Full loot?

Partial loot - pvp would cater to most of people. The full loot players would be happy since there is a reward for pvp and you gain something from a player, carebears will not lose everything but they will still have to be sharp to not carry everything.
There are few ways:
1.Like old time runescape(i changed it a bit) did there are few safe spots for the items, and you put them into your inventory and when you die you only save those items but everything else you drop on death.
2.RNG tho i hate it, make character drop random lets say 1-10 items on death (lets say 1-4 gear, 1-6 material/consumables).
3.Or make players choose which items they lose when they die within 10seconds time spam (or so) but they have to choose atleast lets say 5-10 items if they are not fast enough or didnt choose on purpose drop few random items they are using(geared up).
Numbers can be tweaked and so on

It works perfectly fine in UO, Full loot is a MUST in Sandbox MMOs.

You also need great crafting systems to support this kind of thing.

Full loot drives the economy in these games and without it, all you have a dull gear grind with no risk of venturing out.

If you don't support full loot, you don't belong in a sandbox.

JackalDark wrote:
> It works perfectly fine in UO, Full loot is a MUST in Sandbox MMOs.
>
> You also need great crafting systems to support this kind of thing.
>
> Full loot drives the economy in these games and without it, all you have a
> dull gear grind with no risk of venturing out.
>
> If you don't support full loot, you don't belong in a sandbox.

I guess you have missed the last decade of UO.

Item destruction drives the economy. Full loot drive egos and internet muscles.

I don't?!? OMG I better go delete my UO accounts. Thank you for enlightening me. I'd still be playing wrong without your genius.

Vanpry wrote:
> I'd have to completely disagree. Looting does little to nothing for a game
> besides give griefers ammunition.
>
> Every sandbox attempt does not need to go down the same tried and failed,
> tried and failed, tried and failed path.

Having no loot also does nothing for PvP when there are no stakes involved.

There needs to be a sense of danger when roaming the world, a sense of thrill should a player engage another.

Sroek wrote:
> Having no loot also does nothing for PvP when there are no stakes involved.
>
> There needs to be a sense of danger when roaming the world, a sense of thrill should
> a player engage another.

I do not disagree with your thought. But does taking someones throw away gear, because if there is looting that is really the best most people will carry if the don't avoid pvp like the plague, really give you a sense of thrill?

Runescape, hate it or love it, has been my best experience in PvP in any game to date (I'm referring to pre-2006 here, as I quit then due to some changes in the PvP). What they changed was something called a 'Wilderness' that was theoretically removed, giving the players no full-loot PvP, after 5+ years of constant protesting the developers of the game re-introduced the wilderness to the game via a huge poll that expressed clearly what the largest portion of the playerbase wanted, and also to increase the popularity of the game once again, as well as combating against bots (killing them/reducing their effectiveness), see http://runescape.wikia.com/wiki/Wildern ... Trade_Vote for more detail if interested.

Having times where I was literally sweating to the suspense, I've yet to come across a game that can reproduce the amount of fun and tensity I've had with this game.

Having the full loot to me just makes everything much more exciting. I'm not a fan of mass killing just to increase a number on some stats page, that is meaningless to me.

That is my view of full loot... :)

I played Darkfall and enjoyed it, but it's system was far from perfect. I mostly played that game wearing cheap garbage armor and grouping with friends trying ambush lone travels. The rewards were mostly more garbage gear, but sometimes we got something good. Then into the bank it went, never to be used. The risk? Losing garbage gear I had a dozen more sets of. The Reward? More garbage gear or occasionally something worth more. That did not stay exciting for long.

Honestly, I think the economy in a sandbox will keep the game going better than any PvP loot system. Everyone that plays the game will be involved with the economy while some players won't even want to be involved with PvP at all. So if items take damage upon death and eventually break (and assuming most gear is crafted) then the economy is going to be thriving. The risk upon death is item decay, while the rewards are whatever you happen to be working towards at the time. It's not as harsh but still makes you evaluate what you're trying to accomplish.

I do kind of like the idea of partial loot though for specific items. What if crafted items could be designated "PvP gear" during their construction and that meant they'd drop in PvP, but also meant they had some sort of additional bonus against players? You'd have the risk of losing your PvP gear, but you'd be rewarded with slightly better stats against players. And if you killed someone in PvP then you also get their PvP gear if they have any. Though their gear will have taken a small amount of damage from dying. This also gives more choice to PvE players.

Ugh. I always cringe when I hear "pvp gear". I never liked gear with special pvp specific stats. What's wrong with plain ordinary gear? I get what you're saying though about slightly more powerful gear that you risk dropping in pvp though. But can't it just be the same a regular gear with just better base stats?