Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?



  • @Ragnarock said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

    my little suggestion (might be pretty dumb) is to have a PVP button switch off/on

    Your problem then is that 9/10 times, people will never have PVP on. Because there is no incentive to do so. So you would end up with 2x PVE planets.


  • TF#1 - WHISPERER

    @Kazzier
    Yep, could be. If it scares too much PVP then it would need to implement more rewards to PVP, like full loot, or more XP/KP from killing another person, or gain a new unique killing ability (tons of things to figure out). Also the feeling that brings danger/repercussion while being a PVP might be enough to lit a spark for some to try it out.


  • TF#12 - PEOPLE'S HERALD

    @Kazzier said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

    @Ragnarock said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

    my little suggestion (might be pretty dumb) is to have a PVP button switch off/on

    Your problem then is that 9/10 times, people will never have PVP on. Because there is no incentive to do so. So you would end up with 2x PVE planets.

    While I am personally not a fan of on/off, leaving it as it is now, youre creating 2 nearly identical PvP planets 🤷 Leaving Syndesia as is, only guarantees dead syndesia as it doesnt offer much to the PvX player beside demonic PvP. Actually, scratch that, worse than demonic PvP because those real PvPers will be on Tartaros, leaving gankers with no backbone to ravage Syndesia 😄


  • TF#4 - EMISSARY

    Another thought came up on me about that, since it's right to fear a double Tartaros as much as we can fear a double Arboreus.
    What if every city has an actually visible bounduary, making so that sherifs can only act in good cities territory, jailing reds in good cities jails, while red with -10k karma can roam evil cities territory freely?
    This way we would move the risk reward system to a more territory based concept, evil territory means a PvE gatherer will have to fear a gank and no sherif coverage, good territory means a PvP ganker will have to fear to be catched by a sherif and be put to jail.
    Moreover, bordering cities of different alignment would generate zones where you can "run to safety" and can have a more mixed risk/reward situation.
    Not to mention that this would incentivate city war (and we want city war!), because the good guild wants that coal resource nodes to be under a good territory, not a bad one, and vice versa!
    What do you thing about this?


  • TF#12 - PEOPLE'S HERALD

    @GreatValdus It could work as a solution to the horrendous PvP situation, it would probably promote city wars, but I would be really worried it slips into a boring status quo of two mega alliances stuck in a Cold War of sorts with no actual wars after some times. It kinda promotes the "Us vs Them" mentality.

    ////////////////////////

    Another idea ive seen in discords, one was to combine "guild war declarations" into my partial loot system, where the declaration would allow full loot between enemies. Since Tartaros is the individual "survival of the fittest" PvP, it makes sense to gear Syndesia towards the Group vs Group gameplay, combining partial loot (for individual and criminal PvP) and full loot (for Group v Group PvP) would be a great way to handle it.


  • TF#1 - WHISPERER

    I certainly feel like the full loot is a huge stretch and makes no sense at all. LonelyCookie is making a great point here, If Arboreus is pve and Tartaros is pvp then in my humble opinion it would make sense to make Syndesia pvp by choice, which would meant you get to participate in pvp only if you are flagged as pvp.

    Some pve players who want to play as humans - for whatever reason, i find it boring since i am a human for real so no need to be human an i game as well lol - and there is no scenario in my opinion when they should be bothered by pvp players killing them. PVP should be balanced at least in that way that both parties want to participate in it, otherwise it just makes AVG aka. assholes vs gatherers. Say what you will but killing players who have no desire to fight with you and are focusing on pve with full pve build and talent and skill custom, that makes no sense at all...



  • I feel that the full loot pvp is a core tenet of the game. Changing that in anyway damages the spirit.
    If a demon infiltrated arboreus and I kill him, I get all his stuff. Even on the non pvp world. And vice versa if he kills me.

    Not knowing too much about the current criminal system, IMHO, the best way to curb rampant large gank groups is to have a strict and harsh criminal system. One that gets increasingly worse the more negative karma/murder counts you have. Exponential gold costs and jail times are a great start. How about the knockdown HP debuff that gets worse each time you are incarcerated untill you pay off your debt?
    Attack and cast speed debuffs. Damage debuffs.
    There are many ways you disadvantage criminals to slow down the number of ganks.

    Losing your stuff is the risk you take walking our your door every session. Shorter grind sessions and playing in groups are a must in this type of environment.


  • Content Creator

    @Xanafel said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

    playing in groups

    Yes, except that Fractured is supposed to cater equally to both the group player and the solo'ist. The Human world is supposed to be solo play friendly and not mandate group play...There are always going to be big RAID bosses that take a group, but for everything else, a solo'ist should be able to spec to go out and play to their heart's content too.


  • TF#12 - PEOPLE'S HERALD

    @Xanafel said in Change to Syndesia, the true mix of PvE and PvP?:

    I feel that the full loot pvp is a core tenet of the game. Changing that in anyway damages the spirit.
    If a demon infiltrated arboreus and I kill him, I get all his stuff. Even on the non pvp world. And vice versa if he kills me.

    As I said in the original post, demons killing (and getting killed) on Syndesia would still be full loot 😉 (In addition to "guild vs guild wars" also being full loot as said in one of the later edits). With Syndesia being solo-friendly with PvP geared towards Group vs Group, it makes sense to keep full loot for this group PvP and have it partial loot for criminal PvP (which is in essence, individual/solo).

    Keeps the full loot risk for guild, city and demon raid gameplay, makes it slightly nicer towards solos, PvErs and gatherers while at the same time very likely curbing down the rampant ganking groups as they would lose their easy full loot.

    Edit: Keep in mind, theres already a planet for the "full risky individual PvP", theres no point in replicating the same on Syndesia.



  • @LonelyCookie

    Yes. While those are good ideas I feel that is the wrong approach. From where I'm looking, it seems like you want to have your cake and eat it too.

    The FAQ does state that there will be plenty of solo and small group content, but the developers never said it would be safe.

    If you want safe solo content I suggest you roll a beastman. Then take the portal when you are ready for some pvp action. If you roll human though you should be ready and willing to accept the fact you may lose your stuff if you go out alone. That's the risk vs reward.

    As long as the criminal system is tough enough and the bounty hunter system is rewarding enough, it will balance out.

    Creating a GvG system just sounds like sanctioned fighting. Might as well get rid of criminal system all together at that point.


  • TF#12 - PEOPLE'S HERALD

    @Xanafel

    Personally.. I think the Devs are actually trying to have too much on Syndesia. It's hard enough to make a valid game that caters to both solo players and group players. It's extremely hard to cater to PvX. Them trying to do both, I think is really just unfeasable. Syndesia should not be solo friendly, cause you really just can not have solo friendly with open PvP. If they want that, then open PvP has to be nixed and stick strictly with the "Militia" and Siege aspects. Quite frankly, being a middle gamestyle, I feel that Militia and Siege mechanics is ALL they need PvP wise for Syndesia... as this means that solo play is possible and PvP is possible as well as optional compared to Arboreus where it does not exist and Tartoros where it is mandated


  • TF#12 - PEOPLE'S HERALD

    My impression was that Syndesia was supposed to be the faction PvP planet, whereas Tartaros was all PvP everywhere.

    My suggestion would be to restrict PvP on Syndesia to faction/city/guild warfare. Within the context of guild wars, PvP should be full loot, wide open, no holds barred. Outside, it should either not be possible, or be heavily penalized.



  • @Roccandil
    While I enjoy faction warfare, population balance always becomes and issue. One side is always bigger and more dominant. Making the game to easy for one side and unfun for the losing side.

    I always liked the idea of race war servers like EQ used to have. Probably a little harder to so with just our 3 factions/races we have here.


  • TF#1 - WHISPERER

    Honestly, I'd just take out random player executions in Syndesia. When an evil player knocks down a random player out in the wild they get gold or jewelry that player might have on them, you know like a normal robbery. Karma hit commensurate to the value of the 3 possible things looted. Rings / gold that can be grabbed by evil players. Knocked down player still has their gear and normal pack. You can probably reduce penalties since no one is actually dying. Could leave in death / executions for GvG / Sieges / factions / bounty system sheriffs.

    Possibly let them take the weapon the player is actively holding. Making it pockets / jewelry / equipped weapon. You know things easily taken from a robbed person.


Log in to reply
 

Copyright © 2021 Dynamight Studios Srl | Fractured