Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Arena Style PvP - Spectator Mechanics

    • 187 posts
    October 21, 2016 5:06 PM PDT

    In traditional PvE type servers, players can still consensually test their combat prowesses against one another for sport or to physically settle a dispute ("meet me by the flag pole after class, punk" or "I bet my mage can beat up your mage" :D). Many games have tapped into our competitive desires and provided a built-in framework for us to compete with ladders/rewards/ect. Note here I am not saying any opinion to qualify the degree of success of this implementation; some games over-do it, some games under-do it. That type of discussion escapes the purpose of this post.

    Now, I believe there has been a severly missed opportunity which stems from what I think is a fallacious thought akin to "If we implement a framework for competitive PvP, then we need to give all classes and players an equal opportunity to participate. Surely everyone wants to get in on this action", which we know couldn't be farther from the truth in our community. Not everyone wants to engage in PvP and not all classes should be great PvPers. An analogy that I like to revert to to explain the last sentence is to equate in-game classes to real life careers. If the setting of PvP is combat success, then of course a carpenter couldn't contend with a martial artist and a painter should not be expected to go toe to toe versus a boxer. Similarly, an enchanter shouldn't be expected to be able to compete with a rogue. I believe the whole 'respecing' and PvP balancing is a non-issue. Let the combat focused classes be the most successful PvPers. We would never question the fairness of a painter's combat abilities inside the boxing ring by handicaping the boxer - if the painter wants to fight he would just get destroyed and thats it.

    Having laid that foundation, I'm ready to explain my new idea. Just because not all classes are proficient fighters and not all players want to participate in PvP doesn't mean they can't still be involved in the sport. I propose that if arena-style competitive PvP is implemented in Pantheon, then there should be a framework to support spectators! We know people love to watch sports and eSports is clearly an ever-growing phenomenon. Why not give players the in-game opportunity to watch PvP bouts? Here are a list of possible mechanics that I think would be fun:

    1) Seated, non-instanced physical arenas in cities similar to a colosseum. Spectators would be able to purchase tickets (money sink) to gain entry and build reward pools for the combatants.
    2) In-game sponsorship. Crafters could outfit combatants with their armors and weapons with the prospect of getting a cut of the rewards if their player wins.
    3) In-game local ladder system so spectators could view rising stars and follow their favorite combatant.
    4) Sports betting. Everyone loves a good gamble right? Let the ladder system calculate the odds of two conestants winning and let spectators bet on those odds. Of course, the house will rake plenty of cash, providing yet another money sink to avoid inflation.

    I think this would be a wildly cool inclusion in Pantheon. The arena system I have introduced would be a novel way to
    a) keep cities populated and busy
    b) provide money sinks to counter inflation
    c) establish a novel social venue for in-game downtime
    d) give everyone an opportunity to participate in the PvP system even if their class isn't combat focused.

    Let me know what you think!

    • 137 posts
    October 21, 2016 5:53 PM PDT
    I like the idea in general, somewhat like the arenas that existed in EQ1. There was one outside of the bazaar that I spent alot of time in while in between raids or attempting to buy/sell goods. I really enjoy areas where I can choose to step into and duke it out with someone(s). I think the important thing is that developers should "NOT" attempt to balance for it. It's is what it is and you may be at an advantage or disadvantage based on your class, deal with it.

    To take that idea further, one of the things I really enjoyed about early EQ1 was GM arena events. Large scale pvp, last man standing wins some type of item.

    These types of mechanics go a long way to filling in times when you want to be online, but really don't want to do much. Adding in some of your suggestions could really make it interesting.
    • 763 posts
    October 22, 2016 1:32 AM PDT

    Like the idea a lot:

     

    I personally would want VR to purposefully NOT balance character classes for PvP. Leave them EXACTLY as they are in PvE. Some will be weaker than others, sure. But this will affect the server populations for PvP servers in 'real world' ways. Some will play the 'weaker' classes and may actually find an innovative way to redress this balance!

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

    For arenas, I would suggest :

    1. That championships would be needed to attract people into participating. Perhaps 'unusual' rewards too.

    2. Championships should include some AI (or an occasional sneaky GM player) in the contests. At the very least to ensure you attain a minimum ability before rushing in to die. This might include a 'famous' NPC - a Royal Knight, The Black Knight etc.

    3. Winning these contests should give benefits for you in the local town. Eg faction, status etc. It may give -faction from the opponents Noble house etc though if you beat an NPC.


    This post was edited by Evoras at October 22, 2016 1:32 AM PDT
    • 1778 posts
    October 22, 2016 11:10 PM PDT

    Evoras said:

    Like the idea a lot:

     

    I personally would want VR to purposefully NOT balance character classes for PvP. Leave them EXACTLY as they are in PvE. Some will be weaker than others, sure. But this will affect the server populations for PvP servers in 'real world' ways. Some will play the 'weaker' classes and may actually find an innovative way to redress this balance!

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

     

     

    This. So this!

     

    @Syntro

     

    You are just trying to come up with ways for me to roll those digital die, arent you? Well the answer is hell yes, I would very much like to gamble my money away given the oppertunity.

    • 839 posts
    October 23, 2016 4:00 PM PDT

    This is somthing i definitely would love to see in game, I love having an arena for PVP and your extra inclusions/options for spectators sounds great.  This would go a long way to creating another great social hub.  and 100% agree regarding keeping classes as is in PVP and PVE, this is a key point and further to this we would also assume that the arena can be used for group battles as well.  

    Oh and a side note regarding your example... my enchanter will destroy any rogue :p

    • 85 posts
    October 24, 2016 1:13 AM PDT

    If you want this type of thing on your PVE server, I don't object.  However, I'd like just a pure FFA PVP server to play on. PVP isn't just a sport.  It's a way of life.  

    P.S.  I agree with little to no balancing for PvP.  Everyone should have a foil.  And, group PvP will balance just fine.


    This post was edited by Sylee at October 24, 2016 1:17 AM PDT
    • 1303 posts
    October 24, 2016 5:20 AM PDT

    I really like the idea of having spectators that can participate in a non-combat way. I also agree with not articially balancing classes for PvP. Partly for the reasons you've given, but also because if Pantheon truly means to focus on cooperative gameplay that should also extend into PvP. If you're going to go into a battle as a squishy mage you should rely on others to protect you, not on gimmicky PvP triggers that give you additional tools only in that venue. 

    The one thing I'm not sure how to address though  is this : I prefer PvP with objectives over the last man standing brawls. For all the flaws in WoW I always loved the Alterac Valley battleground, where your forces needed to work their way across the map gaining control points that allowed them towork their way deeper toward the enemy stronghold. It has evolved over time into something completely different, and I dont like the way it is played today. But it used to be a fun, progression back and forth slug fest and strategy mattered. Spectators in this case would allow for those not directly involved in the combat to spoil the surprises a force was preparing, so that would need to be considered somehow.

    Edit: 
    Also, I would prefer that there be a reason for PvP arenas beyond just personal satisfaction. I'm not sure that gear rewards are good because they detract from playing the rest of the game. But I can see them being a path to status with some factions perhaps? There has to be other reasons to do it that don't break PvE. 


    This post was edited by Feyshtey at October 24, 2016 5:24 AM PDT
    • 151 posts
    October 24, 2016 7:03 AM PDT

    First.. I want to say I very much dislike traditional PVP. That being said, I LOVED Hutball in Star Wars Online. If the VR team can figure out a way to do something like that within the lore of the game that would be great!

    • 2138 posts
    October 24, 2016 4:23 PM PDT

    I like the spectator ideas Syntro, especially the small scale betting and maybe level scaled entry fees.

    To add to that, maybe have a slighly higher ticket fee to be pitted against various class NPC's in the arena with maybe half or quarter loss. I mean you could buy a ticket, and face a monster in the arena, if you win, you then face another slightly higher level monster or NPC. If you lose the event ends.

    (some may remember this from that place with the "eerie european feel" as attributed to Mentos ads, or  like the "return of the Archon's" episode form StarTrek - being in Sanctus Seru, prior to faction being ruined;  that had such an arena should the mechanic wish to be....observed)

    • 54 posts
    October 24, 2016 5:25 PM PDT
    Ah, hutball. ... I can still hear the announcer in my head, "LETS PLAAAAAY HUTBAAAALL! " I really enjoyed Hutball (and most of the SWTOR arenas) because of it being objective based.

    I always wanted to be a spectator and not just watching a livestream of an arena match. It would be wonderful to buy tickets to see the next arena match (or buy a seasonal pass for a large chunk of change that enabled you to watch as many matches as possible for a set time period) and I like the idea of betting and I 100% support having sponsored teams or players that transcends a guild tag or title.

    But just like in eSports a few teams have thrown important matches just to profit off of bets. I do not want the betting system to be a lucrative way for groups or guilds to queue up and intentionally lose so their buddy in the stands can profit. If there is a betting system it should only award the amount of currency spent on the ticket and also break even on the bet (so essentially you only break even) but there should be a token/award system that gives players an incentive to bet, you would earn betting points for every winning bet and could exchange them for a title, cloak, or other souvenirs etc. make these character/account bound and I think that could deter most of the players who would intentionally throw.
    • 7 posts
    October 24, 2016 6:23 PM PDT
    Sick idea. Enough said.
    • 428 posts
    October 26, 2016 1:34 PM PDT

    Amsai said:

    Evoras said:

    Like the idea a lot:

     

    I personally would want VR to purposefully NOT balance character classes for PvP. Leave them EXACTLY as they are in PvE. Some will be weaker than others, sure. But this will affect the server populations for PvP servers in 'real world' ways. Some will play the 'weaker' classes and may actually find an innovative way to redress this balance!

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

     

     

     

    This. So this!

     

    @Syntro

     

    You are just trying to come up with ways for me to roll those digital die, arent you? Well the answer is hell yes, I would very much like to gamble my money away given the oppertunity.

     

    Horrible and its been done  EQ2.  What happened was you had groups of all wizards rolling around rooting someone and spamming something like ICE Comet that ended up doing 50k damage in PVP per spell when you only have 10k HP.  It upset the balance there needs to be tweaks done because a spell designed to attack mobs with 500k HP is totally different when applied to a player with 6k health.

     

    • 999 posts
    October 28, 2016 8:07 AM PDT

    @Syntro

    I really like the idea, it reminds me of the old GM "Best of the Best" tournaments in early EQ.  Many of those events drew in a huge number of spectators, and, the winner's were annoucement in a serverwide message.  Having some sort of tracking board that tracked W/L outside the arena would be neat.  The only suggestion I would make is that similar to gladiator battles if it was the same class vs the same class - each player should be given the same gear/spell selections so it's a true measure of skill versus equipment. 

    If it was say a wizard versus a warrior, given Kalgore's fear, perhaps there could be a variety of gear choices for the warrior that includes some resistance gear to offset being one-shotted.  But, I'd much rather have the rock, paper, scissors style of PVP with some classes potentially just being awful due to their desirability in PvE groups rather than trying to ever balance classes for PvP.

     

    • 166 posts
    October 28, 2016 10:00 AM PDT

    This reminds me of the gurubashi arena in stranglethorn.

    While you are in the arena you could fight against every other player, regardless if he has the same or a different fraction than you. When fighting a player of your own fraction, it was the extended version of a duell, because different to a duell you could kill the other player like a player of the oposite fraction could. Outside of the arena ground you could watch the others fight against each other and only had to fear player of the oposite fraction.

    A nice thing is an event, which occures serveral times a day. There a NPC places a chest in the middle of the arena and the last player standing (after dying it was a bit longer way back to the arena) is able to loot the chest. Beside the normal loot the chest cotains an item which starts a quest.

    Maybe for an arena in Pantheon the ranks could be a total peace zone, so no one can attack each other on the ranks, but in the arena ground it should be an everyone versus everyone, so that you not even can trust people of your own fraction. Beside of this kind of arena an one versus one or x versus x arena with play-off fights would also be fun.

    And of course there have to be some form of reward for the winners. On the one hand the players could agree some reward they pay for the winners, but on the other hand there should be some in game reward system as well. E. g. the example with the chest in the middle of the arena or the system where the entrance fee of the spectators is used to reward the fighters, which  I read about above.

    To sum it up, yes I would be happy to have such arenas in Pantheon. I can not already say, if I would actively participate or only watch the others fighting.

     

    • 1778 posts
    October 28, 2016 10:07 AM PDT
    @ Kalgore

    See as this is Arena style you could make it where only a balanced group of roles are possible per match up. That's not dictating which classes but sayou a balanced amount of each role. So say 4 vs 4 is one of each tank, dps, CC, healer. And for solo matches as Raidan suggested Enchanter vs Enchanter. There are ways to balance it without having to balance each class. I think it's far better to balanceven per group. And if VR does a good job of balancing similar roles this shouldn't be an issue. And just for clarity when I say balance per role I mean that each class in a given role can adequately perform that role not that they are carbon copies of eachother in skills with different flavor text and animations.
    • 2138 posts
    October 29, 2016 7:14 AM PDT

    If it hasn;t been stated already, I dont think it makes sense that casters should be balanced in order to possibly even think of fitghting a melee. Casters against casters, yes, but not casters against melee. This does not mean than a caster- feeling their oats- might not want to try to fight/duel against a warrior. They will lose, but they can at least see how long it takes for them to lose or what impact certain spells do.

    Now, such a caster- being defiant in nature- choosing instead to ostracize themselves and spend years in the mountains honing their craft to the exclusion of all others-to then barely win against the now leveled warrior in a duel years later and then fulfilling a lifelong grudge of the caster. Well, you can do what you want. Oh, and I would pay to see that for sure!, with that back story? and maybe remembering said caster from when I was a newbie and maybe grouping with them once, and rabbit-facing at one strange coment they made only never to see them again and not even enough times to determine if they should be friended. Hold my place in line while I get some more cash from the bank- you need some extra?.

    Likewise with a ranking in class on display outside the arena? I might be tempted to ask the class leader privately for a duel if they are on and they have time, maybe learn something.  

    • 93 posts
    October 29, 2016 3:29 PM PDT

    Evoras said:

     

     

    I personally would want VR to purposefully NOT balance character classes for PvP. Leave them EXACTLY as they are in PvE. Some will be weaker than others, sure. But this will affect the server populations for PvP servers in 'real world' ways. Some will play the 'weaker' classes and may actually find an innovative way to redress this balance!

    Necessity is the mother of invention.

     

     

    100% spot on. yes

    • 428 posts
    October 31, 2016 12:16 PM PDT

    Amsai said: @ Kalgore See as this is Arena style you could make it where only a balanced group of roles are possible per match up. That's not dictating which classes but sayou a balanced amount of each role. So say 4 vs 4 is one of each tank, dps, CC, healer. And for solo matches as Raidan suggested Enchanter vs Enchanter. There are ways to balance it without having to balance each class. I think it's far better to balanceven per group. And if VR does a good job of balancing similar roles this shouldn't be an issue. And just for clarity when I say balance per role I mean that each class in a given role can adequately perform that role not that they are carbon copies of eachother in skills with different flavor text and animations.

     

    Yes and No.  If you have a balance group then sure,  But if you allow 6 wizards to enter as a team that can oneshot 2 or 3 people off the bat thats just stupid.  

    There are plenty of ways around this.  EQ2 had PVE damage every spell every attack every item Proc that did a buff heal or damage had a PVP checkbox.  It was there you saw how much it did in PVPvs PVE.  It also made it so PVE changes to a spell wouldnt affect PVP unless it was programed so it removed the whole Dont change PVE stats for PVP sakes.