Sorry if it was made unclear to some of you but I was not saying that on a PvP server should be able to unflag themselves for PvP.
"...just because the server is labeled PvE shouldn't mean the eradication of PvP imo, just that PvP is something you choose to do when you want more than something that comes to you."
I am stating that you should still have the option to flag yourselves on the PvE server and do PvP, and also have more structured PvP available "just that PvP is something you choose to do when you want" instead of the traditional PvP server "something that comes to you." with which I mean that PvP is something that can happen to you without you actually wanting it in that moment.
Althout a very small rules change it is something which is of extremly high impact on a server and player dynamic imo.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Youmu said:I am stating that you should still have the option to flag yourselves on the PvE server and do PvP
Basically, like the priest of discord in EQ1? I feel like the all the people who ever flagged for PvP on the PvE servers (either accidentally or intentionally) ended up regretting it. Would a mechanic like the Priest of Discord even be worth it for Pantheon? I always saw it as being a penalty for the noobs, and that no one who knew what it was ever used.
and also have more structured PvP available
What do you mean by "Structured" PvP? If you mean battlegrounds like in WoW and PvP mini-games, I am opposed to the idea. Plenty of other MMO's already have this.
I think players should make the structure of PvP. For example, if a guild wants to have team PvP, group 1 vs group 2, then they should go to the arena and organize the match themselves.
GM's can also organize PvP events. One of my fondest MMO memory of all time was winning the BotB ranger tournament on my server in Vanguard.
Having GM organized and player organized is exactly what I mean with structured PvP. I am not a the biggest fan of the WoW battlegrounds though I would like to have something like that out in the world instead of a seperate instance, having to go the the battleground itself to join it instead of queueing up and TPing in.
Events such as the Gurubashi Arena in old WoW is a cool example imo, where there was an event (don't remember if it was a daily/weekly/random event) where a chest with stuff was droppedin the middle and turned it all into a Free-For-All where everybody tried to loot the chest which had a pretty long "cast" time to open. Fun little things like this would be I think desireable.
Another thing I would really like is some kind of system and maybe ladder for Guild vs Guild stuff.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
I would not mind have open world zones on a PvE server that flag you when you walk in, such as a battlefield between three castle or something. When you zone in (by choice) you can join others and PvP all you want. Sometimes the server may offer objectives and rewards, and the rest of time it's just open PvP.
Ths is better than simply flagging. You can leave when you want. You don't have to wander around trying to find someone else that is also flagged. It's not a 5 minute structured battle that resets each time.
There will not be any PvP on the PvE servers unless it is a controlled event held by VR Staff or some kind of arena style zone implemented, we are intentionally keeping PvE and PvP separate as the two mindsets do not play well together and have shown in nearly every game over the last 20+ years that it is two completely different experience in which you either like doing both PvE on a PvE server or PvE and PvP on a PvP server, we will cater to a few different rule sets but PvE will be exactly that, player vs environment, there are a plethora of PvP games to choose from on the market currently, we are building a PvE game that will cater to PvP on separate servers and we want that to be very clear.
I definitely wouldn't mind arenas, but I don't want any organized PvP unless it's like a GM run BOTB tournament. I agree that PvP balancing ruins PvE.
EDIT: And if there are no arenas, duels will be enough for me.
Both - it's more immersive.
I enjoy casual pvp - fighting when I want to. Whether it's dueling, minigames or open world flagging (with a timer to unflag). I spend probably 75% of my time PVE and 25% pvp.
I always felt one of the things WoW did right was contagious pvp. If I flagged myself pvp and a friend helped me (healed for example) they would also flag pvp. This drew in so many people that I knew had no interest in pvp. They jumped in in to help me out and found out - hey - this isn't so bad and kinda fun. Very few got flagged and upset about it, very very few. Did they turn in to hard-core pvpers? No, but they also weren't afraid to get their hands dirty.
One time in particular I (Horde) got summoned to the outside of a dungeon and forgot I was flagged. Looked around and it was mostly Alliance players - I knew it was going to get ugly for me. :D Pretty soon we had 3 or 4 groups per side in a giant brawl. For a good 20 or 30 mins we all fought until groups started drifting away. In the end the two sides left each other alone and we headed to the dungeon. I apologized to my group for forgetting about my flag and every one said it was cool, they had fun, and may try out some mini's.
Look, I know pvp will be a seperate thing and all, but I can't help but feel it's a missed opportunity to give a more fuller world and experience - just make it so participation is optional.
Kilsin said:There will not be any PvP on the PvE servers unless it is a controlled event held by VR Staff or some kind of arena style zone implemented, we are intentionally keeping PvE and PvP separate as the two mindsets do not play well together and have shown in nearly every game over the last 20+ years that it is two completely different experience in which you either like doing both PvE on a PvE server or PvE and PvP on a PvP server, we will cater to a few different rule sets but PvE will be exactly that, player vs environment, there are a plethora of PvP games to choose from on the market currently, we are building a PvE game that will cater to PvP on separate servers and we want that to be very clear.
Would this exclude player held events, does this mean I would be unable to flag myself open for PvP on a PvE server?
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Youmu said:Kilsin said:There will not be any PvP on the PvE servers unless it is a controlled event held by VR Staff or some kind of arena style zone implemented, we are intentionally keeping PvE and PvP separate as the two mindsets do not play well together and have shown in nearly every game over the last 20+ years that it is two completely different experience in which you either like doing both PvE on a PvE server or PvE and PvP on a PvP server, we will cater to a few different rule sets but PvE will be exactly that, player vs environment, there are a plethora of PvP games to choose from on the market currently, we are building a PvE game that will cater to PvP on separate servers and we want that to be very clear.
Would this exclude player held events, does this mean I would be unable to flag myself open for PvP on a PvE server?
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
At this stage, no, you would not be able to flag yourself on a PvE server, there will most likely not be any PvP on the PvE servers at all (except in those few possible cases I mentioned above) if you want to kill other players it would be best to choose a PvP server as you will then be flagged for PvP permanently depending on the rule sets we have available.
This is a PvE game but we will allow players to be flagged for PvP on separate servers away from the general and majority fo PvE players.
I've been a fan of pvp since my days in FFXI (Ballista) and periodically thoroughout World of Warcraft. Currently with Legion as I dab around in it due to lack of games, the population of Horde vs Alliance is 80% to 20%. Meaning every open world area is an absolute ass beating to the token 1 to 2 Alliance among the 40/50 Horde. So... if done correctly and the opposing sides are balanced to some degree, I dont mind areas for it. Think I've been burned out on open world pvp free for all.
I'm just curious to why this desicion was taken. As being able to flag yourself voulentarily wouldn't force PvP on anyone and potentially give players on a PvE server the chance to do some PvP and allow for player run stuff more easily. Though I would be totally ok if we had areas where PvP was open (making it an optional and geographical thing as well) it is a bit confusing and I am very interested to hear the reasoning behind (as I understand from you) not having any PvP on a PvE server at all almost.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Youmu said:I'm just curious to why this desicion was taken. As being able to flag yourself voulentarily wouldn't force PvP on anyone and potentially give players on a PvE server the chance to do some PvP and allow for player run stuff more easily. Though I would be totally ok if we had areas where PvP was open (making it an optional and geographical thing as well) it is a bit confusing and I am very interested to hear the reasoning behind (as I understand from you) not having any PvP on a PvE server at all almost.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Because of balance issues. They are not making a PvP game so they do not want to have to worry about balancing PvP. I'm sure Duels will be possible, but not true PvP. Which is a good thing because too often PvP balance becomes an issue in the PvE game.
Balancing for PvP would still be a problem if they implement PvP servers (which they've said they would at launch) as they would need to keep that balanced and saying they concentrate on PvE and still make a PvP server to me sounds like a cheap way to get more players as people that enjoy PvP atleast a bit is more than just "a few", a notion that gives a very bad taste in my mouth and something I think VR is not about.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
Youmu said:Balancing for PvP would still be a problem if they implement PvP servers (which they've said they would at launch) as they would need to keep that balanced and saying they concentrate on PvE and still make a PvP server to me sounds like a cheap way to get more players as people that enjoy PvP atleast a bit is more than just "a few", a notion that gives a very bad taste in my mouth and something I think VR is not about.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
What exactly do you think is so problematic about PvP and requires extensive balancing? Pantheon is a group-based game that already demands classes effectiveness be balanced against others classes and members of similar roles. It's not like PvP changes that and turns it into Street Fighter.
I enjoy both PVE and PVP ...Problem when it comes to PVP is that Dev's try to balance the classes and thats what ruins the PVP experience. My opinion is leave things as they are and let players adapt.
With that being said there are also the stun lock classes that basically take away any chance to compete. I mean whats the fun fighting a class that can stealth/invis sneak up behind you, stun lock you, and kill you ? It seems the greifers always pick those classes. Would be nice if PVP could initiate when someone Kill steals a mob or try's to over run an area you've been camping for hours waiting for a certain drop.
This is going to be a group based game so the same thing should go for PVP if you get caught out in the open solo and your a melee class your probably going to die. If your that same Melee class your not going to solo a dungeon so the only reason you would be out in the open solo is to gather resources. In a PVP setting there are ways to combat that, go out with a resource gathering group prepared to fight if need be.
Agree on letting things alone in PvP. At least until there are insta-kill PvE abilities; those should be adjusted (see mana burn).
Diminishing returns > stun locking. Really, diminishing returns should be applied to any ability that allows damage while incapacitated; whether it's in pve or pvp.
PvE all the way. I love working with guildmates on trying to figure out how developers created encounters. Dueling is about the most PvP I do. If there are interesting PvP ideas like some battlegrounds or the like, I wouldn't mind PvPing at times. If PvP had goals that helped out in PvE via progression or abilitities, I would be more willing to PvP. Just my 2 cp.
Kilsin said:Do you prefer PvE or PvP or Both, and what draws you to that style over the other?
Disclaimer: We have already stated that we will be PvE based and PvP servers will be separate and have no effect on PvE. :)
I prefer PvE. I like working together with friends to overcome what the game has to offer be it group or raid content. Now I don't mind a little PvP as long as it's not forced. Maybe PvP minigames or something like a random PvP hotspot like EQ's Arena or maybe even a small zone battle from time to time between factions would be nice. But overall I'm a PvE guy.
Dullahan said:Youmu said:Balancing for PvP would still be a problem if they implement PvP servers (which they've said they would at launch) as they would need to keep that balanced and saying they concentrate on PvE and still make a PvP server to me sounds like a cheap way to get more players as people that enjoy PvP atleast a bit is more than just "a few", a notion that gives a very bad taste in my mouth and something I think VR is not about.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu SvartieWhat exactly do you think is so problematic about PvP and requires extensive balancing? Pantheon is a group-based game that already demands classes effectiveness be balanced against others classes and members of similar roles. It's not like PvP changes that and turns it into Street Fighter.
There is a HUGE difference in balancing PvE and PvP, you can even decide to have different approuches to PvP balance. An ability that CC's something for 30sec or 1min in PvE is not neccesarily balanced for PvP at all. Utility skills take on very different values in PvP and therefore saying that "if it is balanced in PvE it will be balanced in PvP" can't really apply, so yes, PvP changes a lot and "turns it into Street Fighter", taking on a very different kind of complexity. If it was easy it would had been done good in other games already, but the fact is that many MMO's PvP is very unbalanced.
//Voices of Terminus' Youmu Svartie
That's not what Dullahan was trying to say.
It is trivial to run a check on an ability landing on a player and alter its effects based on that. It is trivial to cap the maximum amount of damage a player can take in a single hit in PvP to prevent one shots. It is trivial to change the amount of incoming damage on a per-ability basis when it is used on a player. It is also trivially easy to disable certain effects from being usable in PvP in the first place to avoid some things that are too hard to balance to begin with.
It is possible to destroy PvE through PvP balance if you're an incompetent developer. Saying that it is an inevitability is just fear mongering and ignorance.
I like PvP because it adds an element of risk and surprise to the environment that is not programed into more PvE games. That said, in a game where travel is hard, death has a lot of meaning and it takes a lot of energy to reset to what you were once working on, open world PvP looses a lot of appeal as it devolves into heavy ganking and trolls looking for ways to screw up others plans as appose to actually adding meaning to the game.
So then, how to balance the interest PvP brings to an open world environment? In one word FACTION, and one that has meaning to world not just something arbitrary. I have always wanted to see Player Characters have faction associated with their home town and a general Good/Evil alignment. The hits should be magnified massively as a higher-level person kills someone lower. Orders of 10 to 100 times per 5 levels or so. This makes it more like the Chris Rock joke that you don’t need to take away guns, just make the bullets cost $10,000, that way if someone gets shot, you’ll just think, “damn that guy must have deserved it”.
You will need a way to allow for some slow recovery of a person’s faction. Perhaps its static, faction erodes at 10 points a day with an ability to do a “good deed” and add a few extra points back toward neutral.
The mechanics would have to be fleshed out, but I like PvP, but I hate that is carriers minimal meaning and seems to bring out of worst of the trolls. The number of times ive seen guild on guild wars for a boss are far out numbered by the times ives seen a 60 smash through some 20's.
Liav said:That's not what Dullahan was trying to say.
It is trivial to run a check on an ability landing on a player and alter its effects based on that. It is trivial to cap the maximum amount of damage a player can take in a single hit in PvP to prevent one shots. It is trivial to change the amount of incoming damage on a per-ability basis when it is used on a player. It is also trivially easy to disable certain effects from being usable in PvP in the first place to avoid some things that are too hard to balance to begin with.
It is possible to destroy PvE through PvP balance if you're an incompetent developer. Saying that it is an inevitability is just fear mongering and ignorance.
Oversimplistic, as usuaL. It not the coding that makes it difficult. The coding may be trivial, as you say.
However, it's the deci making and testing in what should effect players and how much it should affect players that matter. 1 minute, 30 seconds, 5 second, etc. Its those decisoon that cause so many angered players and frustrated Devs, mostly because no one agrees on what the result should be.
The users think they are not powerful enough. The targets think they are too powerful.
Delvesh said:So then, how to balance the interest PvP brings to an open world environment? In one word FACTION, and one that has meaning to world not just something arbitrary. I have always wanted to see Player Characters have faction associated with their home town and a general Good/Evil alignment. The hits should be magnified massively as a higher-level person kills someone lower. Orders of 10 to 100 times per 5 levels or so. This makes it more like the Chris Rock joke that you don’t need to take away guns, just make the bullets cost $10,000, that way if someone gets shot, you’ll just think, “damn that guy must have deserved it”.
Only draw back here is groups pushing low levels in to a fight specifically to trigger this massive hit - depending on how the pvp is designed. Obviously on closed maps it wouldn't happen, but in a more open world system it gets problematic - basically eliminates the use of AOE and the ability to retaliate against a mass of low levels.