>Isn't Horizons another one of those games where the developers think
>that in spite of UO having nothing but problems with PKs and grief
>players, and EQ showing the overwhelming majority prefer a PvP
>switch, that they can come up with the perfect, abuse free forced PvP
>environment?

Yes, and no. I don't think they believe that their PvP environment will be
perfect, but they think it will be good. I like the concept behind it and
generally I abhor PvP because it is all about PK for the most part. Two
things they are doing will make a huge difference. Like the Team PvP
servers, only races openly at war can PvP one another without consequence.
The big difference is, there will not be a way to tell the difference
between PC's and NPC's on sight. If you see an Orc on the road ahead and
you are an elf, you know that he is dangerous to you, whether he is a player
or an npc.

Their consequence system is brutal against PK'ers. If you kill a race that
you are not at war with, even a mere 5 or 6 times you will suffer enormous
problems. These problems will include having npc bounty-hunters showing up
to kill you at random. Playing a PK character would rapidly become
unplayable as every time you logged in you were ambush by these npc
enforcers. Even if you kept your PK-ing to a race yours was at war with,
you would always find yourself in enemy territory where few would feel any
compunction against killing you.

I wasn't really interested much in Horizons initailly due to it's PvP
system, but they have convinced me to give it a chance. They feel their PvP
system will promote the 'risk game' like Player competition while severely
punishing to the point of oblivion anyone who PK's for the joy of hurting
others. Time will tell.

Kit