Should there be an outlaw town for Pkers?

Based on my time in the game UO, aka Ultima Online, where you had a PKer system where you went from grey to red. Grey being your open to attacks cause you killed someone or stole from someone, too red where you are just a killer, and you can enter any towns without being killed by guards.

Not sure if this topic was talked about, but I was thinking, why not have a town for the killers?

If not a town, then a caravan type, one they can be setup in hidden locations, and can grown to a level 2 or 3 only. This town needs to be one that can be taken down, and could be relocated to a different hidden location. One only known by a few PKers. A safe place for them to call home, and where they can sell or buy goods as needed.

Think of it as an outlaw town, one that could be moved after a day or two. A few tents and shacks and this can be a nice place for the villain type players. What do you think? Of course these type of camp towns wouldn't be allowed to be setup close to regular ones.

This is just a though, one I am floating out there, to see if others like it or not.

So what do you think? Please express yourself.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

akabear

Yes, I believe there should be some safe havens to a certain degree

If not a town then perhaps the odd cave, or under a bridge whereby they are just off the radar while inside only.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Yes, I believe there should be some safe havens to a certain degree

If not a town then perhaps the odd cave, or under a bridge whereby they are just off the radar while inside only.

There shouldn't be a safe haven, as it makes no sense that only corrupt players have a safe haven.

As to being taken off the radar, all you need to do that is kill a few mobs until you lose all your corruption. I don't think anything more than that is needed.

FuryBladeborne

Corruption is a deterrent. Adding any kind of reward system (including belonging to a group that joins together) is the opposite of a deterrent and will result in more corrupted players rather than less.

akabear

My understanding is that the karma mechanics do not have any detail to measure the impact at the moment.

What I can say from the L2 mechanics was that it could take upwards of 30-90min of intense pve mob killing to burn off the karma from a pk and exponentially longer if you did multiple pks.

If you chose some of the best pve xp places to burn off your karma you had to be on high alert and it would be burned off quickly.
Whereas, if you chose a lesser known place to burn off the karma, then could relax a little more and the same amount would take considerably longer to do given the xp return but there was the added risk in exposure getting there.

For the fortunate clan`s that owned a clan hall, there was fast travel that provided instant return, so risk was somewhat lower.

Further, L2 had a powerful sword of Zakari (not sure of spelling or name after all this time), when it fell on the map, at random intervals weeks apart, there was a sever wide announcement and everyone with an ounce of desire to exponentially gain xp for the time they could hold onto the sword would flock to get it.. people would pk to get it and whoever held the sword was a marked person on the map until dropped. Being killed by another player or mob would drop the sword and there was a good chance the person that did the kill could take over the sword but also a chance it would disappear again and not be about for a week or three.
Whilst in possession of the sword you could kill 3-4x more powerfully that usual and power level, individual or small teams would come in waves trying to take you out. This is how I expect being marked on the map might be for those that decide to pk.

So without fast travel, then I see a real need to provide some kind of intermittent refuge or equivalent or few will engage or pk`ing.

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

This is how I expect being marked on the map might be for those that decide to pk.

I dont.

In L2, there was a solid, specific reason to kill that one player in order to gain advantage, and every player on the game saw it on the map.

In Ashes, only bounty hunters will see it, and there is nothing specific or unique about any specific corrupt player.

granthor

WhitneyHagasMatsumoto wrote: »

Hmmm ......
Maybe I'm misunderstanding because I'm reading a translated version of the text.

Is anyone else under the misconception that the person who created this thread is expressing an opinion specific to a "system for RED players to survive"?
To me, I think he's saying that it would be interesting if the game system had the scope of roleplaying that RED organizes, assuming you're willing to accept risks such as "being targeted by bounty hunters" ......

Of course, this is a proposal for a specification that is not currently envisioned, so I can understand your confusion, but I don't think it's something you should reject to that extent.

Am I simply mistaken?

You're on point. That is mainly what I am trying to point out with my post. You will have those that go rd, and at the same time have just about everything against them. This is a game, as one person has said to have fun, so why not add more layers to the PKer system. You will have players that will always stay green, and you will have players that want to say red. It's what I found out while playing UO that had a system like this.

There the reds ran with greys, and blues scouted the roads ahead of them. If a PKer hunting party was close, they would warn the reds, and they popped away. With no way of using magic to escape, I figured why not have the temp outlaw camps. Sure we will have the node system, but the idea of the outlaw camp would be outside of the node system and used as a temp place to hold up. If found out, then it would be open to being attacked and taken out. Again this is just an idea, not one to reward PKers, just to add to the system of the corrupted.

granthor

Noaani wrote: »

akabear wrote: »

Yes, I believe there should be some safe havens to a certain degree

If not a town then perhaps the odd cave, or under a bridge whereby they are just off the radar while inside only.

There shouldn't be a safe haven, as it makes no sense that only corrupt players have a safe haven.

As to being taken off the radar, all you need to do that is kill a few mobs until you lose all your corruption. I don't think anything more than that is needed.

You're missing the point. Safe haven as in a place they can buy and sell, and craft. But as in they can't be attacked by other players that hunt them down.

Songcaller

No way mate. Corrupted should not be allowed to buy and sell. The reason is because you can't get Gold from PvP Kills and everyone will go corrupted, gank the resources, gank the hunting certificates and gank the greens to become very wealthy. You want to buy and sell then attack Caravans.

Noaani

granthor wrote: »

You're missing the point. Safe haven as in a place they can buy and sell, and craft. But as in they can't be attacked by other players that hunt them down.

You're missing the point, corrupt players shouldn't be able to participate in the economy until they have worked off their corruption.

Again, in order to gain corruption, you have to kill a player that doesn't fight back. Gaining corruption is 100% optional, even if you are all about the PK lifestyle. If you simply stop attacking players that don't fight back, you will never gain corruption.

Volgaire

I felt like being corrupted was supposed to put you on edge, if you like the thrill of killing players then be prepared to be severly punished and isolated for it, corrupted players are not allies so giving them a location to form a community would incentivize becoming a corrupted player.

They can't sell, buy or do any of the community stuff precisely because they are killers, they made the choice to ruin someones day (probably) and now they have to pay up for it by being isolated from the entire community.

I say this but the idea of being on the run is really appealing and I really want to try it at some point.

daveywavey

Gentle Snow wrote: »

I felt like being corrupted was supposed to put you on edge, if you like the thrill of killing players then be prepared to be severly punished and isolated for it, corrupted players are not allies so giving them a location to form a community would incentivize becoming a corrupted player.

They can't sell, buy or do any of the community stuff precisely because they are killers, they made the choice to ruin someones day (probably) and now they have to pay up for it by being isolated from the entire community.

I say this but the idea of being on the run is really appealing and I really want to try it at some point.

Which is exactly why it's discouraged, but allowed!

bigepeen

I don't think it would work in practice. No one wants to gimp their own character just so they can live with others who might kill them and drop their items. Maybe some people would do it for RP purposes, but it makes no practical sense.

Kurgon

Nope. No mercy for the wicked.

Atama

Lycancoffee wrote: »

The corruption system, as some of you are describing it, is terrible. The point of games is to have fun. The corruption system “punishes” players by putting highly aggressive players into a very high risk-reward situation. That doesn’t mean that being “corrupt” shouldn’t also be fun. Games shouldn’t have systems that make players not want to play the game at all.

Toxic gameplay, which PKing is, will make people not want to play the game. So corruption discourages that behavior.

I understand that some people here are terrified of getting randomly pk’d, but quite frankly there are always those players who enjoy being so toxic in an MMO that those players deserve to have a train other people pk them on site, and I’m glad this game mechanic exists where players can handle the worst people of the community interactively through “aggressive negotiations”.

Okay, if you want to be insulting to the community with offensive speech I’ll reply in kind. You are clearly ignorant about this game. Go read a wiki or something. You don’t seem to know what you’re talking about or what this game is about.

Finally I’d like to point out that some of the posters here act like disagreeing with “what Steven said” is some sort of sin. This is a discussion forum, and I’m pretty sure he wants to hear our opinions...especially when they don’t agree with his own.

Oh we frequently call out Steven when we disagree. Family teleportation is stupid, it contradicts some of the core values that make this game stand out from other MMOs. We generally think calling a class “tank” is also dumb. We disagree a lot. It’s clear this game isn’t for you since you want consequence-free PKing. I’m sorry that there aren’t many games like that for you to play, because they generally fail pretty quickly. I’m sure that’s not a coincidence.

maouw

@daveywavey
Precisely!

bigepeen

Atama wrote: »

Toxic gameplay, which PKing is, will make people not want to play the game. So corruption discourages that behavior.

PKing isn't toxic. It's repeatedly PKing for no reason other than to grief someone that is toxic. The corruption system is there to make us consider whether it's worth it to PK someone rather than just PKing everyone for no reason.

Luthienstorm

I think the idea is unwarranted, unfair, and at it's core a farce of an idea. One it's against the game developers vision for their to be a "safe" place for anyone. Everyone is bound by the rules of the world. A "smugglers coves" and towns don't exist in the system because it's organized crime. Like others have said feel free to grow and benefit from that kind of area, but I think you'll find it more trouble than it's worth and a lot of work. 2. If you ask for a safe haven from the law why can't other players ask for safe haven from pkers?
3. Pk refers to player killers. That's pvpers, people after resources, and people ganking. PVP'ers like fair consenual combat meaning both players are flagging up and on equal ground. People who kill for resources kill for risk vs reward. Gankers kill because they can take advantage of another players circumstances. The corruption system doesn't punish pvpers. Somewhat punishes those who kill over stuff...but really punishes the "toxic" gankers. What your suggesting allows gankers to escape punishment. Lowering their risk for the possible reward. If you want to pvp there will be pvp times, places, and people who want to pvp. If you are a ganker trying to take advantage of someone else who isn't as geared, ready, or has a moral compass the law punishes gankers. It helps create a more positive community for newer players and a safer environment for those who aren't as assertive or are just bad pvpers, which will hopefully increase the longevity of the community. In WoW there was a plague that infested the community that the game was unprepared for. Players made camps and colonies that didn't exist. If that's what you want. Create it, but do not expect the community or game developers to get behind a significant design shift, considering the consequences. In this game, to fight back you have to flag up. If you attack someone who is not flagged you are the bad guy and they are the victim. By this games definition if you kill someone who doesn't flag then you are toxic in the eyes of the other player, because they do not wish to participate in pvp. You might retort, well it's part of the game and they should except it. By staying in the game they are...now you need to accept the corruption.

Atama

bigepeen wrote: »

Atama wrote: »

Toxic gameplay, which PKing is, will make people not want to play the game. So corruption discourages that behavior.

PKing isn't toxic. It's repeatedly PKing for no reason other than to grief someone that is toxic. The corruption system is there to make us consider whether it's worth it to PK someone rather than just PKing everyone for no reason.

As a way to play a game, it's toxic. If you do it now and then (as AoC's corruption system will probably restrict how often you can get away with it) it is fine. If you play a game just to attack people who aren't interested in PvP or have no chance in a fight, you are a toxic player. Anyone who wants to play a game who removes that restriction is someone who wants to engage in toxic play, and it's no surprise those kinds of games don't last.

Michael_Morbius

Choices matter and should. That is why Corruption exists...you choose to PK , so you pay a penalty for doing so. I do not think there should be safe havens/towns for PKers. In a way that would negate Bounty hunters quite a bit.

Caeryl

No there should not be any official cities for Corrupted players. Corruption is a deterrent, and mitigating its consequences reduces its effectiveness as such.

Players can create their own outlaw towns using freeholds, and I would recommend doing so if you really want a safe area to retreat to.

Child Item