pvp islands

[lt_peterson]

before you vote or post please remember this is a forum of the people. dismissing it is ignorance as we are trying to develop this idea into something we all agree with. that includes you too Tierarzt

i have been talking to people in game and have devised a way player vs player could be implemented "with out" hurting the players game play. my idea is basically a large other island which could be called something like the new world for example. petty much players can ship things over to this new island and make a second colony were other players will be present.
you would fight other players as if they were bandit npcs and slowly take over. now further expanding on this we could add many possible bonuses for this. treasure, special buff items like coffee ,buffs and serfs (people who left the new world looking for jobs.) and have it so you can send new army's and men and get special items that would benefit entire guilds. this however is only a suggestion and should be changed to how the development team think it should be (seeing as some people think other wise). if you agree with this idea for pvp please vote yes. or more enthusiastically if you want.

updates-
-replaced term slaves with serfs.

problems that have been brought forward from users:

S: Why should PvP players get items and buffs that non-PvP players can't get?
A: join a guild and you wont need pvp capability's. you can supply your guild with what THEY need to win you all get the buffs.
best player answer:

Because they were willing to pvp is my answer. If there willing to risk what they send into the fight they need to have a good reason to do so. The only acceptable reason is to have the chance to come out of it with something more then they had before. The game needs confrontation otherwise there is very little point having it online, they might as well just call it the settlers 8. The game is incredibly boring otherwise.

[Tierarzt]

Why should PvP players get items and buffs that non-PvP players can't get?

[lt_peterson]

join a guild and you wont need pvp capability's. you can supply your guild with what THEY need to win and get you all the buffs. some people think guilds a bit usless but if pvp islands were here people wouldn't be so dismissive of this.

and on a difforent note tierarzt. i have been seeing you on quite a few forums just saying every thing bad about them. your large amount of Criticism isn't needed here as these are the suggestion forums so please if there is anything wrong say how you think we can fix it and i will update it. if you cant think of a productive thing to say other than trolling people then just sod off.

back on the right note. your problem has been noted. but please in the future just say whats wrong AND how it could be improved.

[Cully]

join a guild and you wont need pvp capability's. you can supply your guild with what THEY need to win and get you all the buffs. some people think guilds a bit usless but if pvp islands were here people wouldn't be so dismissive of this.

and on a difforent note tierarzt. i have been seeing you on quite a few forums just saying every thing bad about them. your large amount of Criticism isn't needed here as these are the suggestion forums so please if there is anything wrong say how you think we can fix it and i will update it. if you cant think of a productive thing to say other than trolling people then just sod off.

back on the right note. your problem has been noted. but please in the future just say whats wrong AND how it could be improved.

His comments tend to be his opinions and in this case he has said what's wrong and I think the same - why should people who do pvp get items and buffs that non pvp players can't get? I'd like to know too

[lt_peterson]

i said you don't need to do pvp. just join a guild that does. besides what would be the point in doing pvp if you get nothing.

do you know a compromise?

[Qualan]

problems that have been brought forward from users:
S: "isn't cotton and slaves a bit inappropriate?"
A: if you got a better name for a person taken away from there family's and forced into hard labor in a far off land then please be my guest and share it with us.

My main issue with this is the associations between cotton pickin' and slavery ... u see where i am going with this i hope.

Understand that any implementation is world wide and needs to take into account sensitivities in all these areas. Cotton and slavery is far too tight in with the slave trade to the us to be able to fitted into the game without huge issues and protests- not something we would be looking forward to and neither would BB.

i don;t feel like formulating socially acceptable alternatives though- just pointing out that your one is just not acceptable so back to the drawing board on that- the fact that you don't see an alternative formulated doesnt make keeping the current one as a suggestion any more acceptable

[Dopey]

How about devoted followers that work hard and for free to aid your cause?

To the question of why should those that pvp get extra stuff?

Because they were willing to pvp is my answer. If there willing to risk what they send into the fight they need to have a good reason to do so. The only acceptable reason is to have the chance to come out of it with something more then they had before. The game needs confrontation otherwise there is very little point having it online, they might as well just call it the settlers 8. The game is incredibly boring otherwise.

Though I guess they could make the forums the pvp zone of the game and we fight each other with words over those that want a dull boring self-contained game and those that want competition and interaction with other players within the game.

[SirRoy]

The real issue, political correctness notwithstanding, will not be rewards/buffs for pvp players.
I think the real challenge for BB is to make pvp a fair system that does not favor gem buyers.

[Dopey]

They need to make money somehow. Under a free to play system there only way is through gems. I believe with what’s in current development now the only thing that will keep me playing the game for any meaningful amount of time is pvp. If BB wants me to buy and spend gems from them they will need to give me a reason to that benefits me in pvp. I see no point in buying things that are purely graphical and believe any game that relies on that will not make enough money to continue for very long. If there is no advantage to buying gems then why buy them?

Likewise I can fully agree how once you buy gems to help you in pvp you are basically playing a pay to win game which is no fun for anyone. It’s too easy for those that pay and more harder for those that don’t. And those that do pay are in fact only hurting each other as it then becomes a war of wallets and the only one who wins is BB. It is simply put, unfair across the board to everyone. But I see no way they can implement a system that works around this problem. My belief is any compromise to pvp while in play will produce an inadequate system that has no fun in it at all. Its either you pay and get an adv or you don’t get an adv so have no reason to pay and BB go broke.

They would do much better I think to leave what they currently have in game alone and make pvp almost a completely different section of the game altogether. Then for those of us that want to pvp, produce a special pvp general or something. He can only be brought with gems and he lasts for example 1 week or 1 month etc. Without him you can not pvp. They would need to break with there tradition of going for an insanely expensive cost in gems and make it a more reasonable cost in terms of £ so if we took a month as the time the general lasts then it should cost around the £5 mark a month to have the general. Small but acceptable as a monthly sub for a little web browser game.

I can still see how this could be a problem for those that will then say ‘but the game is free to play!’ but at least this way pvp would be fair and there would still be the game of what we have now for them to play for free. Also BB could make the special pvp general giftable or even tradable. So long as someone is buying and spending the gems why would BB care? The freeloaders could then buy the general for gc and pvp that way. A bit like they do for gem codes and parrots atm. Or perhaps when someone buys the pvp general they can invite 2 others to join them letting others benefit from there friend spending gems. It provides those that do spend gems an extra incentive too do so since it would let them play with a few of there friends too. I guess my point is I only see it working well if costs surrounding pvp are not done to aid pvp but rather to allow it in the first place so everyone that makes it to the starting line can play with no extra advantages and BB will actually make money from it.

Maybe tying pvp to guild play could work too. The guild has a gem fund that its members can put some of there gems into. Then the guild buys a special guild pvp enabling banner or something and all its members can pvp for a week.

[lt_peterson]

My main issue with this is the associations between cotton pickin' and slavery ... u see where i am going with this i hope.

Understand that any implementation is world wide and needs to take into account sensitivities in all these areas. Cotton and slavery is far too tight in with the slave trade to the us to be able to fitted into the game without huge issues and protests- not something we would be looking forward to and neither would BB.

i don;t feel like formulating socially acceptable alternatives though- just pointing out that your one is just not acceptable so back to the drawing board on that- the fact that you don't see an alternative formulated doesnt make keeping the current one as a suggestion any more acceptable

i see what you mean but its only a suggestion of a pop increase buff. i was more thinking along the lines of old american things like coffee and cocoa. so what you say is true so i guess it was a bad example.