Politician Archive
Thread: Since when is there non consensual PvP in SWG?????
This is a ridiculous thread.
Neutrality. Do you even have a clue what it is? Neutrality doesn't mean immune to attack. It means you choose not to favour one side over another. Its completely different, they aren't even freaking related. In reality if you have 2 parties that hate each other and there is a neutral party, both parties tend to attack the neutral. If you don't like the city policies don't shop there. How hard is that to understand? and remove /citywarn? do you have a better solution? or is it really your belief that we'd be better off with nothing? and fyi30 seconds is plenty of time to peaceably remove yourself from the fighting, if you don't its your own fault. Don't whine and complain because you can't handle the game as it is. This is how it is. Deal with it... Talk about immaturity. Next time I'm in a city of the opposing faction and I'm asked to leave I think I'll jump on the boards and complain about "how private cities are unfair"...
Guess I'll add my 2 credits, since I saw that the server was Chilastra and it is probably my city on Talus. We've had several 30-50+ battles as our city has been in a seige state for several days. We have a Detachment HQ in the center of our town and a few other small bases and many more minefields to deter attacks.Our guildrecently destoyed a large imperial base and have taken several imperial turrets and atstsin the past week as the GCW rages across our server. We have also been beaten up fairly bad as well, losing IIRC 7 turrets on our bases and numerous faction pets recently. All those involved in the GCW have really been enjoying the new content on the server and I'm sure that armorsmiths everywhere couldn't be happier given the decay.You want a money sink, come toChilastra.
The action has been very intense, espicially with the addition of the cloning center. People are litterally running around with entirely black HAM bars...hilarious stuff.I can't pinpoint if the problem is the intensity of the fighting or some other system problem, butsevere bugs have been taking effect during these battles. ie...people respawning under the cloner or exactly where they died, cityban and citywarn not working properly and so on (DEVS PLEASE HEAR ME). It hashad consequences for both sides and I no way use this as an excuse for the last successful raid on Ronin City by the Imperial Armies. I have a feeling that we're one of the first cities to tax the system in such a manner and I justed wanted to give everyone the heads up that there are still severe problems with the system.
I continue to apologize for neutrals being killed and I think that everyone understands the chaos that is to be had with such events. If you are a neutral and want to come to the city to shop, please contact me in-game and I'll do my very best. I'dwarn that if you see dozens of people running around, its not the new pies put up on the chef vendor. 
Should be interesting when the shuttle gets laid down. At least we'll immediately know whether people are imperial or neutral with the faction scanners. I also wish that I could somehow be semi-overt during the seiges when I cityban/warn so I don't accidently tag true neutrals. Don't really know how that could be implemented though. As to the game mechanics debate, I'm not really sure where I stand just yet. I think everyone has good points on both sides and I think the devs need to seriously examine the implications of the militia. Aside from some of the mishaps at our city, I've heard so very horrific stories from other servers. Hope to see everyone (er...rebel folk) visit Chilastra.
Mayor Bernard Rieux, Ronin City (Ronin guild for those not on Chilastra)
alt. Paribus Rieux
I agree, this thread stole 5 minutes of my life and I want them back.
I'll say this. My guild has a city. It's growing, and we have a decent amount of militia. Guess what. We CONTROL our militia. If people abuse it, they lose it.
But you know what? It's a tool to keep **edit** out of our town. And believe me, if we get anywhere near as many as there are in static towns, then we're gonna be using it a lot.
You're telling me you want to take that tool away? You must not have a city or a guild. We want to provide a safe place for our members. That's all. Maybe some people want to grief, but you know what? That's their town. You don't have to go there. Bring friends. Fight back. You DO know you can right? The militia aren't invincible.
I mean, are you telling me your friend didn't see the "You have been warned" message? And he just stood there and thought "maybe they won't kill me"?
Anyone that dumb deserves to die. If I warn someone, and they stay, I'm assuming that means they intend to fight. If they run, then good for them. They were smart.
If you don't like it, don't visit griefer cities. There are plenty of cities like ours, where you won't be blasted for the hell of it.
In general, I don't PvP in this game. But even I can see the necessity of the /warn system and being able to attack people who come into your town. Neutral or not, if you come into our town and start trouble, we'll give you a swift ride back to Theed without thought.
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
"The FS system only rewards the Veruca Salt's of the MMO world . . . not the Charlie's"
"I continue to apologize for neutrals being killed and I think that everyone understands the chaos that is to be had with such events"
Well, yes it was your city, but you'll notice I find the system faulted, I don't fault you for anything, you're using what you can to defend. You can't make the difference between a blue neutral and a blue covert imp so I understand perfectly well you erring on the side of caution. No hard feelings here.
As to people arguing by staying in the city we consent to PvP, that's wrong. "Leave or I PK you" is PvP already, someone enforcing its will on me, and denying me access to a portion fo the map. Something a neutral didn't sign for. Acceptance for PvP must be active. ie, click a button somewhere. That mechanism can be used to grief neutrals and forbid them to go places people have no right forbidding them to go to.
We built it, we control it, we pay for it, we maintain it, we placed what you want to use, we make sure its available for you to use. If you abuse it, we also have the right to take it away from you. If that means you won't live for long in a tiny radius of the planet, so be it.
~~Shabhaii, Mayor of Tombra, Naboo
www.cityoftombra.com
The REAL BT
"The FS system only rewards the Veruca Salt's of the MMO world . . . not the Charlie's"
slugeater wrote:
"Its their city, their rules, they do what they want, get over it"
No, they don't. Being attacked by players while being neutral qualifies as an exploit to me. Neutral=no PvP. I agree there are some idiots who are neutral too, but instead of killing the guy, make /warn teleport him outside of town, for exemple. He was "escorted" out by the militia.
Neutral does NOT equal no-PvP, otherwise the TEF system would not affect neutrals.
I hate to tell you this but if you heal an overt/TEF'd member of a faction, you are in PvP.
There is no such thing as consensual PvP in SWG.
slugeater wrote:
"By staying there shopping as the timer expires, you basically said 'sure! I want to be involved in PvP! shoot me!'. "
No. What you're saying is "thanks for choosing my way of playing in my stead."
So.. if someone sets their building to private and doesn't allow you in, is this against your style of playing? They're choosing where you can and can not go as far as their little plot of land is concerned.
Is that non-consentual PvP? Should people only be able to ban you if you allow them to?
This argument is absurd. Good thing there's people out there with somewhat solid grips on reality in charge of game design
Suggestion to all neutrals...please keep your name searchable. A quick /who neutral will tellmilitia members whethersomeone is a friend or foe. Accidents will happen, but they will happen much less frequently where we utilize this command and continually remind our forces. Not much you can do when the screen is filled with chaos, but it is quite useful during the downtime.
Mayor Bernard Rieux
Ronin City, Talus, Chilastra
I hate to tell you this but if you heal an overt/TEF'd member of a faction, you are in PvP.
There is no such thing as consensual PvP in SWG."
To heal an overt someone you must be factioned (covert/overt)too. else you get a "it would be unwise to heal that person" message. Go play and test before saying crap.
"So.. if someone sets their building to private and doesn't allow you in, is this against your style of playing? They're choosing where you can and can not go as far as their little plot of land is concerned"
Last I know, people couldn't kill me because I was looking at their house.
"If I warned you in my City, and you chose to stay, YOU made the choice for PvP."
Give me 100$ of I shoot you. You choose not to, so you're responsible for your death? The lawyers willlove that. Yourexemple is blackmail and this is it. Thanks for showing how blackmailing neutrals was posszible with this.
"I mean, are you telling me your friend didn't see the "You have been warned" message? And he just stood there and thought "maybe they won't kill me"?
Said friend was AFK at the time. AFK wasn't supposed to be dangerous since as a neutral you're nto supposed to be a target for PvP.
"Neutral or not, if you come into our town and start trouble, we'll give you a swift ride back to Theed without thought"
Sure, but why KILL THEM at the same time? A simple teleport to the other side of the planet and and automatic /report would be enough. There can be other way of dealing with griefers than giving griefing tools to the law enforcement.
"They're choosing where you can and can not go as far as their little plot of land is concerned."
Yes but that doesn't kill me. I don't suffer PvP penalties because of it.
If, for your example, someone attempted blackmailing a neutral in a City and the neutral didn't simply say 'To Heck with You' and left then guess what, That's THEIR Fault.
Operating and maintaining a city is a huge undertaking, those who do it SHOULD be allowed to protect their city in the way they see fit. The /warn and /ban are the only tools they have that are universally useable against ALL players regardless of affiliation or lack thereof.
Also, You keep proposing the whole 'teleport' idea, yet you fail to respond to the griefing THAT idea will incur. Why is that?
vortexala wrote:
Also, You keep proposing the whole 'teleport' idea, yet you fail to respond to the griefing THAT idea will incur. Why is that?
It's got to do with the fact that this thread is just a him trolling for arguments. I don't see how someone could be so thickheaded about consentual PvP.
I don't get this kind of mentality, but there are many out there. Those folks that shy away from interracting with other players unless it's utterly and totally on their terms. His options for solutions include this teleportation thing and a change to a 5 minute flag on offending twinks only offer chances for huge griefing. His comparisons to blackmail and laws of attacking folks from the real world are wholely inappropriate comparissons.
Pretend you're in the wild west of the 19th century and rethink this stuff. Sometimes gangs would take over towns and enforce their own rule there. Sometimes good folks controlled cities. But when you entered city limits, you were subject to the local laws... no matter what those laws were. You had no recourse other than to abide.
Imagine the city as someone's personal abode. A group pays maintenance fees and has spent quite a large amount of time organizing and planning out their city. When you enter into the city, you're made aware of that fact. You are at the mercy of their laws. If that includes splattering you all over the sidewalk then you get a 30 second window to "get out of dodge."
If you don't like it.. QUIT the game. The design of the developers was to create a world where communities could form and player interraction would rule all. Look at the economy for a prime example of this..
The economy opens up Player Vs. Player conflict where people fight to create the best products, find the best resources, and offer the best services to get customers and make money and a name for themselves.
Player cities are TOTALLY player versus player environments... If it's not political scrabling for the mayor's office, it's militia attacking griefers (or anyone they choose) inside the boundaries of the town that they own and contribute to. You can make friends with folks in towns if you try hard enough. Get to know the folks. Then maybe they wouldn't spam warn on you if they knew who you were.
The GCW was designed for consentual PvP combat with weapons. That, and dueling.
All of these are consentual however. You don't have to be a crafter. You don't have to enter the borders of a city. You don't have to join a GCW faction or provide support to folks who have a TEF flag. You don't have to EVER leave a starting town.
But... well.. the game just wouldn't be any fun without these elements... maybe it would be for the author of this thread, but for me, removing these elements would take all the flavor out of the game. There's no good argument for removing these systems from the game.
You are utterly welcome to live an existance of NO CONFLICT. But that means you'll have to refrain from a TON of game systems.... BUT.. You CAN avoid PvP conflict if you want. No one is forcing you into it. This game is not made solely for you, slug. It's made to bring lots of people of lots of differnt playstyles together. If you want utterly consentual interractions.. go pick up a single player game. MMORPG means that there's a large number of independant human minds all thrown into the same world. In order to rise up in the world, you're going to have to interract with other players. And inevitably this leads to PvP conflict in some form or another.
If you're mind is stuck on the kind of conflict that involves blasters and you think that that's all there is to this game... Well.. that just means you've got a little myopia problem. PvP is a core part of MMORPGs... online games of any sort for that matter.
Well, it's not a matter of being whatever myself, as said earlier. I'm a politician/smuggler and I'm rebel, and I do PvP from time to time.
My issue, here, is people can forbid you to go some places just because they feel like it. And they were given tools to enforce that. The exemple in the original post happened ONCE, and the guys warning neutrals had some of a valid reason to do so. (ie, attacked by imps and can't differentiate between covert imps and neutrals.)
I agree the nezutral problem won't happen in most cities, and why would I go there anyway? But think of an exemple.
"-Oooh, a city, let's go visit!" BLAM. Fun? Don't think so. Even moreso because the guy just got to reinsure all his stuff and suffer decay.
You have to understand that PvP isn't the ONLY form of interaction you cna have. I don't despise it, I know a citizen other than me can run for mayor, I do faction missions and get TEFs from time to time. But to some people, a MMO is a much playing WITH people as playing AGAINST them. That's why EQ is still successful, after all. MMO does NOT equal PvP. Horizons, who is launching soon, does not have PvP and it has some numbers of people wanting to try it anyway.
To sum up, as usual, the /warn system isn't bad in itself, but is too easily abused. After all, Nukes aren't bad in themselves, the guy pressing the button is.