I think victory feeling good should be an incentive to PvP, and that defeat should not necessarily make a person feel bad in most forms of PvP. Not all, but most.

For example, if I'm an arena fighter in a contest on fair terms, winning and losing should both feel good. The fight should be thrilling, challenging, and educational no matter the outcome. On the other hand, if I'm robbed and killed on the highway, or by someone I trust, I can't see many situations in which I would feel good about it, or want to for that matter. However, the satisfaction of revenge should be enough to motivate me to seek it out, rather than giving up and trying to shrug it off or stop playing instead.

But to look to the core of the counter-argument against all PvP feeling good: Unfair ground is a big part of the thrill for PvP players. There's a lot of people who love to win, but hate to lose. These are the players you'll find ambushing gatherers and levellers in other MMOs, or running in packs/zergs and devouring everything they encounter. Most of the really interesting PvP experiences in gaming happen in the grey areas where unfair PvP is possible, as situations develop and unfold in a chaotic manner. Ambushes can turn into routs, hunters can become the hunted. The prey can walk away as the last person standing. The factions in one encounter - or string of encounters - can number a dozen or more. These encounters, too, have the potential to be thrilling, challenging, and educational. Not as easily, true. But the encounters that are are that much more interesting for the unpredictability of it all.

Which is why those of us who want PvP are so vehemently against any kind of flagging, battle instancing, or other restrictions on open world PvP. There's a whole other game in the wild that we can't experience if things are too tightly constrained by rules and safety nets. Hell, a good number of us will protect those of you who don't want to fall prey to this sort of activity just so we can put ourselves in harm's way so it can happen. Remember that much of the game's dynamic is going to be built around co-operation and mutual benefit. Around contracts. Small jobs like escorting people between towns or scouting someone's land to clear it of bandits are going to be big draws to PvP players, simply for the chance that there might be other players involved. Your needs as a noncombatant are going to be met. You'll just need to work for it, as we will need to work to meet ours.

Posted By Kyleran at 07:31 AM - Sat Jan 19 2019

Posted By Beathan at 4:22 PM - Thu Jan 17 2019

Sure. PvP should feel good, if engage in voluntarily, on terms of mutuality, and within the local customs and rules of acceptable behavior. It's a lot like other things that way.

If combat is challenging and fun -- then PvP can be. I don't think there is anyone who would disagree with that, and I don't see any reason why to think that goal is not a key "must have" feature for the Devs.

However, if your point is "don't complain about aggressive, nonconsensual PvP gameplay -- because it's for the lulz." Well, that is just anti-social, and I expect many of us won't see fun in that.

Totally nailed it, and I suspect the OP was a passive aggressive way of saying players should enjoy being ganked because of all the "opportunities" it presents for them to "get gud" which is typical griefer mentality.

Best crafter coe at your service. Such an amazing crafter i had an armies support before i joined the coe community.

Posted By Beathan at 12:09 PM - Sat Jan 19 2019

Posted By Thecutepig at 08:18 AM - Sat Jan 19 2019

Doesn't it feel twice as good when you get ganked and win? Imagine having some nice comfy lounging clothes on while tending your garden and all of a sudden 3 armored brigands come. You run and grab you sword and lure them to a place where you can fight them one on one, or focus pecking ones health away while avoiding the attacks of others. Eventually you defeat all 3 and cdp them to make sure they pay for their crimes. That would be an amazing feeling and that situation is realistic despite unpopular belief.

You seem to get far too much enjoyment from direct competition and far too little from other things. Personally, I wouldn’t be tending a garden if I didn’t enjoy tending a garden, and if three brigands interrupted that, I would be frustrated and annoyed and killing them wouldn’t change that much. (That is especially true because I always seem to be ganked right when I have to log off to deal with something irl.)

That said, what I would really enjoy is planning a garden that the brigands wouldn’t or couldn’t attack. Now that would be fun.

And that is the PvP opportunity I think COE offers — a chance to design, build and defend safe havens RK PvPers won’t or can’t attack, and then expanding them until the entire world (or at least the starting continent) is civilized and safe from RK PvPers. That is an amazing endgame for COE.

Also, that endgame won’t end the game for PvP. There are new continents to be discovered. SBS could conceivably just keep adding them. Those will be unclaimed, lawless places — at least not claimed or governed by PCs. There will be plenty of PvP opportunities on or over the edge of PC governed space as soon as a new continent is discovered, and the game will start with a lot of ungoverned or poorly governed space.

Win-Win for both PvPers and people who just want to do stuff ingame without being ganked.

I think that would feel even better than killing them 1v3. Of course people think its going to be like eve or for honor. Its combat system will be more like mortal online

I thought the idea for CoE was to be completely unrestricted. There will be no dev implemented safe zones or opt out features. Unless I am mistaken they wanted this game to mirror real life in that in game laws only act as a deterrent for criminal activity. No mechanical system is out right stopping a pvp focused person from going into a town to happily murder everyone if they deem the risk to be worth the reward.

It will be up to the loot Piñatas to protect themselves. Which would be done by building walls, hiring npc's guards and setting laws for those guards to enforce. The end goal would be to make the chance of successful hostilities within the sheep pen so low, and the punishment high enough as to dissuade the average pvper from praying upon them.

You'll still get the lucky or skillful criminal activity sure, but its not likely to be an out right fluster cluck of nude murder hobos running around. At least not in the town.

It will be unrestricted. Alot of the community want to gloria victis this game. Alot of people want no looting no combat and no actual stealing. They just want rp. Some people do want no restrictiond because alot of the fun pvp based mmorpgs decided to make no looting or safe zones that people could just respawn in and take no damage

a Time to Kill that is slow enough for defenders to react against and fast enough to be able to take on multiple opponents. in terms of literal PvP its all about solid mechanics and reliable combat that can be mastered that make it feel good.

In terms of other forms of pvp;

The feeling of bamboozling your mark are a kind of given. Like if you manage to steal from someone, forge papers, take their identity, trick people into situations where you get what you want without having to draw your sword I think the feeling will come from your own wit