Dullahan said:I think there should be diminishing returns in PvE and PvP on some abilities. I don't think it's necessary to allow someone to lock a player or a mob down for long durations. If a mez can last a minute, I think it's fair if recast within a window that it only last 30 or 45 seconds. That's just one more variable you have to account for that make combat more interesting. Maybe it requires you rotate through different types of impairment abilities to get the most out of them (root to long stun to mez, etc).
I'm glad you guys are discussing this...at the start of DAOC, there were no diminishing returns..so a caster and any other cc class could pin your group down and there wasn't much chance of fighting back, stun, mez, stun, mez...you might as well get up and go get a coffee you were gonna die, plain and simple...so diminishing returns helped reduce that effect.
Nope they weren't ..I joined Daoc pretty early on. The other thing with the invisible stealthers..there was no way to detect them hehe in the early days, you'd be heading back off the Old Frontiers and one of those little guys could hide inside a tree trunk..backstab, poison and you were done without ever seeing them. lol
Like most others I am heavily Involved in pve in most cases but the option for pvp should 100% be there. You gain a lot more player base by having this option. With that being said I would suggest somthing like EQ where you had arenas people could go to that was open pvp. Also obviously this the duel option.
Then also have separate servers as eq and most games do for pvp itself. As for an earlier comment about how pvp always becomes un balanced due to people just joining the stronger side, I would suggest this. Have no sides period. Humans can fight humans or any other race etc. So they only "side" is those you are friends and guild mates with.
I love pve it's my main focus but please don't forget pvp :p
Hempo said:I love my PVE but dont mind some PVP here and there. My only real concern is as always, if you try to get both in the game evenly you end up with a very bleh game imo. Pick one way or the other and go with it.
They've definitely chosen PvE to be the focus. And as a PvP enthusiast who gets bored out of my mind in PvP mmos, I'm glad they are. Having PvE progression offers more to fight over than castles and epeen ever did.
Dullahan said:Hempo said:I love my PVE but dont mind some PVP here and there. My only real concern is as always, if you try to get both in the game evenly you end up with a very bleh game imo. Pick one way or the other and go with it.
They've definitely chosen PvE to be the focus. And as a PvP enthusiast who gets bored out of my mind in PvP mmos, I'm glad they are. Having PvE progression offers more to fight over than castles and epeen ever did.
I've always made it a point not to fight over epeen, so based on that premise I have to agree.
As much as I enjoy Player vs Player content I'm going to have to stick with PvE in Pantheon. The decision ultimately comes down to with how poorly PvP was implemented for both EverQuest, and Vanguard Saga of Heroes.
If you have 15 minutes google "Fansy The Famous Bard".
For me, I have been looking for an mmo that blends the PvE and PvP together in a logical way. Much like some of the class combination decisions you gusy (VR) posted about may make sense. Places like Gladiator arenas for people to test themselves against others in various locations aroudn the world. Pit fighting if you will. I can see the orges maybe having something like this for sure.
Maybe certain quests or boss or areas could be pvp as it relates to pve. Maybe the first team to conquer the boss int he area gets a prize or something, much liek you see in some anime these days. Like an NPC at a random time or event gives out prizes based on who killed or collected the most stuff and you are allowed to pvp to take the items or bounties other players collected. You would need various members int eh group to watch out for stealthyier people or break cc, or cc people..... antoehr point to the grouping theme in this game.
I think for this game especially it would be wise to think of how PvP realtes to the PvE in a wholesome manner. Obviously in any world fighters and other peoepl will want to prove they are the best.
On another note, maybe PvP could encompass other stuff like best alchemy vs other players, best building, crafter vs crafter. tactician vs tactician.
Just try and think of something that fits together in the world as a whole and makes sense about fitting in with the theme of the entire game world!
Flak said:As much as I enjoy Player vs Player content I'm going to have to stick with PvE in Pantheon. The decision ultimately comes down to with how poorly PvP was implemented for both EverQuest, and Vanguard Saga of Heroes.
If you have 15 minutes google "Fansy The Famous Bard".
Fansy was known for shenanigans and training, not for pvp. PvP was great in EQ, and only imbalanced in Vanguard by the same imbalances that existed in PvE.
Well if you choose to add pvp servers your going to split the community thats unavoidable. Once you unleash the smallest bit of PvP your opening Pandoras box and there's no putting the lid back on.
While I like PvP and PvE in the same game and it draws in tons of people, its a big step that needs the proper planning, implementation and direction or it will just be a problem causer. The only PvP I've seen in recent MMO's That balanced the two well is ESO's giant scale map pvp with the 3 factions and small open world pvp in a specific pvp zone. If you want to pvp you join those zones that are meant for purely pvp purposes so PvE doesnt Miss out on anything if they dont utilize it and PvP'ers get to blow each other up.
With that said I could see some really fun times on a PvP server with different factions taking over towns and parts of the world. The dynamics of hard mobs + enemy players sounds awesome in theory.
Dullahan said:Flak said:As much as I enjoy Player vs Player content I'm going to have to stick with PvE in Pantheon. The decision ultimately comes down to with how poorly PvP was implemented for both EverQuest, and Vanguard Saga of Heroes.
If you have 15 minutes google "Fansy The Famous Bard".
Fansy was known for shenanigans and training, not for pvp. PvP was great in EQ, and only imbalanced in Vanguard by the same imbalances that existed in PvE.
I would have to disagree, at the end of the day he accomplished his mission which was killing people on the evil team with minimal blowback. We could argue true PvP versus abusing game mechanics all day, but when it becomes such a problem that Sony has to change the server rules because of a single individual, that individual wins. As for Vanguard I'm with you 110% on that statement.
The idea of PvP in an MMORPG never made sense to me. With the Trinity class system, where characters support each others abilities, how can you then pit them against each other and expect to have a balance encounter? A healer would always loose to a fighter, just as a fighter would loose against a difficult PvE encounter without a healer and other friends supporting him.
The entire model of an MMORPG is about helping each other, not about one v one fights. The only way to have any form of PvP in an MMORPG is in RvR, where supporting groups of characters go into battle, but even then you will find inbalance because the characters where primarily designed for PvE encounters.
In my experience, the majority of players don't enjoy PvP, and you usually find PvP servers lacking in population, ending up with a few "gankers" and little actual PvP.
I think it's best to put resources into good PvE content. It adds to the world, building community. Isn't that what we all want?
Mortam said:The idea of PvP in an MMORPG never made sense to me. With the Trinity class system, where characters support each others abilities, how can you then pit them against each other and expect to have a balance encounter? A healer would always loose to a fighter, just as a fighter would loose against a difficult PvE encounter without a healer and other friends supporting him.
The entire model of an MMORPG is about helping each other, not about one v one fights. The only way to have any form of PvP in an MMORPG is in RvR, where supporting groups of characters go into battle, but even then you will find inbalance because the characters where primarily designed for PvE encounters.
In my experience, the majority of players don't enjoy PvP, and you usually find PvP servers lacking in population, ending up with a few "gankers" and little actual PvP.
I think it's best to put resources into good PvE content. It adds to the world, building community. Isn't that what we all want?
I do i enjoy PvP, especially as an endgame feature.
Indeed, sooner or later, you'll beat the game (dungeons etc). Then which challenge still remains ? Other players, that have the same gear, the same tactics and skills as you.
You say you want cooperation, that you think you only find in PvE, but what about group PvP ? solo PvP may not be as interesting, i can agree on that, but mass PvP is a lot of fun. I remember having a lot of epic fights in other MMOs with group vs group, guild vs guild, or server vs server fights. Everyone feels more useful, may it be healer, DPS, support, because everything is critical. You can't make a mistake against a human player, he'll always take advantage of it. There is a lot of cooperation inside the group, with a big challenge too because you're on the exact same level as the opponent.
For me, the issue with PvP has been the small, but not insignificant, groups of PvP players who delight in seeing themselves as sociopathic collectives/gangs who spend the entirity of their time going out of their way to make all other players' lives hell... or rather, put them in hell (dead). Having played many PvP titles, including those with FFA looting etc, the community rarely seems to mature fast enough to keep these roving bands of murderers at bay! To this end, it seems unlikely (though still possible) that I would play on a PvP server.
However....
... something I would certainly consider strongly would be :
BATTLE-ROYALE Server (full PvP)
These servers run for a fixed time-cycle:
--- of say, 1 week, 2 Weeks, 1 month, 3 months or 6 months etc.
1. Time period is fixed (there is count-down clock)
2. Any death is permanent
3. Corpses are lootable
4. Last man standing, or any alive when time runs out, win.
---At end of Battle---
1. Anyone alive can transfer to either:
(a) any PvP or PvE server, OR
(b) enter next Battle-Royale server open
2. Being alive gets title/achievement
3. Being alive (optionally) also gives (in-game) cash reward based on placement, E.g.:
1st = 100 plat/level, 2nd = 50 plat/level, 3rd = 25 plat/level
4th-10th = 10 plat/level, 11-25th = 5 plat/level
placement = based on 'number of levels gained while server up'
This is not fully-fleshed out - but hopefully you get the idea!
I prefer PVE in my old age :P As I've gotten older my reflexes are not as good. With that said I have enjoyed games with PVP content and backed most of them. I'm just at the point were i want to come home kiss my wife enjoy dinner and then log in with my friends and go dungeon hunting and have fun. I like the sense of accomplishment you get during these types of experiences.
PvE in MMOs. I get my competitive energy out in FPS and Fighting games and with MMOs I don't want to always be looking over my shoulder, I just want to enjoy socializing/grouping/exploring.
I do like the option of PvP though, which is one of the few good things from instancing as I was always a fan of different battlegrounds. I had many great times in the battlegrounds from DAoC, WoW, and Wildstar. I like my MMO PvP the same as I like my competitive games: with as much balance as possible, so even teams and with as close of level/skill/gear as can be managed.
Flak said:I would have to disagree, at the end of the day he accomplished his mission which was killing people on the evil team with minimal blowback. We could argue true PvP versus abusing game mechanics all day, but when it becomes such a problem that Sony has to change the server rules because of a single individual, that individual wins. As for Vanguard I'm with you 110% on that statement.
I have to be honest about this, because it impacts the whole "PVP vrs PVE balancing" issue. I also played a bard and started out on a red server (I wasn't Fancy, don't worry). I contributed to a number of bard nerfs and a few alterations, myself.
Here's my issue with that, and it sounds arrogant, but it's not. It's just hard to say this without acknowledging that I was exceptional at playing a bard... the problem with the bard nerfs was that they nerfed a class based on a few exceptional individuals. Bards were such a unique (and never since even remotely replicated in their level of uniqueness and their particular requirement for exceptional playing)... that they should never have been used as an excuse for nerfing the environment. In particular, a few exceptional individuals, playing an exceptionally difficult class, in a PVP (read: secondary) environement, should never have led to wholesale nerfs across all servers.
It's one thing to nerf bards in PVP, but to nerf them completely and to make sweeping game changes based on PVP (the least common environment) was, imo, a mistake.
My biggest beef with PVP was how it injured PVE so egregiously at times (and not only in EQ-happened in WoW, too). To add insult to injury, a handful (at most) of exceptional players led to these catastrophic nerfs... So not only was it a minority, but it was even the greatest minority of THAT minority that caused tremendous difficulty for the majority.
I hope that the Devs will commit to protecing PVE from nerfs caused by the gnashing of PVP teeth...
PvP.
I absolutely love PvE, but I need that something extra to keep me entertained. My favourite type of PvP has been from Everquest and Vanguard. A game where you PvP over PvE targets, to gain gear that allows you to PvP more effectively over said PvE. A game where PvP death means something, most MMO's actually reward you in some way for losing in PvP these days. It's a constant cycle, all about content control, and player/guild politicis play a significant role. It's so much more in depth than your typical battleground/arena type MMO that completely separates PvP from PvE.
In todays day and age you can balance PvP without affecting PvE. It isn't difficult to have an ability have a lesser, greater, or an entirely different effect all together while you have a player targetted instead of an NPC.
People that play PvP in this type of game should also know that classes will never be completely balanaced from a 1v1 stand point. Certain classes will always have an advantage over others, and they should, it's primarily a group based game, grouping and team play balances out 1v1 class imbalances.
The niche for this type of PvP is a lot larger than most would believe, and I'm excited that we'll have at least one PvP server at launch.
Personally, I'm a big fan of PvP and if it were available in some form, I'd be happy to participate. I've played both casual and hard core pvp MMOs (Darkfall and Mortal Online) and they all have a common theme I really enjoy. A good implementation of open world PvP provides a sense of real danger, layered on top of scripted PvE, while also creating an emergent combat mechanic, which typically requires the full range of a player's skill to overcome. In PvE, once I’ve identified and learned how to overcome a scripted enemy encounter, I can re-use that same strategy, repeatedly (with some variation depending on circumstances) to defeat the enemy as often as required with a near 100% chance of success. However, with an enemy player, it's totally un-scripted and different every single time. This adds an interesting layer of game play for those people who enjoy PvP.
It is true that there are some downsides to PvP. The one everyone always points to is the "griefer". I've experienced this many times and yes, it's annoying. However, I opted in knowing that I might encounter this type of player so complaining about it makes no sense. If it’s bullying then a GM usually handles it, however, typically I log out for 5 mins and the player moves on. It’s a rare occurrence but it happens. However, the positive experience I have trying to get from point A to point B while evading bandits (played by other players) or defending myself from some rogue that jumped me while I'm questing far outweighs the occasional jerk I encounter from time to time.
In my opinion, the sense of danger and emergent combat in open world PvP is what I find compelling. My wish-list for PvP would be the following:
1. Opt-In - Dedicated server for people who enjoy PvP
2. Open World - Create a sense of danger and provide for an extra layer of emergent, un-scripted combat for those who enjoy this
3. PvP Rank Mechanic - Ways to level or acquire skills that help you in PvP, like DAoC realm points. Rank is visible in the player tag for noteriety purposes. I like this better than armor/weapons as it emphasizes character development vs loot.
4. No BGs - I personally am not a fan of BGs in an open world PvP game (which is the assumption I'm making for this post) as it ruins the open world experience with everyone queuing up for BGS, leaving the world empty :).
5. Leader Boards – This adds a spirit of competition and helps encourage PvP
Just my 2.5 cents here, I know there are strong opinions on this topic :)
PvP Servers? That's cool...
PvP Zones! Now you're cookin something.
PVP LOOT REWARDS?! TAKE MY MONEY!