Freeholds: do you want a PvP settings for your freehold?

While I'm obviously not opposed to the settings given my other previous posts on the matter, I don't really understand the ones you've chosen, so I'll just reiterate what I wanted out of that:

"A Freehold Owner can set a status that prevents them from being attacked on a Freehold as long as any players who signed up as their Defenders are still standing. That player cannot interact with those Defenders or any Attackers either. There is a cooldown once all Defenders have been defeated before the immunity can kick in again. Purpose is to allow people to do Freehold Artisanship safely while under guard."

Anyways, I'm also good with a Free PvP zone, can even be a building.

Set up 9 Freeholds in a big square, 8 are 'stadium seating' and the middle one is just a big battle arena (since Freeholds supposedly can't be placed right next to each other, presumably the FFA PvP zone would extend to the edge of the 'exclusion zone' for the middle one)

Player agency!

We have not received permission from Arya_Yeshe to share the quoted post.

I already said my opinion. Option good

What if this option determined the taxes you pay for your freehold? No-pvp option costs more than a ffa pvp one. And service tax could be inverted, so a tavern/crafting stall service would pay lower taxes from no-pvp freeholds and the other way around.

This would push people towards different setups of their freeholds, but also increase profits of those who go for a riskier setup. A ffa pvp tavern might attract more people, so while service tax will be higher, the pvp setting would be covered by the overall amount of money you receive. And carebear crafting stall would cost a ton to upkeep, but low service tax would allow them to set lower prices and attract more customers that way.

And those who setup freeholds for purely their own benefit and don't want any risk of pvp will have to pay a ton of money.

We have not received permission from Dygz to share the quoted post.

I mean, if the concept of risk/reward doesn't suit them, they wouldn't be playing Ashes in the first place. Also, freeholds will already be expensive for any casual player, so a random player with no time to play would probably not even have a freehold to worry about.

Plus there's always the good ol' trick of "this price is the base one, while all the pvp prices are just cheaper". If it works with death penalties, why not here

We have not received permission from Dygz to share the quoted post.

I mean, we're gonna be paying taxes on our freeholds. So all Intrepid need to do is say "by default you have a no-pvp zone on your freehold and your taxes are X. But you can change the zone to a semi/full-pvp zone and your taxes will be 0.5X". Literally the same as the death penalty stuff.