pk is a meh term imo. Hard to say pk and pvp at the same time. Pk is a victim term.

I probably exaggerated as some rules are necessary, but I would focus on reward more. Your soccer analogy is more like you are hitting a tennis backboard and someone comes in and starts slamming your ball around, stealing it, throwing it, etc, what do you do? In the end, what do you? What do you want when you hit the tennis backboard, do you want to conttinue to hit the backboard or would it be more fun to have someone come by and move to the courts and play tennis?

For me, giving rewards to pvp would be as important as rules. Then you wouldn't HAVE to farm mobs. I do think that people should be banned from spawning at the spawn point if they die a certain amount of times. I dunno where you draw the line with karma, though, that was more of the rule I was speaking of. Who can really decide who is right? It really is a battle of skill / will. A lot of contests don't end until someone leaves haha, unfort. You talk about score, there is no score. That's what I mean by rewards. If there WAS a score, it might be fun to keep scoring even if they didn't leave? You might say killing them is a score, but it's not like the points come up.

First, thanks for this conversation, it's far more pleasant to talk with you than with some "walls" of these forums, I had to mention it.

If by mistake I used the word "pk" where it should be "pvp", my bad, I usually try to be careful about that. Pk would be more like an "end" and pvp the "action", something like that.

About the tennis backboard, wouldn't the guy slamming your balls (no pun intended) be totally out of any game and its rules, in fact?

But in the end, I'm totally OK with a karma system with penalties, as long as it produces a real effect. In videogames, we're freed of several limits, the destruction of a digital avatar bears no consequence in real life by itself ; that's why a videogame can allow and even promote such a "bad" bahavior.

If, by killing another player, you get to benefit from the spot for a least some minutes, I'd think that's a reward in itself, and a kind of score. 

Personal opinion though, and that's coming from my idea that both grind and owpvp should exist at the same time, owpvp being a possible tool to defend a spot. And that's also why I think pvp shouldn't give too much money by itself. 

Yeah, I think we have different conceptions of owpvp in this game, but your point of view is interesting. ;) 

PS: i always wondered why BDO didn't use its channel system to regulate owpvp. For example, a PK is stuck on the channel for a set duration, or after several deaths a victim has to switch channels and can't come back on the initial channel for 15 minutes. 

Just think about what hard-core players are asking PA to do:

"Please ignore mass appeal and cater to the fraction of a fraction of that market who want a hard-core PvP experience. We are your most engaged and engaging players, after all!"

Second part of that may or may not be true but it doesn't really matter. PA set up Arsha servers for hard-core players and flagging up still lets you fight other players who are flagged up. That's the OW PvP in this game now. PA doesn't care about how the game was initially conceived. They want money. Removing forced PvP was a decision they calculated in their financial department.

Except that we're far from any "hardcore" setting here, really far. And the settings we're trying to defend are part of the strengths which allowed BDO to reach this point. If PA follows the trend, do you really think BDO has what it takes to confront MMO kings on their own turf? 

100% drop buff and each time you die you are kicked off the channel for 15 minutes haha. :P See that kinda stuff is what I'm talking about. It is a 'rule,' sure, but it's also a game with a reward (kicking people is fun for all, the stakes are v high and the gains are good.)

And if you meet some cool people you can protect each other, etc.

We're talking about OW PvP, I thought.  Forcing people to PvP is hard-core for an MMO and it's really the only thing I'm speaking to. If we agree on that, then we can avoid getting into our opinions on what "hard-core" is- because I don't even know what you mean by being "far away" from it.

I do not know how successful BDO can potentially be as opposed to the biggest games in the space. What I'm trying to get across here, though, is it doesn't matter what I think. These decisions are made by people's wallets, not the forums.

The arguement that "forcing people to PVP is hardcore" might be valid, but we need to look at what it means to "force", in this context.  "Forced" would be if there were no viable wayas to avoid PVP, which in BDO's case, there are plentiful.  That's the big difference.  Players can avoid PVP for over 90% of their gameplay if they utilize the many ways BDO allows players to do so.  Things like horse training on level 49's.  Marni's Realm.  Guild protection.  Not being deficient in social skills.  Etc.

I think PA's aggressive approach to killing off a major part of the game, that BDO had since day 1 (OW PVP) how they did was too much.  They could have implemented other things that are more focused and directed instead of wide-sweeping changes that affect veterans who fell in love with BDO for it's OW PVX style.  Not everyone likes full-PVE either, and BDO's open world / Marni's Realm changes makes it exactly that.

Now, if the argument is that this is better for the masses, I could agree.  However, how long will those masses stay in the game?  How much money will they make PA?  I don't have hard numbers.  So if someone could provide them, that's be great.  But the game feels way more dead now.  I, for one, have lost so much interest and passion for BDO.  And I've been here for a long time.  I see no reason to keep pushing my gear, because for me, the biggest motivator was uncapped PVP.  And with my IRL schedule, uncapped PVP isn't available to me.  Open world GVG was my haven.  It was my favorite content.  And now, it's pretty much dead.  All I have is Arsha and RBF.  It's, simply, not the game I fell in love with.  But it's ok.  It's just a game.  IRL > games.  Plus, I'm sure there'll be another MMO that will be good until casuals come in and wreck it too.  The plight of all MMO's, it seems...casuals coming in and killing what made the game truly good.

I understand your point, but I think that's an oversimplification.  I think a fair read is that people bought a game with the expectation that they'd have unfettered access to open world pvp.  They invested copious amounts of time and money into progression under that provision.  That provision was drastically changed, although not eliminated.  Some people are angry that PA went too far to cater to one group of individuals.

I can understand why they are angry.  On the one hand, other people didn't appreciate harassment and bullying that COULD happen as a part of guild deccs.  ON the other hand some guild deccs were merited when people messed with rotations.  Even though I rarely decced others, I think that PA went too far in eliminating one sided deccs.  Not all one sided deccs were to harass or bully.  Some were legitimate ways to deal with inconsiderate players grinding over someone who was there first.  I would have preferred smaller changes, such as timers on one sided deccs with cool downs for redeccing.

I tend to agree except the "not being deficient in social skills" portion.  That's highly subjective and can be used as an excuse to hound someone who simply disagrees with you.  If you mean interrupting other's rotations, then I agree.

This is probably the popular sentiment on the forums but I will say, as someone who does only play casually, it's funny that I'm ruining your game by just sort of being present, whereas under the old system the game was ruined for me by being often randomly murdered. Just funny in the disproportionality.