I rarely PVP, mostly because I play Outlands on the couch on a laptop (after my kids go to bed). I have little interest in playing on my main computer and setting up the necessary macros to be competitive. I likely fit into a typical persona that likes to play games like Outlands as a way to relax before bed. Also, I hate getting PKed just as much as the next 50+ year old game dad, but...
(Also, please pardon me, I used Claude to help organize my thoughts)
In a purely cooperative MMO, no PK, no threat, no meaningful consequence — something predictable happens: the ecosystem goes soft. Resources accumulate without bound, economies inflate, players optimize into risk-free farming loops, and the world loses its tension. We saw this with Trammel
In UO Outlands (and other shards that support PVP) specifically, the PKer is the apex predator of the open world. Their existence forces:
Remove them entirely and you get a theme park — safe, predictable, and ultimately dead. This is essentially why WoW's transition away from meaningful PvP risk correlated with a certain kind of player engagement collapse.
From a more formal point-of-view:
In the classic prisoner's dilemma, two players each choose to cooperate or defect. The payoff structure looks like this:
The Common Framework: The N-Player Iterated Public Goods Game
In evolutionary terms, cooperators in a zero-predation environment optimize toward local fitness peaks — whatever is easiest and most rewarding right now. Predation pressure flattens those peaks and forces the population to explore the broader landscape. The threat of being PKed creates selection pressure for:
So the question isn't about whether or not the server supports PKing, but instead how we alter the rules to better support cooperation.
p.s.
Also, cancer can be modelled using the same PD models, so PKs are pretty much a cancer
.
(Also, please pardon me, I used Claude to help organize my thoughts)
In a purely cooperative MMO, no PK, no threat, no meaningful consequence — something predictable happens: the ecosystem goes soft. Resources accumulate without bound, economies inflate, players optimize into risk-free farming loops, and the world loses its tension. We saw this with Trammel
In UO Outlands (and other shards that support PVP) specifically, the PKer is the apex predator of the open world. Their existence forces:
- Route planning and situational awareness
- Group formation (safety in numbers — emergent guild structure)
- Economic trade-offs (do I carry more resources and risk losing them, or make more trips?)
- Player skill development under real threat conditions (Tracking, Resist, etc...)
Remove them entirely and you get a theme park — safe, predictable, and ultimately dead. This is essentially why WoW's transition away from meaningful PvP risk correlated with a certain kind of player engagement collapse.
From a more formal point-of-view:
In the classic prisoner's dilemma, two players each choose to cooperate or defect. The payoff structure looks like this:
The Common Framework: The N-Player Iterated Public Goods Game
- A population of agents exists within a shared system that produces value through cooperation
- Individual agents face a temptation to defect — extract more than they contribute
- Defection yields a local, short-term payoff for the defector
- But defection imposes a distributed cost on the cooperative fabric that benefits everyone
The PKer as Fitness Landscape Sculptor
PKers don't just add danger — they shape the fitness landscape that cooperators evolve against.In evolutionary terms, cooperators in a zero-predation environment optimize toward local fitness peaks — whatever is easiest and most rewarding right now. Predation pressure flattens those peaks and forces the population to explore the broader landscape. The threat of being PKed creates selection pressure for:
- Social intelligence — reading player behavior, identifying threats
- Spatial strategy — knowing which dungeons are hot, when to run
- Economic resilience — not over-investing in a single farm run
- Reputation and trust networks — who do you know? Who vouches for whom?
The Necessary Friction Argument
UO's original design philosophy — later articulated by Raph Koster and others — held that meaningful loss is the precondition for meaningful gain. This is not just a psychological trick. It's structural:- Risk creates value. A piece of loot you had to survive to keep is worth more than one you farmed safely. The PKer is the mechanism that makes value real.
- Friction prevents resource collapse. PKers are a wealth sink. They destroy accumulated resources, interrupt farming loops, and create economic turbulence that prevents runaway deflation of challenge and runaway inflation of wealth.
- Narrative emergence requires conflict. The stories players tell — the guild wars, the betrayals, the legendary PK hunters — are only possible because defection exists. A world without defectors has no drama, no history, no culture.
So the question isn't about whether or not the server supports PKing, but instead how we alter the rules to better support cooperation.
p.s.
Also, cancer can be modelled using the same PD models, so PKs are pretty much a cancer
.
Without PKs (player killers), you would just have dungeons with 2–3 "bots" at every spawn location 24/7, overpopulating profitable areas and causing inflation. In a "predator's world," things take on different values. For instance, it’s always nice to walk into an empty dungeon after the "reds" have cleared everyone out.