't have to participate at all, only on RP servers can I see it being a problem tbh, and thats an issue for the Roleplayers to deal with, not myself. Once again however, this is a PvP game, its a game for PvPers, PvPers enjoy PvE occasionally, but I personally would love it if I saw a battle going off in a PvP zone and I could choose to join or not.

I honestly don't see your point about having PvEers having there experience ruined by some people PvPing in the PvE zone, I can see all of one person complaining about that, and its you, and if your complaining about stuff like that, this game isn't for you.



Once again, I don't see your point, with flagging PvP players can enjoy there game by PvPing in the PvP zones, and PvE players can enjoy there game by playing in the PvE zones without flagging themselves for PvP, so they won't be attacked by any PvP players. If a PvP player wants a break, they can go to the PvE zone, drop there flag, and just quest for a lil bit, if a PvE player wants to do some PvP he can just run into the RvR zone and bam he's flagged and into the battle.

This feature was brought in at the phase where Mythic have said that they are changing things on how the beta testers have seen things, and how they've reacted to thing. This feature has been brought in because beta testers have obviously have a problem with the previous system, and Mythic have changed it.This is a PvP game? Hmmmm last I checked, almost half of the page that describes this game at WAR's main site is dedicated to talking about the PvE aspects of it, and how one can play the game without ever having to choose to PvP.

This is a RvR game, not a PvP game, and RvR in WAR also means PvE my friend. I know this comes a shock to many people that have made some false assumptions, but the info is out there for all to see if they'd looked.

If anyone has done much reading lately on various sites where WAR is discussed, or played any game where flagging like it's described it will be in WAR is a feature, one will see innumerable examples of ways that it can negatively effect people trying to PvE.

As well, I'd say that it's the reverse from what you say, and that seeing enemy players and not being able to attack them is primarily a RP problem, and for the great bulk of mmo players, those being of the non-RP variety, it would hardly be a problem at all. Except those that use "immersion" as a sham excuse to get more PvP in the game of course.

As far as why they made the change, the graveyard of failed games is littered with efforts from companies that jumped the gun and made the wrong decisions because either they didn't listen properly to what was being said and by whom, or got their lines of communication crossed, or failed to recognize they had a skewed sampling, or took feedback that was based on opinions garnered too early from people not having the full picture of what they were critiquing, or etc etc etc etc.

[ImixZinz]

This whole "flagging" thing reminds me of an old Reese's Peanut Butter Cup commercial:

"You got crap in my chocolate!"
"No - you got chocolate in my crap!"

With the ToK, I think that there is going to be alot more PvE than alot of people think. There will be numerous PvE quests in order to unlock the ToK abilities, and titles. If we aren't going to have "safe" PvE zones, then, IMHO, If the PQ areas are themselves "safe," then the areas surrounding them should be auto-flagged for PvP.


Either way, you've gotta have some pretty low standards to eat either one.

[sb220]

This is a PvP game? Hmmmm last I checked, almost half of the page that describes this game at WAR's main site is dedicated to talking about the PvE aspects of it, and how one can play the game without ever having to choose to PvP.

This is a RvR game, not a PvP game, and RvR in WAR also means PvE my friend. I know this comes a shock to many people that have made some false assumptions, but the info is out there for all to see if they'd looked.

If anyone has done much reading lately on various sites where WAR is discussed, or played any game where flagging like it's described it will be in WAR is a feature, one will see innumerable examples of ways that it can negatively effect people trying to PvE.

As well, I'd say that it's the reverse from what you say, and that seeing enemy players and not being able to attack them is primarily a RP problem, and for the great bulk of mmo players, those being of the non-RP variety, it would hardly be a problem at all. Except those that use "immersion" as a sham excuse to get more PvP in the game of course.

As far as why they made the change, the graveyard of failed games is littered with efforts from companies that jumped the gun and made the wrong decisions because either they didn't listen properly to what was being said and by whom, or got their lines of communication crossed, or failed to recognize they had a skewed sampling, or took feedback that was based on opinions garnered too early from people not having the full picture of what they were critiquing, or etc etc etc etc.

Bear, you are fighting the battle on the wrong front. The people posting and have general interest in this thread are fans who believe immersion in a mmorpg is one of the most important aspects of it. Your arguments sound irrelevant to us.
Are there really innumerable ways to interrupt a PVEers play time who doesnt have his flag up "if" flagging is done right?
The answer is simply that everything you could think of could be done regardless of a flagging system.
Could it encourage some behavior? Of course, but you are taking an extremist view on something that would rarely happen. If and when it does happen to you, deal with it.

Flagging is an option....more options the better in my opinion, so please go spew your negativity somewhere else. Nobody cares here.

[Bear]

no need to get angry and rage out there friend. It's just a thread on a forum. You don't own it. If you don't like what someone has posted you can report it or ignore it or PM me and rage there. K? thanks.

[sb220]

Im not raging, just trying to sound direct :lol:

Im just saying this thread isnt about flagging pro or con. Its about the flagging mechanics. So yeah I admit your posts were a tad of an annoyance. All good though.

[Feigro]

Have people who are flagged for PvP be unable to target people not flagged for PvP.
Have people who are not flagged for PvP be unable to target those who are flagged for PvP
Only allow targeting when both sides are flagged for the same environment. Thus you must be flagged for PvP before you can begin to engage in PvP.
Spells and effects that would otherwise harm opponents have no effect unless flagged (AoE, etc.)
In addition to chat, do not allow emotes from opposing factions to display against each other. All interaction with enemy players is impossible save for fighting, which can only happen when both are flagged.
Collision detection only works between two players flagged for pvp. I.e. if someone is flagged, he won't block someone who isn't flagged.


The above should solve all potential greifing except for the following;


Enemy players tagging needed quest mobs.
Players being bothered by the inherent fact that their enemy is in the area and they can't attack them.


The first of those should be toned down due to the fact that a lot of the enemies should be unattackable by the enemy faction's players. Of course if you're on a bear quest they may be able to steal your bears. But there seems to be an emphasis on quests where your actively fighting NPCs of the enemy faction. For example, Destruction players doing content in Reiksgaurd castle wouldn't be able to be greifed by Order players, nor would Order players get griefed in Black Crag while doing the Red Fang PQ. As both of those areas are members of the same faction as the would-be greifers. Thus they would be unable to attack the NPCs. I would go so far as to wage that primarily side-quests would be subject to this kind of greifing. Likely it's occurance would be minimal.

[sb220]

Have people who are flagged for PvP be unable to target people not flagged for PvP.
Have people who are not flagged for PvP be unable to target those who are flagged for PvP
Only allow targeting when both sides are flagged for the same environment. Thus you must be flagged for PvP before you can begin to engage in PvP.
Spells and effects that would otherwise harm opponents have no effect unless flagged (AoE, etc.)
In addition to chat, do not allow emotes from opposing factions to display against each other. All interaction with enemy players is impossible save for fighting, which can only happen when both are flagged.
Collision detection only works between two players flagged for pvp. I.e. if someone is flagged, he won't block someone who isn't flagged.
Add that to a system that makes enemy zone access relative to your faction's RVR status and Im sold.

[SteelPulse]

So from what i understand PvP setup for Warhammer looks like this.

1. RvR zones are all open PvP
2. All exploration land is open PvP
3. All cities are open PvP
4. All PvE zones are open to flagging which allows you to chose if you want to fight or not, which im sure we all will if an oposing faction invades your PvE zones.
5. Only non PvP instances are Publc Quest

So that would tell me that 90% of all instances and land is PvP friendly except Public Quest, and if you dont PvP the you will be out of 90% of all EXP gains and rewards.

Sounds like the perfect PvP based ruleset ive ever seen...

[Frein]

2. All exploration land is open PvP

There is no such thing as "exploration land". Only RvR and PvE.

[SteelPulse]

There is no such thing as "exploration land". Only RvR and PvE.

Exploration quests

From Warhammer Online


Jump to: navigation (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Exploration_quests#column-one), search (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Exploration_quests#searchInput)
These quests are, as they sound, designed to be triggered by exploration of the environment. They reward those who wander off the beaten track, talk to NPCs or examine items with experience, items (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Items), quests (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Quests) and Tome of Knowledge (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Tome_of_Knowledge) unlocks. The nickname "Christmas" quests refers to the fact a player will have to do very little work for a large reward. Just like getting a Christmas present!
The quests (http://warhammeronline.wikia.com/wiki/Quests) can be incidental when wandering, like exploring your way up a mountain and unlocking something like a "King of the Mountain" title. Or short quests like talking to a lost ranger with a hungry dog who asks you to find his dog something to eat. Kill the ranger and feed him to the wolf! Almost instant

[Commentaris]

the leap from "exploration quests" to "exploration lands" is a pretty big one.

on the same subject. are there "crafting lands", as we know that there will be crafting?

[Riggs]

players should be force flagged in the RVR areas. If they dont like it, they should stay in the PVE area. If there is someone straggling around an RVR area alone and comes across people of the other faction they shouldnt be able to stand there and throw emotes and dance with them with no punishment. The danger of these areas is what will make them that much more fun, none of that, "oh the battle ends now because the whole other team decided to not return until they werent flagged anymore. PVE zones are your "safe zones" and if you don't like danger, stay there, because this is supposed to be a RVR focused game.