George Black wrote: » If there are penalties for attacking: more and more people wont bother with attacking a caravan for resoyrces or gold. More and more guilds wont bother with attacking a castle defended by top guilds. More and more players wont bother to atk a node. There wont be death penalties for PvP events. End of story.
Caeryl wrote: » It can’t honestly be considered “open world” PvP when it functions unlike any other place in the open world.
daveywavey wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » It can’t honestly be considered “open world” PvP when it functions unlike any other place in the open world. It already functioned differently, given that there's no PvP Flagging system at a caravan/siege/etc.
Percimes wrote: » What I'm trying to say is that even if there is no death penalty it doesn't mean that dying is not a big detriment to the attack or defence. Your death can have a cascading effect that leads to a global defeat, which should always be greater than an individual temporary penalty.
Elo wrote: » A lot depends on how far away the respawn point is. If you can basically respawn at the fight, without penalty, then you might as well make everyone immune to losing health. Hopefully the respawn point will require several minutes of travel.
George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not.
Noaani wrote: » Percimes wrote: » What I'm trying to say is that even if there is no death penalty it doesn't mean that dying is not a big detriment to the attack or defence. Your death can have a cascading effect that leads to a global defeat, which should always be greater than an individual temporary penalty. So, your argument is that dying has no penalty other than potentially making it harder for your side to win. In other words, no penalty.
George Black wrote: » Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason.
Noaani wrote: » I can understand there being a lesser death penalty in events like this, but there really does need to be a penalty of some sort.
Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not. Again, the same arguments can be made for instancing and removing the penalties of PvE deaths in raids, since it’s content where death is also expected. Removing consequences for failure diminishes the significance of success. That’s a very basic statement. Coming from the “participation award bad” crowd, this sudden attachment to risk-free PvP is almost funny.
George Black wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not. Again, the same arguments can be made for instancing and removing the penalties of PvE deaths in raids, since it’s content where death is also expected. Removing consequences for failure diminishes the significance of success. That’s a very basic statement. Coming from the “participation award bad” crowd, this sudden attachment to risk-free PvP is almost funny. There isnt xp debt in instanced raids. If there is, I have no problem with removing it.
Noaani wrote: » George Black wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not. Again, the same arguments can be made for instancing and removing the penalties of PvE deaths in raids, since it’s content where death is also expected. Removing consequences for failure diminishes the significance of success. That’s a very basic statement. Coming from the “participation award bad” crowd, this sudden attachment to risk-free PvP is almost funny. There isnt xp debt in instanced raids. If there is, I have no problem with removing it. There is, and I have the same basic issue with removing it as I do with removing the death penalty from PvP. Failure should have a penalty.
George Black wrote: » Noaani wrote: » George Black wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not. Again, the same arguments can be made for instancing and removing the penalties of PvE deaths in raids, since it’s content where death is also expected. Removing consequences for failure diminishes the significance of success. That’s a very basic statement. Coming from the “participation award bad” crowd, this sudden attachment to risk-free PvP is almost funny. There isnt xp debt in instanced raids. If there is, I have no problem with removing it. There is, and I have the same basic issue with removing it as I do with removing the death penalty from PvP. Failure should have a penalty. Falso bravado mate. No reasoning. Nobody will play a game if they are constantly having XP Debt. Unless you have a game in mind with 0 challenge, that take effort to actually fail abd die.
Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Noaani wrote: » George Black wrote: » Caeryl wrote: » George Black wrote: » Open world flagging and penalties applied when you are green purple red are not as often as in participating in an event such as siege or caravan attack or guild wars, where the possibility of constant death are high, as opppsed to random encounters. Asking for the same death penalties, in situations where death is a high propability, as in situations (flagging) where death is a much loeer possibility is a petty request, without any actual, meaningful reason. We might as well add death penalties in INSTANCED battlegrounds and dungeons. Why not? Is one thing to wonder how come there wont be death penalties in pvp events. It's another thing to demand it without a good reason when you have been given explenations as to why not. Again, the same arguments can be made for instancing and removing the penalties of PvE deaths in raids, since it’s content where death is also expected. Removing consequences for failure diminishes the significance of success. That’s a very basic statement. Coming from the “participation award bad” crowd, this sudden attachment to risk-free PvP is almost funny. There isnt xp debt in instanced raids. If there is, I have no problem with removing it. There is, and I have the same basic issue with removing it as I do with removing the death penalty from PvP. Failure should have a penalty. Falso bravado mate. No reasoning. Nobody will play a game if they are constantly having XP Debt. Unless you have a game in mind with 0 challenge, that take effort to actually fail abd die. Recent interactions just show me that you do not have any interest in good faith discussion. In a game that has advertised itself as being based on weighing risk vs reward, how does risk-free PvP come from that logic? Arenas have practically no rewards, so it makes sense there’s no risk to participating. Sieges have high up-front costs, so while it’s still very iffy for attackers to suffer no penalties at all while in a siege (unless they’re ejected from the siege upon death), it’s not unreasonable. But caravans now only have two outcomes for attackers: net-neutral, or gain. You never risk anything when attacking a caravan if death penalties are disabled. Defenders can’t take your dropped materials when they successfully defend, or cause exp debt to your group to dissuade you from coming back to attack again after a failed attempt. Does it not seem strange that defenders have only net-neutral or loss as outcome if they get attacked, if this no-risk system remains?
George Black wrote: » Look at you caeryl and look at noanni One says remove death penalties from instanced raids but calls risk v reward from me, another says keep death penalties both in pvp events and instanced raids. Both dissaprove of my view. None understands the significance of xp debt in situations where death is a high possibility like PvP events and instanced pve raid. Leave the emotion out and think. Look into other successful examples. Stop being reactive.
