Lawless zone

Magma1997

Basicly a zone where people arent affected by the karma system and can be a PK haven. While PKing in this area you dont lose nor gain karma. So when a PK steps into the area there would be a timer saying how long you have till you can reap the benefits of this zone (mostly so people cant just keep jumping in and out like a troll), and when you step back out you become vulnerable again. Kind of like how you can lose the stars on you in GTA. BUT its also a hunting ground for the bounty hunters as well which is why i think it would work pretty nicely.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Karthos

I'm hoping this is what the oceans are.

Kind of an "International Waters" type deal.

Wandering Mist

I often see this suggestion thrown around, and the very first thing that comes into my mind is: Why. Why do you want a lawless zone?

Karthos

wanderingmist wrote: »

I often see this suggestion thrown around, and the very first thing that comes into my mind is: Why. Why do you want a lawless zone?

I'll actually answer this truthfully.

I want to kill people, but I don't want a penalty for it.

Why? Because I enjoy PvP. And to have a place to play in that way, open world combat where I don't have to worry about corruption would be nice.

Am I a griefer or PKer? Not particularly, but I do enjoy a good fight, and the fact that we can have a location to go look for one, where other people are doing the same, will promote a better and healthier community.

Or else I have to find my fights where all the PvE players are, and that always ends up with someone upset.

Give the PvP it's sandbox, if that's not for you, simply do not go, and enjoy other aspects of the game.

It's honestly a win/win

Magma1997

wanderingmist wrote: »

I often see this suggestion thrown around, and the very first thing that comes into my mind is: Why. Why do you want a lawless zone?

Its just an added amount of content to the game that people can enjoy. Also i still like the idea of PKing without negatives so long as its controlled. Now the other reason as I've stated in the draft is that it also becomes a hunting ground for bounty hunters and will make for a fish in a barrel type deal. If i had to say in the simplest terms for something like this idea its the sense of freedom. When everything else is controlled or regulated in some way this zone would be the haven for such players who hate those constraints. I guess you could call this a gamers stress reliever area, or gainer depends on how you look at it 😆

grisu

So arenas and battlegrounds?

seaber

Grisu wrote: »

So arenas and battlegrounds?

open world pvp is very different to arenas and battlegrounds

cyanideinsanity

Grisu wrote: »

So arenas and battlegrounds?

Probably more like runescape's wilderness, where its a part the world with some kind of "anything goes" ruleset for pvp. For example RS limits who you can attack by level, with the disparity increasing the further you go in, and with some areas only being single combat(1v1) and others multi combat.

The first thing that comes to mind to accommodate such a thing is a node after being sieged.

Wandering Mist

@Karthos and @Magma1997 Thank you for the honest answers.

Karthos

wanderingmist wrote: »

@Karthos and @Magma1997 Thank you for the honest answers.

It was an honest question

Wandering Mist

cyanideinsanity wrote: »

Grisu wrote: »

So arenas and battlegrounds?

Probably more like runescape's wilderness, where its a part the world with some kind of "anything goes" ruleset for pvp. For example RS limits who you can attack by level, with the disparity increasing the further you go in, and with some areas only being single combat(1v1) and others multi combat.

The first thing that comes to mind to accommodate such a thing is a node after being sieged.

That system works in Runescape because (unless it's changed since I played it) you can only do PvP in the wilderness, whereas in Ashes you can PvP everywhere outside the cities.

Hexcat

If I'm not mistaken, Intrepid already said that there will not be any place out of the nodes zone of influence (this means the PVP and PK rules aplys to everyone in the mainland), they will continue to deliberate on "international waters" tho...

cyanideinsanity

wanderingmist wrote: »

That system works in Runescape because (unless it's changed since I played it) you can only do PvP in the wilderness, whereas in Ashes you can PvP everywhere outside the cities.

Where you can pvp is irrelevant and detailing how RS does it was to give a bit of context. Its the idea of an area in the world allowing for "unrestricted" pvp in a non-structured manner.

Karthos

Lumbermark wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken, Intrepid already said that there will not be any place out of the nodes zone of influence (this means the PVP and PK rules aplys to everyone in the mainland), they will continue to deliberate on "international waters" tho...

This was my understanding of the current system, hence why my hopes are towards the sea.

It's honestly the most logical option because no one really owns the ocean, there's no city building. There could be a bit of water that a coastal node would control, but as far as out in the open water, I strongly feel anything should go.

Piracy, theft, murderer, recording football games without the express written consent of the NFL.

supqtpie

Definitely want a lawless zone (punishment free zone). Tons of players love open pvp and grew up playing on PVP servers on other games. There's nothing like a 1v1 in the open or small skirmishes with parties using the natural landscape and possibly NPC mobs coming to attack. This also would have no consequence for casual/non-pvp oriented players so why not?

Wandering Mist

Karthos wrote: »

wanderingmist wrote: »

@Karthos and @Magma1997 Thank you for the honest answers.

It was an honest question

I try my best. Now that we've agreed that it's something people would want, the next question would be what effect such a zone would have on the community and the game world. The only game I've played that contained lawless zones was Elite Dangerous which had certain anarchy systems where you could kill other ships without getting a bounty on your head. Despite them being lawless zones, the anarchy systems were perhaps the safest places to travel through. Why? Because most of the pirates stayed near to the high-traffic trade routes where they could catch the big transport ships on various runs. As a result, the anarchy systems are mostly deserted because there was no need to ever go there.

The only way I can see it working is to give law-abiding citizens a valid reason for going into the lawless zones (e.g. to collect rare items) but that comes with its own set of problems.

Karthos

I'm going to use Archeage as an example, not because it's the best example, but it's the game that did this that I'm most familiar with.

They had zones that would shift in and out of "War" and "Peace" status. I think ot was based on the amount of activity in each.

During the default status, you could PvP but incur a possible penalty (if you were reported to the trial system). The during Peace, PvP was turned off.

But during War, there was no penalty. And for the most part, anyone you ran into there was there specifically to fight. You didn't find players leveling or running tadepacks through a war zone.

What this did was pull the PvPers into that zone to fight, leaving the other zones less populated by PvPers, which allowed people to run packs or do other stuff fairly safely.

I spent 90% of my time on a boat in that game, while the water was full PvP all the time, you still could be reported for killing your own faction.

It was a decent balance in someways, but there was always that tension of "friend or foe" when in the water, which made it exciting.

Wandering Mist

cyanideinsanity wrote: »

wanderingmist wrote: »

That system works in Runescape because (unless it's changed since I played it) you can only do PvP in the wilderness, whereas in Ashes you can PvP everywhere outside the cities.

Where you can pvp is irrelevant and detailing how RS does it was to give a bit of context. Its the idea of an area in the world allowing for "unrestricted" pvp in a non-structured manner.

There's no point talking about a system in a game without considering why that system exists. As I said, in Runescape the only place you can do open world PvP is in the Wilderness, and there are no consequences for killing someone in the Wilderness once you step back in the no-PvP zones (the white skull only lasts 10-20 minutes and then disappears). It is completely different to the systems that are planned for Ashes.

cyanideinsanity

wanderingmist wrote: »

cyanideinsanity wrote: »

wanderingmist wrote: »

That system works in Runescape because (unless it's changed since I played it) you can only do PvP in the wilderness, whereas in Ashes you can PvP everywhere outside the cities.

Where you can pvp is irrelevant and detailing how RS does it was to give a bit of context. Its the idea of an area in the world allowing for "unrestricted" pvp in a non-structured manner.

There's no point talking about a system in a game without considering why that system exists. As I said, in Runescape the only place you can do open world PvP is in the Wilderness, and there are no consequences for killing someone in the Wilderness once you step back in the no-PvP zones (the white skull only lasts 10-20 minutes and then disappears). It is completely different to the systems that are planned for Ashes.

The differences between the games is irrelevant. Having a game with pvp anywhere doesn't mean you can't have a small piece of the world the removes the pvp penalty thats applied elsewhere. Doesn't change the penalties impact either since its only removed in that single piece of the world.

I mean we already have some instances of it with sieges, as well as more contain, more structured pvp, with caravans, and participating in either has no impact on corruption.

Magma1997

wanderingmist wrote: »

Karthos wrote: »

wanderingmist wrote: »

@Karthos and @Magma1997 Thank you for the honest answers.

It was an honest question

I try my best. Now that we've agreed that it's something people would want, the next question would be what effect such a zone would have on the community and the game world. The only game I've played that contained lawless zones was Elite Dangerous which had certain anarchy systems where you could kill other ships without getting a bounty on your head. Despite them being lawless zones, the anarchy systems were perhaps the safest places to travel through. Why? Because most of the pirates stayed near to the high-traffic trade routes where they could catch the big transport ships on various runs. As a result, the anarchy systems are mostly deserted because there was no need to ever go there.

The only way I can see it working is to give law-abiding citizens a valid reason for going into the lawless zones (e.g. to collect rare items) but that comes with its own set of problems.

The way the zone can stay relevant is by adding unique stuff to the zone such as unique crafting materials, mobs, herbs etc... Another way is by having special titles given when you gain certain amount of kills in that area or types of kills such as elf, human, or dwarf killer. You could also have benefits to what you gain in that zone, preferably increased XP gain.

Azathoth

I don't know. Seems like if such a place exist it will just fill up with the types of players that just want to kill others regardless of the challenge, reward, or meaning.

I hope a place like this does not exist.

Child Item