Susurrus said:Thanks for making a new thread to talk about this in more detail. Not that this has not been covered before but it seems even VR wants us to keep talking about it.
As a strict PVE only player one of my main frustrations with PVP is that for a PVP player there is no downside to mixing PVP and PVE. Mixing them dose improve PVP though. In my opinion this is why PVP fans want every MMO to have PVP. I mean why not. Can anyone name one downside to having PVP mixed with PVE if you are a strictly PVP player?
But as a strict PVE player what are the up sides to mixing with PVP? I can think of none only negative. Granted it can be done with a plan of minimal impact on PVE like EQ did back in the day. This sounds like what VR plans for Pantheon. But again, this only minimizes the impact there is still a negative impact. At the very least resources have to be spent on PVP that could otherwise be spent on PVE.
I recognize that VR plans to have PVP server and my hope is for minimal impact on PVE. Something like what EQ did for example. I know it had an impact but it is one I feel is tolerable.
Stances like mine might seem harsh to a PVP player but try to understand how a pure PVE player feels. Name a major MMO that was PVE only? I cannot think of a single one. Now list off all the MMOs that were PVP only. A PVE only fan basically has to put up with a mix of some amount if they want to play. But PVP players have their PVP only games. It would be a dream come true to just once be able to have a game that focuses 100% on PVE.
For a little bit of more insight into this PVE only player thoughts. I play PVP games off and on and have a lot of fun with them. I am not against PVP as a general rule. What I have no interest in is PVP in my MMO worlds. For this player the MMO genre and PVP just do not mix.
I can understand your frustration; being hesitant of endorsing PVP is becuase of technical issues of it affecting your PVE experience is a valid concern.
The preference of one or the other is very subjective, which is why I think both being an option is key.
I cannot think of any MMO that was PVE only, because forcing the game to be either PVP or strictly PVE is a poort strategy for MMOs. I think this is because of how traditional it is for the two to be present in an MMO.
What if there was a solution for the technical issues of keeping PVE and PVP from negatively affecting each other in the same server? Would you still endorse PVP being present in your server?
@Cyphonus - Well first I take issue with the word "hesitant" I am 100% against PVP in any MMO I want to play. I just recognize I will not get what I want. That is completely different then hesitant.
As to your question is there a way, I would not mind PVP mixed with PVE if we lived in a perfect world? I think this is what you are asking.
There is just so many ways PVP effects a PVE focused game I cannot fathom a way in which it could be pulled off.
I am sure there is a lot more. Maybe we can start a community list of compatibility issues with PVE and PVP?
I will most likely choose a PvE RP server. I like to try to surround myself with players that want to also try to immerse themselves in the world and be their character while they are there. I'd prefer as much as possible to keep the problems of our real world out of my in-game experience.
When I read a book the characters I read about don't want to discuss the argument I had with my brother the night before. When I watch a movie I don't find out about the actors financial problems. In the same way I want the characters I meet in game to be characters in a world that VR creates.
I'm on the PvE side, but I might be more prone to the PvP side if that was the only option there was. What I mean is, if I had no pre-concieved notions and I wanted to play this cool game and in reading the manual it said: there are factions, racial and deity. If you choose one race and associated deity you may/will be subject to hostile behavior and be attacked and killed by opposing factions- this also applies to players if they want to act upon another player with opposing faction/deity to their own so be aware and choose your friends wisely.
I associate this with the initial instruction regarding naked corpse runs in original EQ. they said thats how it was. When you die, you appear back at your bind point naked and all your stuff is on your corpse where you died and you have to get it. This will only really happen after level 10. I had no pre-conceived notion so I accepted that as is. You better believe I got in the habit of knowing where my corpse was from levels 1-10. I acted as if it was always in effect and always looted my corpse at level 5 or whatever even if there was nothing to loot - just to make it poof and clean up the litter of the body. With the slow leveling, that made going into new zone or dungeon extra harrowing. For instance Estate of Unrest, You can name the camps right away as those were places you moved slowly to because you were mindful of where your corpse was and always, there were newbies at the Zone in. Maze, Back yard, gates, basement, upstairs. Sebs: Bugs, Disco1, Disco2, Crypt, Dining room, jail, mushrooms, golems, etc . If in a new zone -= instinctively I would ask where is the city? and get there right away to start faction, bank and bind as that would be my new home base for a while- weeks maybe. At least get the guards to help if I needed it.
So I think if a rule was created saying, this is how it is, there would be little a new player could do about it except to accept it and play on.
Ranarius said:I will most likely choose a PvE RP server. I like to try to surround myself with players that want to also try to immerse themselves in the world and be their character while they are there. I'd prefer as much as possible to keep the problems of our real world out of my in-game experience.
When I read a book the characters I read about don't want to discuss the argument I had with my brother the night before. When I watch a movie I don't find out about the actors financial problems. In the same way I want the characters I meet in game to be characters in a world that VR creates.
Oh yea, I totally agree about keeping the 'real world drama' out of the game. It kind of defeats the purpose of escaping into a game when we are constantly remind about real world narratives in-game lol!
Susurrus said:@Cyphonus - Well first I take issue with the word "hesitant" I am 100% against PVP in any MMO I want to play. I just recognize I will not get what I want. That is completely different then hesitant.
As to your question is there a way, I would not mind PVP mixed with PVE if we lived in a perfect world? I think this is what you are asking.
There is just so many ways PVP effects a PVE focused game I cannot fathom a way in which it could be pulled off.
- PVP takes resources to develop and manage hence taking recourses from PVE
- Developers even now are most likely ruling out ideas that sound cool for PVE just because they might make implementing PVP harder.
- I know not all PVP player are toxic just like how not all PVE player are not toxic. But I think it is fair to say that the pure PVP player base has generated a reputation. By not having PVP at all the chances of those players playing Pantheon is diminished.
- I like a game that is not balanced. This is normally a major issue for PVP.
- Freeing devs of considering PVP in any way gives devs a larger canvas to work with. There is just so many things that break PVP that are fine in PVE.
I am sure there is a lot more. Maybe we can start a community list of compatibility issues with PVE and PVP?
See, that's cool, I'm happy you're open minded about the possibility PVP being copresent in the game, even though you'd prefer it not to be.
Good idea on the compatibility issue list. I think the most used compatibility issue would be technical concerns. I offered sort of ad-hoc solution earlier in the discussion that Star wars the Old Rebublic used. It created an artificial barrier between PVE and PVP, any changes made to PVE would effect the entire world, but they would override that in PVP zones and instances with the "bolster system" which makes up for the difference. So in other words, PVE changes affected PVP, but PVP changes did NOT affect PVE gameplay.
OK. I have zero interest in PvP. Zero. If VR wants to meld servers allowing PvP on "PvE" servers just let me know, so I can find a different game.
Isnt every PvP server automatically a hybrid server? Certainly all the normal NPC mobs are still in game. Just when it's a PvP game you have the added joy of being ganked by any random PC thirty levels higher than you. What fun! Rock on.
Questaar said:
OK. I have zero interest in PvP. Zero. If VR wants to meld servers allowing PvP on "PvE" servers just let me know, so I can find a different game.
Yes, a PVP server would be the hybrid server. I think 'hybrid' is a more fitting name than PVP server which is what OP may have been confused about.
Questaar said:
Isnt every PvP server automatically a hybrid server? Certainly all the normal NPC mobs are still in game. Just when it's a PvP game you have the added joy of being ganked by any random PC thirty levels higher than you. What fun! Rock on.
That assumes that world PVP is in the game and that it's a free-for-all. I agree, no fun. But I think instanced PVP or zoned world PVP is a healthy option to any of the servers. If you don't like it, you aren't forced to participate.
Questaar said:
OK. I have zero interest in PvP. Zero. If VR wants to meld servers allowing PvP on "PvE" servers just let me know, so I can find a different game.
Isnt every PvP server automatically a hybrid server? Certainly all the normal NPC mobs are still in game. Just when it's a PvP game you have the added joy of being ganked by any random PC thirty levels higher than you. What fun! Rock on.
I think what a lot of people don't seem to get, is that while it might seem like it could affect a non-pvp player is that they could make it in a way of not being in the same instance of a zone. Not sure if you play EverQuest but in WoW they have it so when you opt into PvP mode you phase out of PvE only server.
I would prefer to have a pure PVP server, open world, Free for All. Also have a level range so griefing is minimalized. Out of Range healers ect. would become targetable only if they decided to engage in the fight.
As far as "toxicity" is concerned I found PvE guilds significantly worse than the PvP guilds. In PvE, competing for gear and buffs became the sole obsession for a lot of people with the singular purpose to brag about their "parse" on ACT. Very disturbing experience.
In the PVP guilds people were much easier and fun to raid with as raiding was a means to an ends for good gear to PvP with. Raiding(parsing) wasn't the main goal, PvP was. Plus on a PvP server people are forced to work together in a guild for survival so there was a lot more sharing. Though, there's always greedy people everywhere for whatever reason. Even when playing a make believe video game for fun.
Questaar said:Jiub
We know VR doesn't want instances so let's ignore that for now.
How would PvP zones work in your example?
Ezrael said:
See Ezrael's picture.
A PVP zone is a non-instanced sectioned off area of the map in which a player voluntarily walks into.
Once inside the zone, there is a countdown which alerts the player they have entered a PVP zone, once the timer runs out the player is now flagged for PVP. It could also trigger any balancing systems as well to accomodate for the difference between PVP vs PVE.
Both instanced and non-instanced PVP zones are non-instrusive. They allow for the coexistence of PVE-only crowd and the PVP+PVE crowd, resulting in perseverance of server population.
Susurrus said:@Cyphonus - Well first I take issue with the word "hesitant" I am 100% against PVP in any MMO I want to play. I just recognize I will not get what I want. That is completely different then hesitant.
As to your question is there a way, I would not mind PVP mixed with PVE if we lived in a perfect world? I think this is what you are asking.
There is just so many ways PVP effects a PVE focused game I cannot fathom a way in which it could be pulled off.
- PVP takes resources to develop and manage hence taking recourses from PVE
- Developers even now are most likely ruling out ideas that sound cool for PVE just because they might make implementing PVP harder.
- I know not all PVP player are toxic just like how not all PVE player are not toxic. But I think it is fair to say that the pure PVP player base has generated a reputation. By not having PVP at all the chances of those players playing Pantheon is diminished.
- I like a game that is not balanced. This is normally a major issue for PVP.
- Freeing devs of considering PVP in any way gives devs a larger canvas to work with. There is just so many things that break PVP that are fine in PVE.
I am sure there is a lot more. Maybe we can start a community list of compatibility issues with PVE and PVP?
None of this is correct mate.
Think of a PvP server exactly like a PvE server only we click a button that allows you to attack other players too. That's it... no extra resources other than general server costs that will be outweighed by subscriptions to pay for that server.
Having this separate allows us to make PvP changes that have no impact on PvE classes and balance at all, even Brad was adamant about this.
Bottom line, we're PvE first and foremost but we will have PvP servers that we will try to make as fun as possible for our PvP community members and I don't like seeing such a divide between play types when they don't affect each other, we're one community supporting Pantheon no matter what style you prefer and I would ask that everyone shows a bit of respect to each other on topics like this.
There is toxicity in every game, including PvE games and as such, I am focussed on weeding a lot of it out and preventing it from contaminating our community prior, during and post-release and with everyone's help we can certainly make a big dent in that type of behaviour, no matter what server it is on.
@Kilsin -
Let me first apologize if I added to any of the toxicity. That was not my intent if I did. I feel VR has been abundantly clear that Pantheon is a PVE first game that will have PVP server/s. My statements were to make my stance on PVP clear while also trying to make a point that by having PVP it will have an effect on the PVE game. I will admit of all people to not see what I was getting at with my post I am surprised you did not.
My only guess is that you are looking at the effects as being so small that you feel my statements are incorrect? If there is even one dev, moderator, customer service rep, etc. working on the PVP server that is resources that could be spent on the PVE server. This is just one way it can take resources and I still feel that in many games my above list can be accurate.
This dose not mean it can’t work or that both PVE players and PVP players can’t both be happy. EQ did a fine job having both and from what I can tell that is the same plan VR has for Pantheon.
Susurrus said:@Kilsin -
Let me first apologize if I added to any of the toxicity. That was not my intent if I did. I feel VR has been abundantly clear that Pantheon is a PVE first game that will have PVP server/s. My statements were to make my stance on PVP clear while also trying to make a point that by having PVP it will have an effect on the PVE game. I will admit of all people to not see what I was getting at with my post I am surprised you did not.
My only guess is that you are looking at the effects as being so small that you feel my statements are incorrect? If there is even one dev, moderator, customer service rep, etc. working on the PVP server that is resources that could be spent on the PVE server. This is just one way it can take resources and I still feel that in many games my above list can be accurate.
This dose not mean it can’t work or that both PVE players and PVP players can’t both be happy. EQ did a fine job having both and from what I can tell that is the same plan VR has for Pantheon.
I mean, if pvp gets them more subscribers for longer than couldn't the one dev/moderator/cs rep etc. be well paid for by those additional subs? I'm not sure how that could take away from the pve at that level.
As it stands your money won't go towards the pvp. There's plenty of pvp players who are going to give vr more than enough cash to take care of what little consideration they give to pvp.
If anything the cash from the pvp players will overflow and provide money to hire more pve people.
What if that moderator, customer service rep, and server, are all paid for by customers who enjoy pvp? The argument assumes that those resources will simply exist, but don't you think those resources will be allocated based on why they exist in the first place?
Edit: Beaver types faster than me :) ... "What he said"
@BeaverBiscuit - I am sure this could end up being true. It could also end up not being true. In time I am sure VR will find out.
Kilsin said:Susurrus said:@Cyphonus - Well first I take issue with the word "hesitant" I am 100% against PVP in any MMO I want to play. I just recognize I will not get what I want. That is completely different then hesitant.
As to your question is there a way, I would not mind PVP mixed with PVE if we lived in a perfect world? I think this is what you are asking.
There is just so many ways PVP effects a PVE focused game I cannot fathom a way in which it could be pulled off.
- PVP takes resources to develop and manage hence taking recourses from PVE
- Developers even now are most likely ruling out ideas that sound cool for PVE just because they might make implementing PVP harder.
- I know not all PVP player are toxic just like how not all PVE player are not toxic. But I think it is fair to say that the pure PVP player base has generated a reputation. By not having PVP at all the chances of those players playing Pantheon is diminished.
- I like a game that is not balanced. This is normally a major issue for PVP.
- Freeing devs of considering PVP in any way gives devs a larger canvas to work with. There is just so many things that break PVP that are fine in PVE.
I am sure there is a lot more. Maybe we can start a community list of compatibility issues with PVE and PVP?
None of this is correct mate.
Think of a PvP server exactly like a PvE server only we click a button that allows you to attack other players too. That's it... no extra resources other than general server costs that will be outweighed by subscriptions to pay for that server.
Having this separate allows us to make PvP changes that have no impact on PvE classes and balance at all, even Brad was adamant about this.
Bottom line, we're PvE first and foremost but we will have PvP servers that we will try to make as fun as possible for our PvP community members and I don't like seeing such a divide between play types when they don't affect each other, we're one community supporting Pantheon no matter what style you prefer and I would ask that everyone shows a bit of respect to each other on topics like this.
There is toxicity in every game, including PvE games and as such, I am focussed on weeding a lot of it out and preventing it from contaminating our community prior, during and post-release and with everyone's help we can certainly make a big dent in that type of behaviour, no matter what server it is on.
I think what Kilsin is trying to get at and that you seem to misinterpret, is that 1) It doesn't affect any type of social interaction by having a certain crowd in of the equation 2) You can't just leave out the PvP community to also enjoy the aspect of PvE as without both you can't have a healthy and progressive way of enjoying the game.. just because 1 PvP'er might be toxic doesn't mean they're all the same and from what I've know a lot of PvP'ers are probably in their own world being the cool people that they are. Now, if you think leaving PvP aspect out of the PvE community is healthy, is not.. there will be toxic people in PvE servers just as much in PvP as everyone has different styles of game play, and second, that would be totally detrimental to the PvP community to die off rapidly as they also need a sense of PvE game play.. I hope I'm not being too harsh but that's just what I think. I hope this enlightened your ideology.
EDIT: Possibly misread. I apolgize if I did. The statement might still hold true. <3
"Think of a PvP server exactly like a PvE server only we click a button that allows you to attack other players too. That's it... no extra resources other than general server costs that will be outweighed by subscriptions to pay for that server."
I would prefer this method for a PvP server. I think Dev's are to quick to make adjustments because the community cries about one class being to strong in PvP. Weak classes (PvP) will have less people rolling that class so the people who do will have an abundance of opportunities for groups and raid spots. Assuming the class is relevant for PvE.
OP classes (PvP) will have a severe over subscription to the class flooding the game with redundancy. Group and raid slots will be difficult to find assuming there's a balance for classes in PvE.
So just through basic supply and demand principles a class's stregnth and weaknesses in PvP will balance out in the population.
The PvP player base is very adaptable to PvE mechanics to maximize their achievements in game. (i.e.) xteaming in EQ and playing in exile in EQ2.
@M1A1 - I believe you have an accurate (or at least similar to me) perspective regarding class balance and population on a PvP server. ""OP classes (PvP) will have a severe over subscription to the class flooding the game with redundancy. Group and raid slots will be difficult to find assuming there's a balance for classes in PvE.""
My predictions for PvP server "endgame" class population will be:
Over populated: Dire Lord, Rogue, Necromancer
Under populated: Cleric, Warrior, Monk
So if you want garaunteed group slots on a PvP server, go Cleric, Warrior or Monk, and if you want to compete for PvE slots with numerous of the same class, go DL, Rog, or Nec :)
I will be playing on a PvE server simply because I (personally) do not enjoy "free for all" PvP. I prefer faction (or racial) based, so you at least know there is SOMEONE you can trust to have your back... even if they have a bad day, get rambunctious, or their account is shared/compromised. I found that on Tallon Zek, the comradery was nothing like any other game I've ever played - i.e. If you saw a fellow Elf being attacked by an Ogre, you ran to their aid (even if you weren't strong enough/high enough level) because you knew they would do the same for you. In "free for all" PvP that I've played, I saw the opposite... dog-piling on the guy that was already overmatched just because of the gang mentality. In faction based pvp, dog-piling was expected and encouraged, because it was usually territorial to starting areas, like the example of an Ogre by themselves in the Elven forest - don't go there alone unless you know people/have proven yourself to the community... and if an elven rogue wants to brave the Ogre lands, know that the odds are not in your favor lol. (That was a whole adventure in itself for some of us... as a group of Dark Elves, daring to run through Freeport or HHK ... or seeing a group of Humans in Nektulous Forest!! lol)
And to your comment about PvP players being adaptable to PvE - It's been my (personal) experience that PvP players are almost always better PvE players when addressing the same content. Higher levels of awareness, relying on skill/technique instead of gear, and never being heavily reliant on others to "carry" them through content are requisits to being succesful on a PvP server. Nobody logs into a PvP game slouching in their chair, half watching a television show in the background, alt-tabbed on a web browser - they log in and immediately do a 360 degree surveilance, check their character's supplies (if they didn't do that before logging off in the first place), make sure their buffs are appropriate (to include a space for debuffs to land in order to rapidly respond to cleansing it) they have the proper abilities on their bar at all times, and they're reading all chat to find out if there are threats/concerns near by. By the time they get to PvE content, they're ALWAYS paying attention to what every other player around them is doing to the point that a melee can tell which type of heal a Cleric is casting just by the animation or sound while simultaneously knowing that they need to move 3' closer to be included in the heal, or move 3' away to avoid an AoE dispel... there are a lot of little things that pure PvE players take for granted and then the toxic ones say stuff like "Oh that cleric is trash because he healed everyone but me!" when in actuality, that player wasn't paying attention if they were expecting the cleric to move to them.
Edit: I don't mean to offend anyone by saying "PvP players are almost always better PvE players" - I should say that PvP players are almost always more perceptive and responsive to those perceptions.
Darch said:I found that on Tallon Zek, the comradery was nothing like any other game I've ever played - i.e. If you saw a fellow Elf being attacked by an Ogre, you ran to their aid (even if you weren't strong enough/high enough level) because you knew they would do the same for you. In "free for all" PvP that I've played, I saw the opposite... dog-piling on the guy that was already overmatched just because of the gang mentality. In faction based pvp, dog-piling was expected and encouraged, because it was usually territorial to starting areas, like the example of an Ogre by themselves in the Elven forest - don't go there alone unless you know people/have proven yourself to the community... and if an elven rogue wants to brave the Ogre lands, know that the odds are not in your favor lol. (That was a whole adventure in itself for some of us... as a group of Dark Elves, daring to run through Freeport or HHK ... or seeing a group of Humans in Nektulous Forest!! lol)
Captured my feelings exactly!
Faction vs Faction would fit Pantheon well.
Every week, in one particular zone, two factions fight. Players can join in but must have positive faction with the side they join. The fighting factions can be playable races as well as non-playable and there will be NPC combatants as well as players (this can be used to keep it more balanced as well as making the battles more epic in scope.
Limiting the fighting to one area keeps the impact small on everyone else and it helps concentrate the action. Players who don't wish to compete are flagged as noncombatants and to become a combatant you need to opt in at faction HQ.
Changing up the factions fighting each week keeps it fresh and can allow players to sometimes be allied with others and other times be enemies. FvF battles determine control of specific outposts / territories and it isn't changed again until another FvF fights over the same territory.
