PvP and Badge Hunting Just Don't Mix

I personally never attack people farming in RV. some players are just pvErs and dont like pvp . they are forced to get to RV and get the badges. if someone asked me to leave him alone i would. then again if the one who asks is rude i dont see any reason

Also there are people asking to leave them alone but in the past we have seen them attacking other farmers. well . . . that's a different story. u just hunt them .

Anyway there are pvpers in RV good enough to protect themselves while farming. if they dont ask no problem attacking them . they propably like the challenge

oh well RV is a mess and everybody has their own rules but what i know right?

Next time just pretend you don't understand. Make your first response back to him 'habla espanol?' and blast the crap out of him.

If you feel like you simply can't live without getting the stuff that's in the PvP zones, but you don't want to be 'griefed' (insert exaggerated quotes here a la Chris Farley) then I suggest you get a team together and include a few people who are good at PvP. Let them protect the PvE'ers and do your thing in relative safety.

It's interesting. I guess it's safe to say that this discussion started when the PvP zones were introduced. The arguments on both sides are always the same. And sooner or later the discussion starts to get emotional/heated (usually sooner). One of the main arguments on the PvP side is: „Everything that is or happens in a PvP zone is PvP and if you don't want to PvP just don't go there.“ And very often the PvP side complains about nonPvP folk who come to the PvP zones but actively avoid or ignore PvP or ask to be left alone. One of the main arguments on the non PvP side is: „There are some rewards in the PvP zones that are PvE, like badges and temp powers that work outside PvP areas.“ And very often the nonPvP people complain about PvPers who don't leave them alone or even grief them (usually PvPer and nonPvPer use different definitions of griefing) thus interrupting their activities and/or making it impossible to reach their goal (now).

If you take this discussion to a meta level it's obvious that there is a problem. No matter what arguments you prefer or who you think is right. The fact alone that this discussion fills large threads again and again, endlessly repeating the arguments from both sides, clearly shows that the current situation is NOT ok. Sure, we all can live with it. Some better than others. But lets face it. This fight isn't necessary nor is it productive or helpful to the game in any way. Actually it's worse. It has the potential to frustrate people on both sides and this isn't good for a game that is supposed to be fun. This is why I think it is bad game design to have things in the game that give reasons for nonPvP people to go into PvP areas, intentional or not. It's like placing cheese in a mousetrap. And it is very unlikely that the mouse is happy when the trap is sprung.

There are several scenarios how you could solve this. They all have in common that you have to eliminate the bait from the PvP zones. I don't want to go into detail here, but for example you could remove the rep badges from PvP and replace them with a working ranking ladder like we had in the info-terminals. And remove the RV-AV badges and make them available somewhere else (in Praetoria maybe?). Keeping the exploration badges could be a compromise and so on. Just make the badges available somewhere else or in a way that doesn't involve PvP or at least only minimal PvP (exploration badges in PvP zones would be an example). And you could remove the temp powers and place them somewhere else. Or change them so you can only use them in PvP.

Some people would still complain, that is certain. But I believe it would be much better than it is now. The nonPvP crowd can do whatever they want without ever having a reason to go into a PvP zone. And the PvPers are among themselves and are no longer irritated by nonPvPers. And if the devs finally have success in making PvP attractive by giving players a PvP game of fun and fame we will see many people switching from the nonPvP to the PvP side. Wouldn't that be nice?

So I attempt to inject a non-cliche argument (what does the attacker gain?) into this cliche debate, and what do some people do?

IT'S OKAY BY THE RULES *repeat ad nauseum*

That argument has nothing to do with the question of whether one SHOULD do it. Stage 1 morality is generally not effective in a moral debate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CactusBrawler I guess ultimately the issue raises two questions, is it okay to be a jackass, just because the rules allow you to?

This is kind of what I am getting at. Let's put it this way:

I go to a PVP zone. I discover a team trying to fight AVs.

From experience, I know that those who organize these teams often need to do a ton of recruiting. There are not enough people available most of the time. When I joined such a team, it took 2 weekends and some of them, particularly Statesman, could only be taken with one team if that team was better than your average PUG. The main person who wanted the badges was able to join only during certain times. The heroes in zone were nice enough to let us do it. That was before i13 made enemies super strong too.

They ask me to let them do it politely. There is no bounty or benefit to me attacking other than the inf and very unlikely chance of recipe drop. It also won't be particularly interesting since I could kill them just by so much as buffing the AV. I am aware that if I do stop them I could ruin hours of effort and they might not be able to try for quite a while.

You'd better believe that attacking them, for no reason other than possible enjoyment of frustration of others, would be trolling, sociopathic, or whatever. It would be entirely within the rules, consistent with the intent of PVP, and not GM-actionable. But that would not make it anything other than schadenfreude.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atheism I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for someone who cries and ******* about being attacked in a pvp zone. I'm a sociopath now because I refuse to obey someone else's made up rules? Again, what makes them more important than me?

I said "For non-sociopaths, PVP is fun because it is more interesting and challenging than PVE." I suppose there is recipe farming too, but the point is that a person whose primary interest is to frustrate a person they don't know is quite obviously performing sociopathic behavior. That isn't even a remotely controversial thing to say. Sociopathic behavior is that which demonstrates lack of empathy or social conscience. Perhaps somebody could try to dispute it instead of saying "oh, so now you call people sociopaths?!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by MunkiLord You don't actually believe the junk you type do you? The way you think makes me laugh.

What way of thinking might that be? Could you explain it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrandX Let's see...today...I went into the first 3 PvP zones for the purpose of badge collecting. Point is. You're saying yes to being killed in a PvP zone, by another player, when you enter that zone. This isn't a matter of forced consent. Or rules lawyering. This is matter of you the one going into the zone saying "Yes. I know the risks. I'm going in." and thusly turning on your flag to be killed by other players.

None of that is in dispute, but the moment a person says they don't want something, regardless of previous behavior, it is not consentual, IMO. But I don't want to argue personal interpretations of the word consent.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrandX Now if they had asked me. Likely would have left them alone. Well, except maybe in Sirens, but I don't really PvP in there, I prefere to PvP in RV/Arena, where I have access to every power, but Siren's has a bounty system, so if they're your target, you really have to go for it. This isn't being mean. It's playing how the one was designed to be played.

That I agree with totally. What I'm speaking of is a whole other scenario, where a person is asking not to battle, and there is no benefit to the attacker.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OPTICAL_ILLUSION Yes, for you and your kind.

Stay classy Twixt! I suggest your next study should be about supposed sociologists who are incapable of making an argument other than "it's within the intent of the zone" or ad hominem trolling.

That, or scam research funding to study whether people get mad when you point at them and yell "I'M NOT TOUCHING YOU! I'M NOT TOUCHING YOU!" even in absence of rules against it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrandX Do you stop attacking PvE mobs, when they get stuck in such way that they can be attacked, but don't fight back at all? Not counting holds, I mean they get stuck in the enviorment, they can be attacked and yet they can't attack back? Same thing. Player vs Player means exactly that...you're opponent is a player. If they're AFK, would rather not fight, suck at PvP...doesn't matter.

...Wow. Are the feelings of that person even remotely relevant? Mobs also generally have better rewards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lemur Lad Quote: Originally Posted by CactusBrawler Red Cross. War journalists. ...get blown up and shot at just as much as anyone else, sometimes more. There's a reason medics stopped wearing the red cross after Korea.

This would make a very interesting defense during one's trial for war crimes!

Never mind that any soldier caught doing this would be in big trouble. I want to get past the stage 1 morality here. The debate is not about whether PVP by duress is against the rules, but whether it is rude. That argument, if you do mean it as a defense of surprise PVP, implies that a soldier who kills journalists is acting appropriately.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suspicious_Pkg Next time just pretend you don't understand. Make your first response back to him 'habla espanol?' and blast the crap out of him.

Hilarious. I wouldn't do it unless they were being jerks, but hilarious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Myriad If you take this discussion to a meta level it's obvious that there is a problem. No matter what arguments you prefer or who you think is right. The fact alone that this discussion fills large threads again and again, endlessly repeating the arguments from both sides, clearly shows that the current situation is NOT ok. Sure, we all can live with it. Some better than others. But lets face it. This fight isn't necessary nor is it productive or helpful to the game in any way. Actually it's worse. It has the potential to frustrate people on both sides and this isn't good for a game that is supposed to be fun. This is why I think it is bad game design to have things in the game that give reasons for nonPvP people to go into PvP areas, intentional or not. It's like placing cheese in a mousetrap. And it is very unlikely that the mouse is happy when the trap is sprung. There are several scenarios how you could solve this. They all have in common that you have to eliminate the bait from the PvP zones. Some people would still complain, that is certain. But I believe it would be much better than it is now. The nonPvP crowd can do whatever they want without ever having a reason to go into a PvP zone. And the PvPers are among themselves and are no longer irritated by nonPvPers. And if the devs finally have success in making PvP attractive by giving players a PvP game of fun and fame we will see many people switching from the nonPvP to the PvP side. Wouldn't that be nice?

Good points. I am a PVPer actually, but bad arguments are bait for me to start up some forum PVP.

My last post on the subject, ChaosExMachina has summed up all my thoughts perfectly.

Adios.

Sorry to let you down chaos but I'm not Twixt.


LOL some of you are so funny. I really don't understand how you can argue against the game design.

If your brains can't comprehend that the game rules > social rules then I feel very sad for you.

This game, just like any other, has specific rules and limitations. CO allows for uninterrupted 1v1 duels anywhere and arena. AION allows faction invasion, arena and Abyss PvP. CoX has zone and arena. 3 different games with 3 different PvP rules.

Still don't get it? Probably not.


When the Devs read some of these ****** comments they are probably laughing at the sheer ************ from some of you.

QQ I was attatcked in a pvp zone QQ

QQ there is no resect and honor in pvp QQ

QQ leave me alone I'm just badging QQ

A PvP zone is a place for players to PvP and some of you are ******* ******** to think otherwise.

QQ more though bc it's fun.

Here ya go PvE and PvP newbies.

A quote for you to read from the PvP Guide to Guides stickied by Niviene in the PvP section. Some things in that post need to be changed/updated but this still stands.