Looting in PVP

[ahoythematey]

The fun of combat against another player being it's own reward is absolutely true in action-oriented games(which is why I loathe things like BF2's unlocks), but when RPG's are involved I still want my ding-gratz achievement pellet to openly display.  PvP players can like variety too, mmkay?

[Cheddar]

Neocron did have a decent system for loot drop.  The more "good" you were the less of a chance you had of dropping items.  There was a slot added later which would make 1 item non droppable on death; this helped attenuate the death penalty a lot; due to the uber crafting mechanic weapons were a top priority and it took a lot of time to get that perfect raygun/cannon/flame thrower put together.  

On the flipside, if you went "red," you would drop a ton of stuff.  So the random PK element was pretty low; those who went that route became infamous and well known.  Really, NC's original PvP mechanics were the best I have seen.  I could go more in depth, but it does not matter.  They killed what I loved about the game with their "expansion."

[LC]

LC is right.  AC2 failed becuase the PvP sucked.....

AC2 is a good example of how NOT to do just about everything. Not just PVP.

[Nebu]

The fun of combat against another player being it's own reward is absolutely true in action-oriented games(which is why I loathe things like BF2's unlocks), but when RPG's are involved I still want my ding-gratz achievement pellet to openly display.  PvP players can like variety too, mmkay?

It's just fine to like it, but you have to realize that ding-gratz and PvP aren't good company.  When the disparity gets large enough that new players have no chance against established players, then they lose incentive.  If ding-gratz is used in a diversification sort of method, then experienced players get more abilities without necessarily more power and the whole thing works.  If I'm going to enter into a battle with someone, I need to know that I have at least some chance to win or I lose all incentive in the encounter.  This is possibly the biggest problem with the implementation of PvP in mmogs. 

[LC]

It's just fine to like it, but you have to realize that ding-gratz and PvP aren't good company.  When the disparity gets large enough that new players have no chance against established players, then they lose incentive.  If ding-gratz is used in a diversification sort of method, then experienced players get more abilities without necessarily more power and the whole thing works.  If I'm going to enter into a battle with someone, I need to know that I have at least some chance to win or I lose all incentive in the encounter.  This is possibly the biggest problem with the implementation of PvP in mmogs. 

There should be situations in which you have a very low chance of victory, but it should never be zero percent.

[Nebu]

It's just fine to like it, but you have to realize that ding-gratz and PvP aren't good company.  When the disparity gets large enough that new players have no chance against established players, then they lose incentive.  If ding-gratz is used in a diversification sort of method, then experienced players get more abilities without necessarily more power and the whole thing works.  If I'm going to enter into a battle with someone, I need to know that I have at least some chance to win or I lose all incentive in the encounter.  This is possibly the biggest problem with the implementation of PvP in mmogs. 

There you go assuming that every game needs levels, or some sort of long ass grind to the top again.

Did you even read what I wrote before reacting? I was explaining why levels and PvP are a BAD IMPLEMENTATION IN MMOGS. 

Same as in the other thread.  You post before even reading what I write.

[SnakeCharmer]

Saying 'as long as the equipment doesn't make the player' seems to say to me 'as long as we're all the same level with the same stats with all the same skills and abilities'. 

That sort of homogeny would be a bit boring, yes?  No real 'ding gratz reward' for time or 'effort' spent?

It's all about what you find fun in the game.  If "ding gratz" is the game to you, then it would be boring.  If PvP is the game, then wouldn't even fights be more fun than getting steamrolled by some guy that lives in his mom's basement?

See, thats the thing...I expect to get steamrolled by the guy that lives in his mom's basement, in ANY game whether it's tic-tac-toe, chess, or <insert MMORG>.  If all he does all day every day is play tic-tac-toe, I *expect* to get beat everytime.  But I also realize that the proverbial basement dweller is in the smallest minority.

I'm getting the impression that you're polarizing ding gratz or pvp or <whatever>.  Why can't it be all those things?  (If I am getting the wrong impression, let me know.)

The way to offer a carrot is similar to what you see in planetside and (to a lesser degree) DAoC.  You offer ability diversification with PvP kills.  Being able to "pwn with impunity" is only fun for the people with lots of free time to invest.  To attract a large audience you need to offer rewards for participation that don't overly skew the fights.

Again, the 'pwn with impunity' crowd is small, very small.  They're vocal, yes.  But it's such a small subset of player that it really shouldn't even be considered.  It's the same as Blizzard not freaking out when the powergamers flew thru content and levelled up the 'toons at breakneck speed in beta.  They realized and understood that they were not designing their game for the powergamer hardcore.

[Nija]

On the flipside, if you went "red," you would drop a ton of stuff.  So the random PK element was pretty low; those who went that route became infamous and well known.  Really, NC's original PvP mechanics were the best I have seen.  I could go more in depth, but it does not matter.  They killed what I loved about the game with their "expansion."

So the good guys never lost anything but the bad guys lost everything? That was a good PVP mechanic? So the guys doing the Neocron version of EVing balrons for 6 hours a day never lost anything when they died to another player - yet the guy who kills those tools loses everything when he finally dies. I hate it.

[Cheddar]

UO had little ding grats.  The game was based on character skill development, and with little work a noob could survive after a week or so of exploring.  We need to start pressuring Mythic to open a UO shard without Trammel and Item insurance!

[Nija]

UO had little ding grats.  The game was based on character skill development, and with little work a noob could survive after a week or so of exploring.  We need to start pressuring Mythic to open a UO shard without Trammel and Item insurance!

Nah, what they need to do is focus on making that new client great and not another UO3D coding abortion. Then they need to leave player-ran shards alone and let people use the fancy new client to either A) relive the past on runuo shards or B) swing neon katanas at each other while riding etheral llamas on the EA shards.

[LC]

It's just fine to like it, but you have to realize that ding-gratz and PvP aren't good company.  When the disparity gets large enough that new players have no chance against established players, then they lose incentive.  If ding-gratz is used in a diversification sort of method, then experienced players get more abilities without necessarily more power and the whole thing works.  If I'm going to enter into a battle with someone, I need to know that I have at least some chance to win or I lose all incentive in the encounter.  This is possibly the biggest problem with the implementation of PvP in mmogs. 

There you go assuming that every game needs levels, or some sort of long ass grind to the top again.

Did you even read what I wrote before reacting? I was explaining why levels and PvP are a BAD IMPLEMENTATION IN MMOGS. 

Same as in the other thread.  You post before even reading what I write.

Sorry, but your replies got so boring/rehashed in that other thread that I stopped reading them after the first line. I will admit my loss this time, and rewrite my response.

[d4rkj3di]

From what I understand of Warhammer Online, they will treat other player characters as mobs after killng them, where you can loot their corpse for random money/items. I'd love to be able to point at someone and say, that's the guy who I looted my epic sword of awesomesauce from. If they allowed cross faction communication, I would link it to him in tells everytime he logged on.

[Rasix]

We need to start pressuring Mythic to open a UO shard without Trammel and Item insurance!

I don't think it would make money for them for all of the overhead costs that they'd incur.  But, that's a topic for another thread I suppose.   Good PR decision, poor business decision.

[Cheddar]

We need to start pressuring Mythic to open a UO shard without Trammel and Item insurance!

I don't think it would make money for them for all of the overhead costs that they'd incur.  But, that's a topic for another thread I suppose.   Good PR decision, poor business decision.

They would need to implement new hardware and copy the code over from Siege Perilous, minus the stupid ass ROT bullshit.  Viola!

I know it is a bit more complicated than that, but it would be good for drawing in box sales.  Dunno, I will have to ponder it some more.

[LC]

We need to start pressuring Mythic to open a UO shard without Trammel and Item insurance!

I don't think it would make money for them for all of the overhead costs that they'd incur.  But, that's a topic for another thread I suppose.   Good PR decision, poor business decision.

They would need to implement new hardware and copy the code over from Siege Perilous, minus the stupid ass ROT bullshit.  Viola!

I know it is a bit more complicated than that, but it would be good for drawing in box sales.  Dunno, I will have to ponder it some more.

I'm pretty sure they removed ROT years ago.

[Nebu]

Sorry, but your replies got so boring/rehashed in that other thread that I stopped reading them after the first line. I will admit my loss this time, and rewrite my response.

No worries.  It was obvious that you missed the part where I said that I thought Vanguard was a shitty, bug-ridden game but I enjoyed looking around anyway.  Keep up the personal attacks. They're obviously helping you build some self esteem.  

Snake: I think we just have a difference in taste.  I prefer my PvP to be filled with fights of varying degrees of challenge, but I always want to have at least some chance against my opponent.  There has to be a point where skill and strategy can defeat an unskilled, yet well-equipped player.  I don't mind the existence of some carrot to encourage people to enjoy some type of character development, but skill should still be the dominant factor in determining outcomes.  My ideal is that someone that plays a lot isn't guaranteed power... ability still plays the major role.  Now, if they happen to develop skill by playing a long time then good for them.  One of the many reasons that WoW pvp fails is because gear and level play a HUGE role in success.  

[ajax34i]

So why were these better than lootless PVP? To me it must be the thrill of the hunt, or on the otherside the urgency to live. [...] In item loss PVP, the difference in adrenaline and will to live is huge.

I'm not really looking for an adrenaline rush in games, I'm looking to relax and unwind, to play casually and let my guard down and not have to look over my shoulder all the time.  Hence, I try to avoid PvP, and if I do get involved in PvP, I prefer the lootless kind.

All the examples you cited are "better" if you're PvP'ing for the adrenaline rush.  I can't imagine having to suffer the whole fight-or-flight physiological state for 4 hours a day, as soon as I get home from work, for 5 days a week and then the whole weekend; it's the opposite of relaxing, and thus the opposite of entertainment, for me.

[Slayerik]

*Snip*

Out of your games that are examples, only UO and Eve can be considered any kind of success. Neocron is basically begging for subscribers and SB is dead. And out of UO and Eve, UO survived only because of Trammel (and I know this debatable in some people's fantasylands but the numbers bear it out.) and Eve is niche and not full-on pvp everywhere in any case. It could be argued that SB died because it was horribly made, but the same really can't be said of the others.

When wasn't Neocron begging for subs? I'm amazed it is still going, it never really caught on. Outpost battles in that game are some of my fondest memories out of any game. Their system for drugs kicked ass. The implant system kicked ass. It really was a cool game , IMO. Shadowbane had WAY more problems than a few noobies getting killed. My guild experienced a bug that wiped out our entire city. Just....gone. SB.EXE errors in any real combat, and randomly did nothing to hold subs.

Shadowbane done right would hold as many or more subs as Vanguard. I think any company with some balls when it comes to PVP and skills when it comes to coding could do quite well.

[slog]

This entire thread is kinda silly when you think about it.  The Marketplace has pretty much rejected Looting in PvP for a few years now.  No MMORPG developer (except maybe Glitchless) is going to put in PvP loot.  The overwhelming majority of mmorpg customers don't want it.

[Slayerik]

So why were these better than lootless PVP? To me it must be the thrill of the hunt, or on the otherside the urgency to live. [...] In item loss PVP, the difference in adrenaline and will to live is huge.

I'm not really looking for an adrenaline rush in games, I'm looking to relax and unwind, to play casually and let my guard down and not have to look over my shoulder all the time.  Hence, I try to avoid PvP, and if I do get involved in PvP, I prefer the lootless kind.

All the examples you cited are "better" if you're PvP'ing for the adrenaline rush.  I can't imagine having to suffer the whole fight-or-flight physiological state for 4 hours a day, as soon as I get home from work, for 5 days a week and then the whole weekend; it's the opposite of relaxing, and thus the opposite of entertainment, for me.

You become more trained over time. You lose a lot of being tense, you just follow certain rules and you keep yourself safe. The rush is always there though, when its engage time. You go from shaking every time you fight to your heart just racing instead. You go from needing a cigarette after a tough fight, to just a drink of water. You becomed conditioned to it, those that don't usually don't care for those types of games....or love the hell out of em.

[Nebu]

I have to admit that's one aspect of UO that I will always miss.  That intangible feeling that you could be attacked at any time and lose anything of value.  I think that and EvE are the last examples of games where you're really required to pay attention to everything all the time.  I think there's still a market for games like that, it's just small meaning high risk for ROI. 

[Cheddar]

FYI Neocrons system of PvP was extremely versatile and well balanced.  I can post a synopsis later if someone wants me to.  For now I must brave the snow flurries and drive across the bay! 

Work 4tl.  Why do you assholes engage in interesting conversations when I gotta go?

[ajax34i]

Yeah I know I'd become conditioned to it over time, but at this point I'm not looking for ANY amount of adrenaline whatsoever (it's bad enough at work), and so I don't want to spend any time whatsoever doing these two things:

a.  Suffering through high adrenaline / high alertness 4hr periods so that I CAN get accustomed to it.
b.  Spending extra time grinding for the extra cash/gear needed to offset in high death penalty costs.

To compare it with TV, I'll watch Discover, Sci-Fi, History channel, or whatever dumb movie's on, but definitely NOT any truly scary horror movie (good horror, not crap that's so bad it's funny).

[WindupAtheist]

I think this is the pvp equivalent to the pve players who believe you need to grind and invest massive time to get around cockblocks (corpse runs I'm  looking at you.) for the game to be meaningful. Both are looked at as crazy by most other gamers. Both mindsets believe you need to be punished so you earn your fun in the games.

I was going to say almost exactly the same thing, but you beat me to it.

I love my WoW PVP.  Running back from the graveyard is annoying enough that I don't just blithely attack everyone I meet while on my way from point A to point B.  But at the same time, I can get steamrolled and rezkilled a couple times without gritting my teeth at a mental laundry list of farming and shit I'll have to do later just to break even.

[LC]

Yeah I know I'd become conditioned to it over time, but at this point I'm not looking for ANY amount of adrenaline whatsoever (it's bad enough at work), and so I don't want to spend any time whatsoever doing these two things:

a.  Suffering through high adrenaline / high alertness 4hr periods so that I CAN get accustomed to it.
b.  Spending extra time grinding for the extra cash/gear needed to offset in high death penalty costs.

To compare it with TV, I'll watch Discover, Sci-Fi, History channel, or whatever dumb movie's on, but definitely NOT any truly scary horror movie (good horror, not crap that's so bad it's funny).

Just about every mmorpg in existence right now already caters to your needs. We don't really need more of them.

[Riggswolfe]

From what I understand of Warhammer Online, they will treat other player characters as mobs after killng them, where you can loot their corpse for random money/items. I'd love to be able to point at someone and say, that's the guy who I looted my epic sword of awesomesauce from. If they allowed cross faction communication, I would link it to him in tells everytime he logged on.

My understanding is that the items will be spawned on the corpse and not come from the player's actual items.

[Riggswolfe]

Yeah I know I'd become conditioned to it over time, but at this point I'm not looking for ANY amount of adrenaline whatsoever (it's bad enough at work), and so I don't want to spend any time whatsoever doing these two things:

a.  Suffering through high adrenaline / high alertness 4hr periods so that I CAN get accustomed to it.
b.  Spending extra time grinding for the extra cash/gear needed to offset in high death penalty costs.

To compare it with TV, I'll watch Discover, Sci-Fi, History channel, or whatever dumb movie's on, but definitely NOT any truly scary horror movie (good horror, not crap that's so bad it's funny).

Just about every mmorpg in existence right now already caters to your needs. We don't really need more of them.

I don't think anyone is arguing that you can't have your own MMO if you want it. The big argument is that it probably won't happen because the market isn't asking for it in enough numbers to make it worthwhile, regardless of how you or I feel about it. No company is going to sink even Vanguard amounts of money into a looting PvP type game because they will lose money. And if you don't have the money, the game is probably going to be underproduced and you'll end up with another Shadowbane. The best you can hope for is really EvE levels of success both in market and in a well-made game.

Which brings us back to the original discussion. There simply aren't enough players who enjoy this "adrenalin rush". No amount of arguing or waving your e-peen in the faces of people who don't enjoy it will make it happen. Sorry.

ETA: This really comes down to the whole point that most gamers do not want to be punished for losing in a game. This applies to both pve and pvp. I'm not sure I understand why that is so hard to understand.

[SnakeCharmer]

Snake: I think we just have a difference in taste.  I prefer my PvP to be filled with fights of varying degrees of challenge, but I always want to have at least some chance against my opponent.

Actually, we're in 100 percent agreement.  I, too, would like the same.  Guess I didn't (or haven't) expressed that well enough.

There has to be a point where skill and strategy can defeat an unskilled, yet well-equipped player.

I think that currently exists, to be honest.  I couldn't tell you how many times I was victorious in SWG against either ebayed Jedi (who I KNOW had superior equipment to what I had with my Jedi or when I beat them with my eternally fooked Commando).  There are LOADS of players out there with topnotch characters, but don't understand the combat dynamic of the game itself.

I don't mind the existence of some carrot to encourage people to enjoy some type of character development, but skill should still be the dominant factor in determining outcomes.

To me, that is the MMO conundrum, in that 'skill' in an MMO is overrated.  When it comes down to it, it is at it's heart a math game (i.e. whose player skills are higher than the other).  If you take two players of equal skill in terms of understanding the combat engine and how it works, and give them characters of (for example) level 50 versus level 60, the level 60 is going to win 9 times out of 10.  It's not because one player understands the combat theory better than the other, because they both understand it equally, it's that the level 60 'toon is superior to the level 50 in every way.  The 'math' favors the level 60 more than the level 50.

My ideal is that someone that plays a lot isn't guaranteed power... ability still plays the major role.

Absolutely agree.  Just because the basement dweller plays 70 hrs a week versus my 7 hrs a week, doesn't mean that he or she understands how the game works more than me.  It's especially true if they are creatures of absolute habit in which their attack goes root/snare, DoT, power attack power attack power attack everytime.  

Now, if they happen to develop skill by playing a long time then good for them.  One of the many reasons that WoW pvp fails is because gear and level play a HUGE role in success.

Again, in my view it all comes down to the math.  And when dealing with a level based combat engine, that is the way it is going to be every single time.  And developers are going to go the route of level based progress because that is the easiest to create and balance.

Conversely, if you take the 'skill' and put it squarely in the players hands (a la FPS), you get SWG NGE.  And we all know how that worked out.  You can ignore the fact that lag and latency that is inherent in an MMO, and you will STILL have the issue of the basement dwellers pwning with impunity over the casual players because their twitch reflex in that setting is so much further refined.  I've got a 4 handicap in golf, I'm a damn fine tennis player, played every sport known to man, and played baseball during my four years in college for a major div I school.  I'm a hell of an athlete.  My hand eye coordination is way above average.  But I can't compete with red bull guzzling teenagers in CS.

The closest thing to a player skill based combat system was preCU SWG, IMHO.   It rewarded being prepared and informed about what foods and drinks and buffs did what, and knowing your 'template'.  As a Pistoleer/Smuggler or any other sort of ranged-centric 'toon, I had NO problem with melee stackers.  I never worried about melee stackers on my Jedi.

[slog]

WoW's PvP is a failure?  Last I checked 10% of the Earth's population was logged into Battlegrounds....

[Nebu]

WoW's PvP is a failure?  Last I checked 10% of the Earth's population was logged into Battlegrounds....

WoW's PvP is a financial success.  I happen to be of the opinion that much of it could be improved from an implementation standpoint.  WoW is a PvE game with PvP thrown in.  That's obvious to anyone that has played games designed with PvP as the primary focus.  I don't find WoW's pvp to be all that engaging.  If other people like it, then great... it's right there for the taking.

[pxib]

AFAIC FFA PvP with player looting will require:

(a) Uniformity of avatar skill and abilities. Any character with a basic combat skill set ought to theoretically be able to kill or escape from(escaping PvP is almost as fun as winning) anyone else. You must never get killed in a situation where you had no chance to flee or defend yourself. If you lose, you lose because the other player played better than you... which also means:

(b) Equipment must not grant large advantages without equal and opposite disadvantages. Like with (a), you should never lose because the other player's avatar is better. If they gain some advantage from having awesome armor, that armor should also give them an obvious vulnerability to exploit. If paper meets scissors on the road, paper must be able to identify scissors and take appropriate action... and players should get a thorough explanation of rock/paper/scissors before they make it to the road. In other words:

(c) Players must receive a complete explanation of the combat mechanic and have the opportunity to experiment with it in a relatively safe environment. How do you fight? How do you disable an attacker to run away? How do you guage the safety of a situation and keep yourself tactically prepared? What locations and terrain features could hide an ambush? These questions must be treated with the same importance as use of the WASD keys and the hotbar. Players must also get the opportunity to practice safely so:

(d) There must be non-lethal option for combat. Pins, for example.Every kill must be a choice. A player doesn't have to "die" in order to lose control of his actions. Perhaps he is simply "exhausted". He can no longer fight or defend himself... but he may be able to bandage his bleeding wounds, call for his friends, or open a trade window and beg for his life, but he's completely out of combat and cannot move at more than the slowest of crawls for a few minutes. Alone he's doomed, but as part of a group he may have a chance. What's stopping the enemy from making the choice and killing every time?

(e) Tangible consequences for choosing to kill. The most obvious one is that a killer loses precisely that protection: killing a killer has no consequences. This should last a non-trivial amount of time. A week per kill, perhaps. Perhaps during that time period the character cannot be deleted. Even if he dies, that character slot is locked. Even after that time period has elapsed, the player whose character was murdered will always be able to kill the murderer without consequences... revenge is a dish best served cold.

Theoretically a group of PKs in a situation like this could have a designated killer. As such it's important that they share the revenge option, but not necessarily the general kill protection and slot locking. Accidentally grouping with a psycho killer shouldn't doom you beyond the bitter fury of his particular victim. This sort of "notoriety" system is hard to arrange fairly. UO taught us that.

Once you have all those things, corpse looting is still problematic... but I think it would work fairly well so long as:

(1) Player inventory comes in layers. Any potion, bandage, or spell item you have in a hotkey slot is vulnerable to theft and looting. Items that are easy to transfer into those hotkey slots are one layer down... items you can transfer into -that- space are deeper still. The easier an item is to access and use, the more risk that it will be taken. Indeed, player theft and looting work best if:

(2) Player inventory is extremely limited. A thief or looter must choose between the items he carries and the objects available for looting. Regardless: what a player has in his inventory will be a small part of what he actually owns... and any large items he's wearing or wielding will be hard to carry extraneously. No spare battle-axe and cuirass in inventory... that's ridiculous. Also:

(3) Armor isn't fungible. One size doesn't fit all. Perhaps it can be retailored or reforged, but that's an expense by itself. Added to (b), looting somebody for his clothes or armor ought never be a concern.

(4) There must be time in combat to say "Your money or your life." This relates direclty to (d). The victim needs to be able to lie about what he's carrying in the deepest recesses of his inventory... and he'd be well served to carry some decoy valuables that he can pawn off to save his skin if he's got something -really- valuable. He must also effort to make his lies convincing. If "Your money or your life" is a genuine option, even the grittiest griefer will explore and enjoy it.

This framework isn't perfect and will STILL BE NICHE, but I think it offers some unexplored flexibility.

[Valmorian]

Conversely, if you take the 'skill' and put it squarely in the players hands (a la FPS), you get SWG NGE.  And we all know how that worked out.  You can ignore the fact that lag and latency that is inherent in an MMO, and you will STILL have the issue of the basement dwellers pwning with impunity over the casual players because their twitch reflex in that setting is so much further refined.  I've got a 4 handicap in golf, I'm a damn fine tennis player, played every sport known to man, and played baseball during my four years in college for a major div I school.  I'm a hell of an athlete.  My hand eye coordination is way above average.  But I can't compete with red bull guzzling teenagers in CS.

And yet, we have people arguing to apply a handicap (item loss) to people who are less skilled (the losers).  What kind of nonsense is THAT?

I'd lose every single game of Chess against a grandmaster, but at least I wouldn't play successive games against him with a loss of material. 

[Slayerik]

Conversely, if you take the 'skill' and put it squarely in the players hands (a la FPS), you get SWG NGE.  And we all know how that worked out.  You can ignore the fact that lag and latency that is inherent in an MMO, and you will STILL have the issue of the basement dwellers pwning with impunity over the casual players because their twitch reflex in that setting is so much further refined.  I've got a 4 handicap in golf, I'm a damn fine tennis player, played every sport known to man, and played baseball during my four years in college for a major div I school.  I'm a hell of an athlete.  My hand eye coordination is way above average.  But I can't compete with red bull guzzling teenagers in CS.

And yet, we have people arguing to apply a handicap (item loss) to people who are less skilled (the losers).  What kind of nonsense is THAT?

I'd lose every single game of Chess against a grandmaster, but at least I wouldn't play successive games against him with a loss of material. 

The losers aren't always the less skilled. Most the time, they are the ones that can't adapt. Sorry, its true. Adaptation includes: Strength in numbers, escapes (such as recall / root and run). Sometimes luck is a factor, as well as environment.

Just become there is some item loss doesn't equal huge roaming death packs of people. From your quote it sounds like you don't like losing to more skilled players than yourself. You know you will never be the best so you say remove any death penalty. My five year old daughter is obsessed with winning too. So when she loses and starts throwing a fit, I take her toy away.

The point, you ask? Item loss is a bitch. But its sure fun to be the one taking the item!!! :P
 

[Nebu]

The only problem I see is one for the solo/casual player.  The mentality will quickly become one of run in an optimized group for maximum gain.  Groups of skilled players will band together dominating weaker opponents, taking their stuff, and widening the gap even further.  Forced grouping, forced grinds to replace items, and forced grinds to have the best available skills. 

I love PvP but hate forced grouping.  Where do I fit in?

[SnakeCharmer]

I'd lose every single game of Chess against a grandmaster, but at least I wouldn't play successive games against him with a loss of material.  

Hahaha...No doubt....

In my view, PvP isn't about a tangible reward.  It's purely about the competition, whether it's 1 vs 1 or 1 vs 2 or 100 vs 100.  I don't need a reason to fight.  I just enjoy the fight itself.

However, having said that...

If PvP could offer my 'faction' a bonus, whether it be land / territory control (resource spawns, etc), mission/quest payout bonuses, and that sort of thing, I would be in complete heaven.  PvP reward, in my opinion, should be rewarding to more than just the individual, it should be rewarding to my entire 'faction'.