Counterfleche said: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.
This would be amazeballs!
Have an area(s) in Terminus that factoins warred over because of the natural/magical resources which granted their craftsmen bonuses (and open up unique quests for surrounding PvE areas) due to having that precious commodity only obtainable there... and every "X" days, the resource becomes unstable, causing an eruption (similar to a volcano) and some being (boss fight) comes to cleanse the lands of players that are causing the instability, and the faction that controls the territory at that time has severe disadvantage against the being (due to being attuned/susceptible to the local resource), while other factions have advantage against the boss... allowing for other factions to control the area and "change it up" each week like you suggested. If a faction with vulnerability can send enough players at the boss, they can maintain their control of the land... as long as no other factions interfere and crush them - otherwise, they can back off, and let another faction attempt the boss and control the area... or try to interfere with the boss fight even though they have disadvantage in the area.... or another faction without disadvantage can contest as well... or multiple factions can make an alliance, or the server could even set a schedule of which faction gets it on X week and just use the area as a fun PvP spot (until some guid decides to throw a wrench in there). The opportunities would be vast.
Just to add my 2cp...
From what has been said by VR, in the tenets and vision from day one and in comments in all media all along and especially recently, I would be VERY disappointed if PvP at launch, and, to be honest, ongoing, were anything more than a separate server with the PvP 'switch thrown on'.
One of the major reasons I became involved and pledged to VR is it was clearly stated it would be PvE focused and early statements made it clear that there could be a PvP server at some point only because it is so easy to 'switch on' and that no 'effort' would be put into PvP - balancing, mechanics, arenas, tournaments, UI elements, etc - other than that switched server.
Like many design decisions VR are taking with Pantheon, this is a conscious, intentional thing in order to make Pantheon's PvE the best it can be. Simple as that. Not a judgement or condemnation of PvP in general, but simply a choice to make PvE the firm focus.
This, of course, means that players that *are* judemental of PvP, right or wrong, to lesser or greater degree, are attracted to Pantheon and VR need to realise that (in fact I'm sure they do). There may be many that *do* like PvP and would want it, but there are also many that do *not* like PvP and a more general effort and inclusion for PvP would be - without meaning to sound dramatic, but picking an appropriate word - a 'betrayal' for them. Those that want PvP were never promised PvP and can hardly be anything but slightly miffed if it isn't included.
To be clear, I like PvP games - I play Battlefield quite competitively - but I desperately want an MMORPG that is *not* PvP. I prefer MMORPGs to be cooperative and the genre has almost wholly 'gone for' PvP as a focus or major element in recent years at the expense of the PvE experience to some extent. For me, MMORPGs are like Dungeons and Dragons but without one of you having to be the Dungeon Master. You can play *with* all your friends against the evil computer monsters. Perfection. PvP in MMORPGs over time has become, at best, a distraction and, at worst, ruins the PvE experience.
(Yes, I know, some who play Dungeons and Dragons like to 'PvP'... Let's not get into that...)
Kilsin said: "It is very unlikely that we will split the community up into different ruleset servers other than PvE and PvP (and possibly RP). Our game is being built following our tenets and they will dictate the rules that we want our game to follow"
I believe, re. many important issues like MDD/FTE policy, instancing, fast travel, auction houses, twinking, power-leveling, etc, etc, there will be mechanics in the game that govern them in the way the tenets and vision and design intend them to be and that will be that. That will be how Pantheon is supposed to be and how everyone will experience it together as a community.
There are lots of choices in game design. Some features and mechanics can be accomodated with almost no impact on other areas. Some have fundamental impact all over. All have impact in that, with limited resources, to develop them is at the expense of another area.
PvP is something that, if it can be accomodated with nearly no effort and can be kept completely from impacting the core game - as VR has said it can - then, yeah, why not? If not then a bug NO. Please, VR, as with all the other fundamental mechanics and features, please don't be tempted to accomodate more and attempt to broaden the audience at the expense of the quality of the product.
One important thought comes to me after having said all that though: How much greater impact *can* there be, in a game like Pantheon wants to be, than splitting the community completely onto different servers?
Are there really enough players that will *not* enjoy Pantheon if there is *no* PvP that we should force those that might like *some* PvP to split off onto an entirely different server?
In the Pantheon Questionnaire mentioned before there is a statement "I will most likely end up playing primarily on a "X" server" and the answer was 16% PvP.
The next question though was "My typical playing preference is" and 47.4% answered PvE and 46.8% answered "PVE & PVP (Mix, but Mostly PVE)".
Only 0.4% answer "Only PvP" when "PVE & PVP (Mix, but Mostly PVE)" is an option. 5.3% answered "PVP & PVE (Mix, but Mostly PVP)".
Would 47.4% + 46.8% = 94.2%, or even +5.3% = 97.5% be fine with PvE and PvP mix, if the PvP were somehow, simply, kept seperate? Could we keep the community together and happy in that way?
If we have PvP servers, there would be 0.4% definitely happy and 5.3% probably happy (though maybe lonely?). How many of the 46.8% would we 'lose' to the PvP server, though? Would they be happy on a PvP focused server?
So, the OP's question is pretty important either way.
Personally, subjectively, as I said earlier, I would prefer it if VR 'stick to their guns' even if it means alienating some potential audience, because I believe it is a fundamental design choice that cannot be catered to without significant impact on PvE. I think there should *not* be PvP at all in Pantheon, because there are tons of PvP focused games out there - I play them - but having a PvE focused one is part of what makes me so enthusiastic for Pantheon.
But what if VR could put PvP 'into' PvE servers with very very minimal impact on PvE? They are clever folks...
disposalist,
Both of your posts are filled with meaningless information and statistics, and in end the only thing you really wanted to say is this: "I think there should *not* be PvP at all in Pantheon"
To anyone else trying to figure out those posts: You are welcome.
Faction pvp and player agency
Regarding faction pvp: In my opinion player agency is removed when there are only 2 or 3 (or even 4 factions) and players are locked in said faction. There most certainly will be some bad actors in your own faction. No way in hell do I want to be powerless to do something about it. And no, reporting to a gm is not the solution I am looking for.
That type of pvp server (small number of factions) also favors zerg pvp battles where a players feels like nothing more than an unimportant cog in a wheel rather than a significant piece during a skirmish.
If Pantheon ends up having dozens of factions(as Joppa as hinted at in the past) in my opinion in the pvp server factions should be mostly used for player advancement and personal choice, because:
1> I'm in guild A and everyone in it likes different factions because they identify with it for whatever reason.
2> Suppose that most players on guild A are on the same faction but the leaders/officers of A dont like any other guild on the faction they are on. They should be free to make an alliance to a guild that is on another faction.
It is players and guilds that should shape the diplomatic landscape of the server, not some artificial restrictions!
Kaynrath said:disposalist,
Both of your posts are filled with meaningless information and statistics, and in end the only thing you really wanted to say is this: "I think there should *not* be PvP at all in Pantheon"
To anyone else trying to figure out those posts: You are welcome.
Lol. If you don't understand my interpretation of the figures from the questionnaire (Pantheon Questionnaire), no need to be rude. Perhaps re-read or ask questions.
If you disagree with me not wanting PvP, still no need to be rude. I made it clear that was my subjective preference and not linked directly to the hybrid server OP.
To anyone else trying to figure out my posts: I think the point is pretty clear and based on a survey of 901 fans and, no "I think there should not be PvP at all in Pantheon" is not all I wanted to say or all I did say.
disposalist said:Are there really enough players that will *not* enjoy Pantheon if there is *no* PvP that we should force those that might like *some* PvP to split off onto an entirely different server?
Force? If they go there they choose to go there. Do you mean them not having the option to play on a PvP server means they aren't being forced to?
Spluffen said:disposalist said:Are there really enough players that will *not* enjoy Pantheon if there is *no* PvP that we should force those that might like *some* PvP to split off onto an entirely different server?
Force? If they go there they choose to go there. Do you mean them not having the option to play on a PvP server means they aren't being forced to?
If someone prefers PvE unimpacted by PvP, they will only get that on a PvE server.
If they would like to dabble with PvP as well, they will have to split their time to a PvP server either as well, or play just PvP instead.
There is no other way, so in that way I mean they are 'forced', whereas if PvP was accomodated in some form on all servers, there would be no forcing and no splitting.
Of course, then it is very difficult to balance for both on the same server... It's more complex than just switching on PvP.
disposalist said:If someone prefers PvE unimpacted by PvP, they will only get that on a PvE server.
If they would like to dabble with PvP as well, they will have to split their time to a PvP server either as well, or play just PvP instead.
There is no other way, so in that way I mean they are 'forced', whereas if PvP was accomodated in some form on all servers, there would be no forcing and no splitting.
Of course, then it is very difficult to balance for both on the same server... It's more complex than just switching on PvP.
I get the impression that it might just be scary that some people would prefer PvP and you'd rather they didn't go play what they like instead of PvE :P
disposalist said:If someone prefers PvE unimpacted by PvP, they will only get that on a PvE server.
If they would like to dabble with PvP as well, they will have to split their time to a PvP server either as well, or play just PvP instead.
There is no other way, so in that way I mean they are 'forced', whereas if PvP was accomodated in some form on all servers, there would be no forcing and no splitting.
Of course, then it is very difficult to balance for both on the same server... It's more complex than just switching on PvP.
Solution: Do not make any technical distinction between PVE and PVP builds. This complicates things imo.
Instead, create an artificial barrier between PVE and PVP, any changes made to PVE would effect the entire build, but they would override those changes in PVP zones / instances with a "bolster system" which makes up for the difference. So in other words, PVE changes affected PVP, but PVP changes did NOT affect PVE gameplay.
This is not something novel to MMORPGS, other games have used this method of having ONE technical build for all servers but balancing subsystems within the build.
I know VR is probably not going to go this route on launch .. But my suggestion is there if anyone is listening.
Spluffen said:disposalist said:If someone prefers PvE unimpacted by PvP, they will only get that on a PvE server.
If they would like to dabble with PvP as well, they will have to split their time to a PvP server either as well, or play just PvP instead.
There is no other way, so in that way I mean they are 'forced', whereas if PvP was accomodated in some form on all servers, there would be no forcing and no splitting.
Of course, then it is very difficult to balance for both on the same server... It's more complex than just switching on PvP.
I get the impression that it might just be scary that some people would prefer PvP and you'd rather they didn't go play what they like instead of PvE :P
Lol. Just discussing the subject in a forum that's for discussing these subjects.
It's hardly a major concern, sure.
As I said before, the figures from the questionnaire would suggest that 0.4% are PvP only folks and 5.3% are mostly PvP, but some PvE. 47.4% are PvE only and 46.8% are PvE with some PvP. If you cross-reference with the number of people who don't play alts, 13.1%, then, yeah, it will probably be a small amount of folks that end up on PvP servers that might have been on PvE given more flexibility.
Of course, even those that play both PvP and PvE servers have limited time, so it is still, effectively, limiting the 'players' on PvE servers somewhat to have PvP servers.
*shrug* As I say, it's not a big deal. Not 'scary' hehe, but worthy of a forum post.
To expand the point, though, it's interesting you go say "rather they didn't go play what they like". I wonder how many potential players 'prefer' PvP, because in modern PvP-focused MMORPGs the PvE tends to be crappy?
If there are PvP servers, will some players choose them just because they are used to it being the 'best experience' in their previous MMORPGs?
disposalist said:In the Pantheon Questionnaire mentioned before there is a statement "I will most likely end up playing primarily on a "X" server" and the answer was 16% PvP.
The next question though was "My typical playing preference is" and 47.4% answered PvE and 46.8% answered "PVE & PVP (Mix, but Mostly PVE)".
Only 0.4% answer "Only PvP" when "PVE & PVP (Mix, but Mostly PVE)" is an option. 5.3% answered "PVP & PVE (Mix, but Mostly PVP)".
Would 47.4% + 46.8% = 94.2%, or even +5.3% = 97.5% be fine with PvE and PvP mix, if the PvP were somehow, simply, kept seperate? Could we keep the community together and happy in that way?
I would add the point that this poll was presented to PRotF followers, who are primarily EQ1 fans hoping for a game similar to EQ. These numbers do not reflect the majority of modern MMO players and I would bet those numbers directly correlate to the population of EQ1 players on PvP servers that are currently following PRotF (a game with no release date yet). I didn't participate in that poll, and I'm sure there are a lot of others in these forums that didn't either.
I'm not advocating for a hybrid game because the scope has clearly been identified to focus on PvE with a server(s) that has PC targetable enabled. If this were instead a PvP/PvE hybrid (similar to WoW) I think it would be more welcomed than people think. BUT, in the end this is all moot - in order to successfully have a PvP/PvE hybrid, there would have to be party/raid instancing, and that isn't going to be an option, so a blended PvP/PvE system would not work in PRotF. You would not be able to separate the PvE and PvP without group instancing.
Cyphonus said:disposalist said:If someone prefers PvE unimpacted by PvP, they will only get that on a PvE server.
If they would like to dabble with PvP as well, they will have to split their time to a PvP server either as well, or play just PvP instead.
There is no other way, so in that way I mean they are 'forced', whereas if PvP was accomodated in some form on all servers, there would be no forcing and no splitting.
Of course, then it is very difficult to balance for both on the same server... It's more complex than just switching on PvP.
Solution: Do not make any technical distinction between PVE and PVP builds. This complicates things imo.
Instead, create an artificial barrier between PVE and PVP, any changes made to PVE would effect the entire build, but they would override those changes in PVP zones / instances with a "bolster system" which makes up for the difference. So in other words, PVE changes affected PVP, but PVP changes did NOT affect PVE gameplay.
This is not something novel to MMORPGS, other games have used this method of having ONE technical build for all servers but balancing subsystems within the build.
I know VR is probably not going to go this route on launch .. But my suggestion is there if anyone is listening.
I think you are right, though I'm not sure any other game has done it well, or that it can be done well. That doesn't mean VR can't work it out, though.
I'd prefer they 'fold it in' rather than separate it off, but if they can't fold it in, I'd rather they do nothing, which is, apparently, controversial hehe.
disposalist said:To expand the point, though, it's interesting you go say "rather they didn't go play what they like". I wonder how many potential players 'prefer' PvP, because in modern PvP-focused MMORPGs the PvE tends to be crappy?
If there are PvP servers, will some players choose them just because they are used to it being the 'best experience' in their previous MMORPGs?
Yea I wonder. Although actually I'm not even sure I'm clear on what PvP/PvE Hybrid as in the thread title even entails. I'm personally a big fan of classic wow pvp servers and they definitely are pve focused servers with open (but faction, which is an aspect of them that I dont really think is very good or warranted) pvp. On the other hand I've gotten the impression from some posts in this thread and others that there isn't/people think that there isn't any PvE happening on a PvP server. I'm not really sure if thats the case in any special ruleset server in some games. In EQ i've only ever played on a PvE server and I was too late to experience any of the PvP servers in Vanguard so I've only played PvE there as well.
As far as popular modern MMOs I don't know which as the most popular atm but I'd assume it might be FFXIV and WoW, in both of which (especially XIV) PvE as an activity seems to be more popular than PvP. At least in classic WoW i know the PvP servers tend to be more popular but even there PvE is still by far the more popular activity for players. I don't think they even have PvP servers in Final Fantasy.
In my own understanding of PvP servers pvp and pve complement eachother so I can't really speak of them as separate interests. Basically killing people in pvp serves as the ultimate end game reason for getting stronger loot in pve.
If I'm to speculate I think it's more likely that people coming from wow would be more likely to pick PvP server out of habit and people from Final Fantasy 14 would pick a PvE one. But I wanna stress that I think picking a PvP server still means a PvE focused gameplay style for a lot of people, where the danger of PvP just serves to breathe life into and spice up the game.
disposalist said:I'd prefer they 'fold it in' rather than separate it off, but if they can't fold it in, I'd rather they do nothing, which is, apparently, controversial hehe.
Those "controversial" opinions annoy me because it comes off that you'd rather people who wanna play on an open pvp server are denied it than risk entirely speculative effects it may or may not have on the PvE server. As if something that'd be huge for others isn't even worth a minor possibility of an inconvenience to you
Darch said:You would not be able to separate the PvE and PvP without group instancing.
I assume PvE servers will at least have a dueling feature and those arenas where you can fight like the one in Kaladim
Spluffen said:...
disposalist said:I'd prefer they 'fold it in' rather than separate it off, but if they can't fold it in, I'd rather they do nothing, which is, apparently, controversial hehe.
Those "controversial" opinions annoy me because it comes off that you'd rather people who wanna play on an open pvp server are denied it than risk entirely speculative effects it may or may not have on the PvE server. As if something that'd be huge for others isn't even worth a minor possibility of an inconvenience to you
I appreciate what you're saying, but, although I obviously can't know the extent, I'm certain, for the reasons I've stated re. splitting the community and redirecting dev effort, PvP *has to* effect PvE to some degree. I don't think it's entirely speculative - I think my reasoning is pretty solid. Unless it all (including separate servers) waits until Pantheon becomes popular enough to be more than self-sustaining on the development front, PvP will have *some* effect on PvE, the question is how much.
It's not about inconveniencing me, it's just an observation I think is more than reasonable, but worth chatting about? Just for fun!(?)
I really don't intend to offend or upset or even provoke, and I always hope that people will take my discussion points for what they are - just discussion points - but I see that it might well trigger feelings to seem like I am suggesting one's preferred game style shouldn't be included.
As I keep saying (hoping it will head off conflict) I've got nothing against PvP - I play PvP games - I've played PvP MMORPGs - I just want a solidly PvE focused MMORPG for a change after 20 years of the genre going the other way and there being tons of good PvP focused games already out there (and more coming - Asheron's Call looks great - if you want PvP).
I want a solidly social and cooperative game after the genre going the other way so long and this thread simply made me wonder if my previous belief - that having PvP servers would have no effect on VR's PvE focus at all and no effect on the community - was true.
Whilst I cannot say how much, I'm pretty sure it isn't as simple as that and I'm interested to discuss that with the community.
I always like to think I'm open to changing my mind (as above, I already did as a result of this thinking about this thread), but I know I can be opinionated, like anyone hehe.
I invite people to reason with me, and, as always, I would hope it can be done without unpleasantness.
So, if anyone has a good reason they are sure the effect of PvP on PvE development and community will be none or insignificant, then let me know! I'd love to be reassured.
Kaynrath said:disposalist,
Both of your posts are filled with meaningless information and statistics, and in end the only thing you really wanted to say is this: "I think there should *not* be PvP at all in Pantheon"
To anyone else trying to figure out those posts: You are welcome.
I actually appreciate that disposalist walked through their reasoning and provided analysis of the poll data. I found the argument that having PvP on a separate server to be well reasoned and he does make a good point about how it may be harmful to the PvP community, at least numbers-wise, since many people who may occasionally want to PvP won't do so if it requires leveling an entirely new character on a new server.
I'm not a big fan of most PvP, though I do enjoy RvR and other team based PvP. I have suggested a Faction vs Faction option and I hope there is some kind of opt-in PvP in designated areas on the regular PvE servers. Either that, of allow players to copy their PvE characters to the PvP server (though this comes with other issues as well).
Counterfleche said:I'm not a big fan of most PvP, though I do enjoy RvR and other team based PvP. I have suggested a Faction vs Faction option and I hope there is some kind of opt-in PvP in designated areas on the regular PvE servers. Either that, of allow players to copy their PvE characters to the PvP server (though this comes with other issues as well).
I am of the same opinion on the team-based PvP being the only PvP I truly enjoy. I absolutely hate free-for-all at all times pvp in an MMORPG environment. I am however absolutely against PvE characters transfering to PvP servers as this was the primary reason I quit EQ years ago... After about 5 years of having strict non-transfer rules, Tallon Zek allowed PvE players to transfer to it... so there were players transfering over in full Plane of Time gear when our server barely had a single guild about 10% through progression... and they were gods in PvP because they had 400+ to all resists, DPS classes had more HP than our server's tanks, and more ATK Power than our Rogues... giving a single player the strength of 4-5 players simply due to MASSIVE gear advantages.
The one thing they should never do is allow transfers from PvE to PvP servers unless it is allowed from day 1... in which case, we will see PvP servers be overpopulated after about 8-10 months because what people don't like about PvP is it interfering with the PvE "experience", so once the new PvE is experienced, the anxiety of PvP blocking them from those opportunities is obsolete - (another factor of the success of hybrid pvp/pve like WoW... PvP didn't impede a player's PvE experiences at all).
disposalist said: and there being tons of good PvP focused games already out there (and more coming - Asheron's Call looks great - if you want PvP).
As a long time ACer, this just jumped out at me. Have you heard something about Warner Bros. 'officially' exploring that possibility, or are you referring to an Emulator?
Jothany said:disposalist said: and there being tons of good PvP focused games already out there (and more coming - Asheron's Call looks great - if you want PvP).As a long time ACer, this just jumped out at me. Have you heard something about Warner Bros. 'officially' exploring that possibility, or are you referring to an Emulator?
I noticed tha too! I'm pretty sure it's a typo and they were referring to Ashes of Creation though lol
Spluffen said:
disposalist said:To expand the point, though, it's interesting you go say "rather they didn't go play what they like". I wonder how many potential players 'prefer' PvP, because in modern PvP-focused MMORPGs the PvE tends to be crappy?
If there are PvP servers, will some players choose them just because they are used to it being the 'best experience' in their previous MMORPGs?
Yea I wonder. Although actually I'm not even sure I'm clear on what PvP/PvE Hybrid as in the thread title even entails. I'm personally a big fan of classic wow pvp servers and they definitely are pve focused servers with open (but faction, which is an aspect of them that I dont really think is very good or warranted) pvp. On the other hand I've gotten the impression from some posts in this thread and others that there isn't/people think that there isn't any PvE happening on a PvP server. I'm not really sure if thats the case in any special ruleset server in some games. In EQ i've only ever played on a PvE server and I was too late to experience any of the PvP servers in Vanguard so I've only played PvE there as well.
As far as popular modern MMOs I don't know which as the most popular atm but I'd assume it might be FFXIV and WoW, in both of which (especially XIV) PvE as an activity seems to be more popular than PvP. At least in classic WoW i know the PvP servers tend to be more popular but even there PvE is still by far the more popular activity for players. I don't think they even have PvP servers in Final Fantasy.
In my own understanding of PvP servers pvp and pve complement eachother so I can't really speak of them as separate interests. Basically killing people in pvp serves as the ultimate end game reason for getting stronger loot in pve.
If I'm to speculate I think it's more likely that people coming from wow would be more likely to pick PvP server out of habit and people from Final Fantasy 14 would pick a PvE one. But I wanna stress that I think picking a PvP server still means a PvE focused gameplay style for a lot of people, where the danger of PvP just serves to breathe life into and spice up the game.
I think he was referring to the PvE servers on Classic WoW on which it was still possible to PvP but you had to 'flag' yourself as being PvP. Personally I loved this as occassionally it was fun to dabble in around Southshore etc where even on a PvE server you would occassionally get some fun battles. And if you didn't fancy it you were never in any danger of being ganked or would run into any issues.
Again on PvE servers you could still do battlegrounds etc as well.
I don't mind either way at the end of the day. I'm not sure how free for all would work if at all.
This is a long, complex thread, and I have practically no experience with PvP, but a thought that occurred to me is to have taverns where PvP is allowed, but only to unconsciousness, not death.
Tavern brawls.
That could give players a taste of PvP, and give Pantheon some test data outside of a PvP Server.
Just a tiny thought.
Balanz said:This is a long, complex thread, and I have practically no experience with PvP, but a thought that occurred to me is to have taverns where PvP is allowed, but only to unconsciousness, not death.
Tavern brawls.
That could give players a taste of PvP, and give Pantheon some test data outside of a PvP Server.
Just a tiny thought.
You sound fun, we should hit the dockside taverns sometime.
TheWingless said:Jothany said:disposalist said: and there being tons of good PvP focused games already out there (and more coming - Asheron's Call looks great - if you want PvP).As a long time ACer, this just jumped out at me. Have you heard something about Warner Bros. 'officially' exploring that possibility, or are you referring to an Emulator?
I noticed tha too! I'm pretty sure it's a typo and they were referring to Ashes of Creation though lol
Personally, I blame Autocarrot.
Adrenicus said:I think he was referring to the PvE servers on Classic WoW on which it was still possible to PvP but you had to 'flag' yourself as being PvP. Personally I loved this as occassionally it was fun to dabble in around Southshore etc where even on a PvE server you would occassionally get some fun battles. And if you didn't fancy it you were never in any danger of being ganked or would run into any issues.
Again on PvE servers you could still do battlegrounds etc as well.
I don't mind either way at the end of the day. I'm not sure how free for all would work if at all.
I think this is what the OP was trying to argue for, where PVP is present in all servers, yet completely optional.
So rather than making an exclusive PVE-only server, and forcing people there ONLY to partake in PVE there, you could have a unified build across all potential servers and hence 'hybrid' for everyone.