One final merge

[Ernests]

I think that maybe the solution might be one common server for all. But server needs to be set up so that you can choose the PvP or PvE mirrors (inst.) of every zone.

[Belawen]

I know many players in crom who say the same.."I love the worldpvp, but what to do if i can't find anyone, and can't do nothing coz there are not enough players" so left to crom.

And it's not just those who left, I could imagine there's a lot of cromlings like me who'd love to get a taste of open world pvp, it's just that fury doesn't seem to offer that any more than crom does. I've been logging my 39 and 59 sin/barb on fury from time to time to see if it's worth it to roll a new alt there, and it's just sad how there's maybe one or two players outside main hubs at those levels. On crom on the other hand you're actually having to wait for mob respawns in the most weirdest of places to get quests done, there's just people of every lvl running around everywhere. And it's pretty fun to see that, too bad there isn't really any other upside to it.. And it doesn't look much better at 80. So, my new barb that I plan to play pvp only found it's home in crom. Isn't that a bit funny?

Another thing I'd be interested to hear is why are some people so much against a merge like this, especially if both servers rulesets could be retained through a solution like pve/pvp instances? Because I just can't understand why you're threatening to leave if this would happen.. The merge wouldn't force you to pve or pvp against your will. Somebody said crom don't want the "poisonous" pvpers to invade their community. What community? Global chat? that's already just pvp trash talk and trolling. But really, joking aside please enlighten me.

And Tomium, why would you want to say something like that? I mean, this thread is about people wanting to play your game but are finding it really really hard and don't know what to do anymore. You don't have to log on just to jump around for a few mins and then log off too many times before you go cancel your subscription. You saw how it's like, and tbh it was blatantly clear from your voice, talk and the way your face turned red that you began to be quite fed up with it.. Considering your job description, how exactly does your post relate to positive community management?

[Kurt2013]

... I enjoyed my short stay on the Fury server as a 19 toon, but I can't imagine trying to climb another 60 levels like that in maps where the trek to quest objectives are long enough without having gankers looking to ruin someone's day. Though I'll count myself pleasantly surprised at how many players were actually nice about NOT killing other players 60 levels lower than them or players of the same level actually bowing and jumping before killing you.
...

This gives a good point to consider when designing open world pvp rulesets. The problem usually are those "out to ruin others day". That is why a ruleset favoring those is plainly not working (has not been since 2008 and in other games as well). Usually people killing you once or actually wanting to play with you by giving you additional thrill CONSENSUALLY are not a problem.

Before a final merge imo three things have to be done/considered:
- open pvp has to stay voluntary and not enforced. This rules it out as mandatory in popular grinding zones without alternative too (as in the discussion about open pvp quests on crom). So to do this, you will need to give a choice between pvp or pve rulesets upon entering a zone or invent/use some kind of flagging system.
- open pvp needs some kind of regulation system (not like guards, ideally self-regulating without limiting the choice of player actions and gamestyle). If you want to keep focusing and hunting the weak or certain people only or kill all on sight...do so, but not without ingame consequences. Also there should be basic countermeasures (if you do the first suggestion, this would be one. Just hand in the quest or read the npc talk in the pve version). If done right, this could be just the additional motivation even pve inclined people would need to go and play on the pvp instances (maybe with other benefits for pve as well, though you have to be carefull to link these to enemy activity or make them more vanity than power to counter handholding/exploiting).
- open pvp has to be fun and keep a casual aspect. The gear explosion and the server move (latency) and cheat/exploit policy are not helping in all these aspect when it comes to motivation. Gear explosion can actually again be solved by good design, server move is not so easy to solve and there are limits the engine can be tweaked probably and the cheat/exploit policy is another point where a more structurized and partly transparent approach might help.

[Shealeigh]

How out of reach is a flag pvp system, where people can drop their precious t4 armor if they grief newbies? This would encourage protection behaviors against grief, with people rushing to get those precious armors from the now-vulnerable griefers.
I remember Lineage II, an old game, having good system of guild x guild war declarations along a PK system avoiding grief abuse among non-combatants. IMHO if its not hard to code (probably harder then renown fix) this system would work wonders for most everyone, except for those who can't stand being killed not even a single time by another player. Or then make this on Border Kingdoms areas, add stuff to BK as an alternate leveling area, with more rewards or whatever, not a place where people go hold hands to farm unaware rock-diggers. If you want to merge all into a single server then make the BK areas filled with repetable quests like "protect NPCs", "defend villlages", etc, both with NPCs to make them completable solo, with the possibility of interference from other players, for good or for bad.

There is a lot of options. And basically I prefer what Kurtz said, if I had read his post I wouldn't bother posting but now its done. One addendum though, pretty silly: WB could drop t1 PvPPP gear. It drops a lot of t1 PvEEE gear already and this put fresh powerleveled/offlineleveled returning old players right into PvEEE action. The same should be done with PvPPP

[Tony82]

Funcom imho can use a simple method to finally fix this situation:
1) Merge ALL server in one.
2) Develop the "Flagged" for PvP (Blue/Orange/Red).


Flagged for PvP must work like this:
- A player who wanna make open world pvp can flag himself as "PvP", and he become "Orange" for PvE flagged Player(Blue), and "Red" for flagged PvP player (Red).
- Orange player cant hit/heal Blue Player and Blue player cannot heal/hit Orange.
- If a Blue Player try to attack an Orange player he will have an "error message" (NO auto toogle PvP, to avoid exploit, like in WoW...).
- Red Vs Red work as always.
- If a PvP flagged player (Red) want to switch back to PvE flag (Blue) there is a wait timer of 5 minuts after press "Switch to PvE flag".


This is basicly my idea.



"Moar" addition (i will be hated for this prolly), just for make things interesting:
- PvP flagged player (Red) can see a PvP player flagged Red ONLY player in a +- 5 lvl, else is Orange.
- There is no lvl restriction on flagging himself for pvp, due to the +- 5 lvl range.
- PvP flagged player cannot hide (except rogues).
- PvP flagged player in a grp of 3+ player are localized in the map/radar with a red dot.
- PvP flagged combat on the map are locallized on the map/radar by a "crossed sword indicator".
- Orange player cannot tell/chat to Blue Player, exception : guild chat.
- Chat will be be split 2 different chat (example: [Global] and [Global PvP], [NPH] and [NPH PvP], etc. etc.).



Peace

[Succuby]

Flagging system may could work, tho i don't understand the difference between your red and orange flags.

Basicly for absolutely non pvpers should have a flag which protects them from every kind of world-pvp.

I think 2 type of flags would be enough for the most players(red and blue nametag).
To prevent unfair pvp, only players with the same flag could grp up.

Tho i heard from some pve players they would like try the world pvp, but not in the way like we do in fury, but faction wise.
Ok there are many factions so basicly everyone could hit everyone, but instead of looking at all factions, players could pledge for one faction at the time, and see the opposite faction members red.(this could be the 3th flag)
faction pvp flagged players could also fight with normal pvp flagged players if they are member of the opposite faction.
To prevent unfair pvp, faction pvp flagged players could only grp up with players who pledged for the same faction.


about the "moar" ...(i think you have never played in a pvp server)

"- PvP flagged player (Red) can see a PvP player flagged Red ONLY player in a +- 5 lvl, else is Orange.
- There is no lvl restriction on flagging himself for pvp, due to the +- 5 lvl range."
Something like this exist in pvp servers players 5lvl below you are grey and giving murderer points


- PvP flagged player cannot hide (except rogues).
- PvP flagged player in a grp of 3+ player are localized in the map/radar with a red dot.
- Orange player cannot tell/chat to Blue Player, exception : guild chat.
Worst ideas i ever heard.showing pvpers in the map would result pvper hunter alliances.

- PvP flagged combat on the map are locallized on the map/radar by a "crossed sword indicator".
Most of times a fight doesn't take longer then a few seconds. by the current settings the map sometimes can't even hadle the players (think of wb raids), this just wasting of resources in my eyes. otherwise crossed swords indicator is used for fix pvp objects.

- Chat will be be split 2 different chat (example: [Global] and [Global PvP], [NPH] and [NPH PvP], etc. etc.).
They shouldn't be split by flags, but it's a good idea to have different type of channels for discussing pvp things in public

[Maelkjar]

I'd prefer the separated zones as this is somehow a 100% on/off option, which is simply "clean" - although I think I read something about mixed rulesets on a server being hard to implement.
A flag-based system could simply be a buff similar to the pvp-event buffs on fury, given automatically and ideally clearly visible above one's name. Just make it removable through clicking it off and automatically reapplied after 5-10 minutes not attacking player-targets.
I see pros n cons about this approach as naturally through the lacking split into different zones more people can become witnesses to pvp and possibly interested in it, on the other hand flag-bases systems are prone to support abuse and/or cowardice (e.g. people stay unflagged until someone kills someone else, then flag pvp on and kill the victor while he's low).

I strongly disagree on the ideas about minimap-marking flagged players or deactivating hide for all but rogues. A better approach might be to make hiding a timed ability for ~15-30 secs per attempt for any class.
Also anyone supporting another player in pvp while unflagged himself with buffs/heal should automatically be flagged, too -though this could be abused by already flagged players to create new victims...Imagine someone killing questmobs and a hidden and flagged player intentionally catches some AE, flags the quester as pvp-active and kills him then...

[Succuby]

I'd prefer the separated zones as this is somehow a 100% on/off option, which is simply "clean" - although I think I read something about mixed rulesets on a server being hard to implement.

True some players would always find some glitch to ruin the pvp, in a mixed ruleset.. so simple solution may would work the best.

[Bukkithedd]

I have only one thing to say about a Final Merge(™) of all the servers: whatever you do, for the love of the gods, you MUST make it worthwhile for the PvE'ers to risk facing their ultimate dread, namely a gaggle of frothing-at-the-mouth, bloodthirsty-as-a-honeybadger-on-crack horde of PvP-maniacs. I've been a firm believer in the past that creating PvP-instances of the regular gameworld where you get a popup every time you zone into the zone if you want normal, epic or PvP is a bad move, but that's because I have been influenced by the 5% and 0%-gas areas in Anarchy Online (5% means that anyone belonging to any other faction than yours are open to attack, 0% means that EVERYONE, even guildies, is fair game. If I recall correctly. Been 7 years since I last logged into AO. Anyone oldtimers remember the Bar Brawls up at the Hope Bar? ). Back in AO, you had very little reason to go there, apart from the odd mission that you blitzed for nanos to sell (those familiar with AO will remember this).

One of the biggest flaws with the Border Kingdoms is that there's nothing there that makes the risk of getting your face punched into the back of your head for your average PvE'er, and thus only those that want to fight do. Now, if there was a reason to go there, however (better loot, better materials (ref. the new crafting-system), dungeons that drop Phat Lewts ), that would change. It's a win-win, really. PvE'ers gets what they want but not without risks, PvP'ers get what they want: An all-out slaughterfest. Which, in turn, might pull more people into PvP, thus increasing the likelyhood that faces will be punched, which...well, you get the idea.

[Maelkjar]

Problem's just that the level-design of CE aint as interesting as other areas. Fighting in zones like Zelata/Kesh/NG is more fun than there, especially the village in the middle is not a fun fight-ground.
And i dunno if thats just me, but I think CE/AE aren't the particularly most performant zones in terms of FPS.