Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The latest devblog. Forced PvP is gone.

168101112

Comments

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    Iselin said:
    Brainy said:
    The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward.  The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE.  People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people.  You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.


    FTFY.


    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    Chamber of Chains
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,677
    cheyane said:
    Iselin said:
    Brainy said:
    The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward.  The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE.  People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people.  You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.


    FTFY.


    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.

    I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.

    YashaX
    "I don't wait for games. Games wait for me."
    -- CHUCK NORRIS

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    edited July 2020
    Iselin said:
    cheyane said:
    Iselin said:
    Brainy said:
    The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward.  The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE.  People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people.  You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.


    FTFY.


    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.

    I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.

    Every choice a developer makes is to encourage certain game play. Whether it ultimately succeeds is beyond their control. 

    However I can bet the spots where those resources spawn will be camped by players in stealth waiting for easy kills. That is how the content ends up being used as. It does not matter what the developer wanted it will be what the player decides and goodness me I would not want to stifle a player's creativity in how they want to use that content.

    I have played PvP games where resources are in PvP areas. I have gone there to get it. I didn't enjoy it one bit and why you might ask is it different from avoiding mobs when I go to a high level area to harvest. I can expect the high level mob to behave in a certain way and I cannot predict how a real player might behave. To a player that enjoys PvP that is the fun and joy of it to me it is a horrible deterrent.

    The fundamental difference many PvP players cannot understand is why a PvE player cannot accept things the way they can. This is exactly why you should not force these types players together. Many people fall in the areas of the Venn diagram where both sides overlap. Those players are comfortable playing both types of games. Forget the idea that if you make it so they cannot avoid those areas the PvE player will somehow end up enjoying the PvP.  All it did for me was dislike it even more.

    Trying to cater to every type of player is the real problem here.
    itchmonbcbully
    Chamber of Chains
  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 15,677
    cheyane said:
    Iselin said:
    cheyane said:
    Iselin said:
    Brainy said:
    The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward.  The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE.  People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people.  You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.


    FTFY.


    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    Well here's the thing about looking at this without a PVP or PVE bias: it is not about providing easy kills to PvPers it's about having unique things that a certain type of player has easy access to that players who don't do that type of content won't. Raiding is no different.

    I have zero problems with those systems as long as the resources or items in question are not made bind on pick up and can be freely traded in the AH giving raiders and PvPers a unique economic niche advantage and players who want nothing to do with either of those things access to the resources or items.

    Every choice a developer makes is to encourage certain game play. Whether it ultimately succeeds is beyond their control. 

    However I can bet the spots where those resources spawn will be camped by players in stealth waiting for easy kills. That is how the content ends up being used as. It does not matter what the developer wanted it will be what the player decides and goodness me I would not want to stifle a player's creativity in how they want to use that content.

    I have played PvP games where resources are in PvP areas. I have gone there to get it. I didn't enjoy it one bit and why you might ask is it different from avoiding mobs when I go to a high level area to harvest. I can expect the high level mob to behave in a certain way and I cannot predict how a real player might behave. To a player that enjoys PvP that is the fun and joy of it to me it is a horrible deterrent.

    The fundamental difference many PvP players cannot understand is why a PvE player cannot accept things the way they can. This is exactly why you should not force these types players together. Many people fall in the areas of the Venn diagram where both sides overlap. Those players are comfortable playing both types of games. Forget the idea that if you make it so they cannot avoid those areas the PvE player will somehow end up enjoying the PvP.  All it did for me was dislike it even more.

    Trying to cater to every type of player is the real problem here.
    Well I enjoy both although as I have stated many times here, I don't enjoy open world PvP everywhere. I want it in separate zones like DAoC, ESO and others do it so when the mood strikes me I can do one type without another player imposing his preferred style on me.

    If I want an item that comes only from PvP and I'm not in the mood I just buy it... works for me.
    cheyaneultimateduck
    "I don't wait for games. Games wait for me."
    -- CHUCK NORRIS

    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    cheyane said:
    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    The increased rewards, both for raiding and for PVP, are not there to reward playstyle choice or preference (which is what you point as the difference). They are there to reward increased challenge and potentially risk. Rejecting this implies you do not want to reward players porportionately for their efforts in a multiplayer game. In this context, substituting one word for the other is fine.
    [Deleted User]YashaX
  • BloodaxesBloodaxes Member EpicPosts: 4,520
    Not to butt in or anything, but I'm sure the discussion being made is in general not for this specific game.
    tzervoitchmon

  • ultimateduckultimateduck Member RarePosts: 825
    Rhoklaw said:
    Brainy said:
    If PVP was popular, why would you have to give incentives greater than PVE zones?  Its obvious PVP MMOs is a losing concept.  They have to have some PVE just to pull people in.

    Here is a thought, why don't they give greater incentives to PVE zones, make resources 2x or 3x more?  LOL there would be zero people in PVP zones then.  Just shows PVP zones are dead without OP incentives.

    The same reason they give incentives for PvE, because progression is important.

    PvP is harder and less consistent than PvE so the rewards are either greater or overall different. There's nothing overly challenging about farming PvE mobs. Fighting another person is a different story.

    I don't know if the PvP rewards in this game are greater than the PvE rewards, but there's a reason if it was.
    So why have incentives at all? Just let players play how they wish? If they want to PvP, than they can make a PvP character and PvP other PvP players. The whole point is, not every PvE player wants to have to PvP. At the same time, you could reward PvP players based on how good they are. Such as lootable currency from killed players used to buy better gear.

    As mentioned above, why does anything aspect beyond standard questing/PvE have incentives? In most games, you have to go on a raid to get the best gear and most of the time you have to do that raid many times before getting what you want making it incredibly repetitive. Why have those incentives at all?

    In reality, a game with basic PvE and nothing else, where all the best loot would randomly drop off trash mobs, would be a boring game.

    YashaX
  • TwitchTaranissTwitchTaraniss Member UncommonPosts: 12
    I always preferred separate loot/rewards. I enjoy PVP myself and never minded when games had gear or items that were rewarded in PVP but did not work in raids. "Gain XX amount of damage when flagged for PVP". I always thought this was a way to reward the players who do prefer to PVP but it was not hurting those who had no interest. I also think cosmetics matter in games regardless of how many people say they don't care. Over and over again in games we see cosmetics sell and many players wanting their toon to look a certain way. Making PVE and PVP drops have different cosmetic looks imo is a way to get someone to play both as well. It is not a reward that changes the game what so ever but it does make the player who wants that specific look or pet engage in something they usually don't to make it happen. 



    I disagree that PVE is made for the fun of doing the raid and quest and the rewards are just a bonus. If a raid boss has a small % chance to drop a piece of gear that I need I will continue to do that boss until I get the gear. Once myself and the guild have that gear we most likely won't do that boss anymore. If that took us 6 months to all get the gear then so be it. But we were not doing it for "fun", we did it for the reward and once we all received the reward we stopped. It is fun the first or second time imo.
    YashaX
    Twitch - https://www.twitch.tv/taraniss

    Legends - Heroes fade..Legends last Forever
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    edited July 2020
    tzervo said:
    cheyane said:
    Here's the difference between raiding in PvE and placing resources in the PvP area to provide sheep for the PvP players. 

    Raiding isn't about providing another player an easy target to kill. It is about working together to conquer the AI in a dungeon. No matter how stupid the AI is in your opinion, the PvE players do not feel like they are being hunted and are simply in the area even when they have no wish to be there so that the game can be enjoyed by players who kill them.

    The difference is choice. One is to work together as part of a group whether you provide DPS or support while the other makes the player feel like prey. Honestly for me personally I want to play where I can work with other players and not look over my shoulder while running towards a node to harvest in fear.

    So you cannot fix the opinion by substituting raiding for PvP because they are fundamentally different. I think you know that but I suppose being facetious is part of the problem.
    The increased rewards, both for raiding and for PVP, are not there to reward playstyle choice or preference (which is what you point as the difference). They are there to reward increased challenge and potentially risk. Rejecting this implies you do not want to reward players porportionately for their efforts in a multiplayer game. In this context, substituting one word for the other is fine.
    That only works if it is a PvP game and the rewards are for PvP players only. If it is mixed game where the developers are trying to force the PvE players to go to the PvP zones then it is not the same as rewarding a PvP player now is it? You're basically forcing the PvE players to go the zones that have the resources. The increased rewards should affect all players equally. However the PvE players are facing a risk they have no wish to take and are ill equipped for. Raiding isn't approached with the same mind set and if it does I would question my engagement.

    Therefore you are not rewarding the PvE players anything because they are going there for the resources which isn't a reward. Resources are not rewards unlike Raid loot. They could become part of raid loot where some games place some resources in raid areas but they are not the same as Raid loot. Loot is loot and resources are not loot. There is a difference.

    I maintain you cannot compare a raid to killing easy targets that have no wish to participate in PvP. There is no equal comparison between raiding and randomly killing of some sod mining in a PvP zone. Therefore substituting  'raid' for 'PvP' doesn't work in this context and for that matter in any game involving two completely different playstyles. Mixing them by the contrived placement of resources is an insult to a PvE player but I am willing to do it if there are other things the game offers.

     I would agree that it would be rewarding if the developers specifically rewarded the PvE players with actual loot for going to PvP zones to provide content for the PvP players. Now that would be something don't you think? 
    Chamber of Chains
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    All this discussion is of little value unless developers respect the chosen play style of their players instead of trying to capture a larger market share by going after the PvE players. They do this and then think up ways to make the game palatable to the PvE players who wouldn't bother to play their game but it merely creates resentment and unhappiness.

    I witnessed this very thing in Aion and quit soon after when I realised how they tricked me. I am not going to go and complain or anything on their forums since it was my own naivety that I should place the blame on but these days I research a game and decide what risks I wish to take. I play PvP games within my parameters and comfort zone.

    Games that do not tempt me or provide me with enough security from PvP I avoid. 
    YashaX
    Chamber of Chains
  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    cheyane said:
    That only works if it is a PvP game and the rewards are for PvP players only. If it is mixed game where the developers are trying to force the PvE players to go to the PvP zones then it is not the same as rewarding a PvP player now is it? You're basically forcing the PvE players to go the zones that have the resources. The increased rewards should affect all players equally. However the PvE players are facing a risk they have no wish to take and are ill equipped for. Raiding isn't approached with the same mind set and if it does I would question my engagement. 
    That's a flawed assumption. Devs in these situations are not trying to lure PVP-averse players to the resources, they simply reward risk with higher value resources. A PVP-averse player can always buy off those resources, substituting risk with extra time and effort.

    What would make more sense to me for a PVP-averse player would be to request an equally challenging type of PVE content with high value rewards (such as raids or an open world equivalent, if they do not want to go the instanced route).
    cheyane said:

    Therefore you are not rewarding the PvE players anything because they are going there for the resources which isn't a reward. Resources are not rewards unlike Raid loot. They could become part of raid loot where some games place some resources in raid areas but they are not the same as Raid loot. Loot is loot and resources are not loot. There is a difference.
    I don't see any fundamental difference, could you explain? The way I see it, both PVP map resources and raid loot have a perceived player value (market value, progression/gear value, bragging rights) and both should be proportional to the risk, effort or skill required.
    cheyane said:

    I maintain you cannot compare a raid to killing easy targets that have no wish to participate in PvP. There is no equal comparison between raiding and randomly killing of some sod mining in a PvP zone. Therefore substituting  'raid' for 'PvP' doesn't work in this context and for that matter in any game involving two completely different playstyles. Mixing them by the contrived placement of resources is an insult to a PvE player but I am willing to do it if there are other things the game offers.

     I would agree that it would be rewarding if the developers specifically rewarded the PvE players with actual loot for going to PvP zones to provide content for the PvP players. Now that would be something don't you think? 
    You are still under the false assumption that this is typically done to lure PVP-averse players in PVP. Putting high value resources in PVP areas is typically a design decision that facilitates risk vs reward.

    Also, not all PVE players are PVP or risk averse. Some are willing to accept the risk because they think that the reward is worth it, and this risk gives meaning to their content. It's just a different target audience with different playstyle preferences. Not all players are either killers or "PVE only" players, there is also a middle ground (I belong to that middle ground).
    YashaX
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    edited July 2020
    Developers have admitted that to encourage PvP they place higher tier resources in PvP zones. 

    That guy from Albion Online said as much.

    The problem is the developers ask and encourage players who are not keen on PvP to play their games by giving them false assurances. Bless Online even gave PvE players the option to purchase immunity items from their real money shop which admittedly was a pretty scummy thing to do but something they considered and used.

    It isn't about the players who don't mind PvP, they are fine with it. It is the dishonesty that developers practice to increase the population of their games. You're mistaken because I have read interviews where developers admitted one method to ensure and encourage PvP adverse players from considering and participating in PvP was to place resources or high value dungeons in those areas. It is a known tactic.

    In Dark Age of Camelot which has a lot of areas that are only for PvE but they made a very lucrative dungeon (Darkness Falls I think it is called ) in a PvP area. Although in that game most of the PvP is actually in another zone they did it to encourage more participation from PvE players who want to try their hand at PvP. This was what they thought might ease players averse to PvP to try PvP, it is not an unknown motive and one developers have used in many games.

    They did exactly this in Aion too and it pissed a lot of the PvE players enough because those zones were constantly camped by high level players waiting to kill us and we had no chance against their levels.

    I think you aren't aware of this because you have no problem with PvP but since I do and have played in these games where the expectation and the actual reality were vastly different and participated in many discussions on the forums for those games I have a very keen memory of the reasons those resources were placed in those zones in Aion.

    Answer me this then, if it isn't to lure PvE players why did New World make the changes they did ?
    [Deleted User]Brainy
    Chamber of Chains
  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    cheyane said:
    Developers have admitted that to encourage PvP they place higher tier resources in PvP zones. 

    That guy from Albion Online said as much.
    Encouraging PVP != trying to lure PVE-averse players into PVP areas. In a PVP game like Albion it makes sense to put these rewards there to facilitate high risk high reward PVP and competition over resources for PVP players. AO (like EVE) never hid that their target was primarily players that are fine with or are after full loot OWPVP. And it works:

    https://massivelyop.com/2020/02/11/albion-online-now-counts-350k-monthly-active-players-plans-major-alliance-changes/

    Also, AO has its own version of higher reward purely PVE content (HCE, hard core expeditions), as well as arenas (non-full loot, normalized PVP) for those that want it.
    cheyane said:

    The problem is the developers ask and encourage players who are not keen on PvP to play their games by giving them false assurances. Bless Online even gave PvE players the option to purchase immunity items from their real money shop which admittedly was a pretty scummy thing to do but something they considered and used.

    It isn't about the players who don't mind PvP, they are fine with it. It is the dishonesty that developers practice to increase the population of their games. You're mistaken because I have read interviews where developers admitted one method to ensure and encourage PvP adverse players from considering and participating in PvP was to place resources or high value dungeons in those areas. It is a known tactic.
    Bless Online is a bad example, everything about it was a scam, including this item that you mention which was just a monetization shenanigan.

    Some devs do try to mix the two crowds (Legends of Aria, Worlds Adrift come to mind) and that is naive/dishonest and has failed miserably in the past. But "PVE only" players abuse these examples and extrapolate them to all games that have PVP over resources because it fits their story - you did this for example with AO.

    To my understanding, New World tries to cater to both and keep them separately but just does not have the time and bandwidth to do that properly given their recent change of heart. If they do not give appropriate rewards for the risk, they will lose the PVP players, since OWPVP without risk/reward and high stakes is meaningless and boring - you can always get that from a MOBA or shooter. If they do not give enough separate content for the PVE players, they will correspondingly lose that audience.
    YashaX
  • HuntrezzHuntrezz Member UncommonPosts: 92
    Forced pvp is gone - Me:  Takes game out of never to play ever folder and places in wait and see folder.
    [Deleted User]
  • GaendricGaendric Member UncommonPosts: 624
    Trying to reach both audiences is risky business.
    OWPvP only shines if the entire game is designed for it. 

    tzervo[Deleted User]
  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,888
    SkitzoX said:
    YashaX said:
    Wizardry said:
    Isn't required pvp the same as forced?
    You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point.
    I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever?
    The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?

    Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?


    When a territory is weakened it becomes vulnerable to attack. If another faction then declares war on that territory the defenders get to pick a time window for when the siege will take place, but they cannot simply ignore the challenge. An individual player or guild can of course choose not to participate in the fight for the territory.


    The funny part is if your guild spends the day running faction missions to put a specific territory into a conflicted state so you can declare war... ANY company in your faction (even 1 man alt guilds from other factions) can sign up to declare war. Every company that signs up is put into a vanguard lottery where the company that actually gets to do the war declaration and siege is chosen completely random. The system is so broke. 

    Is there any benefit to being the vanguard other than just getting to choose/recruit who fights in the War?
    ....
  • bcbullybcbully Member EpicPosts: 10,352
    So do you a full game free game or half a restricted game? 
  • cheyanecheyane Member LegendaryPosts: 7,969
    Do a full free game and cater to the players that originally wanted it. They are halfassing it and it does no good to anyone.
    tzervo
    Chamber of Chains
  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 2,888
    SkitzoX said:
    YashaX said:
    SkitzoX said:
    YashaX said:
    Wizardry said:
    Isn't required pvp the same as forced?
    You are barely even playing the game and getting nowhere without pvp.Well your alternative is to join a powerful guild and be one of the few within that doesn't take part but then like i said,you will barely be playing the game at that point.
    I don't even know how their 50-50 is going to work,what if you don't have 50 players?What if your guild was fast and got a nice spot and don't want to pvp ...ever?
    The only term i have seen is the term "challenge"you can challenge another fort,that doesn't mean they must accept,or does it?

    Since they are steadfast on the claim there is no FORCED pvp that means your guild/fort never have to accept a challenge ever,does it not?


    When a territory is weakened it becomes vulnerable to attack. If another faction then declares war on that territory the defenders get to pick a time window for when the siege will take place, but they cannot simply ignore the challenge. An individual player or guild can of course choose not to participate in the fight for the territory.


    The funny part is if your guild spends the day running faction missions to put a specific territory into a conflicted state so you can declare war... ANY company in your faction (even 1 man alt guilds from other factions) can sign up to declare war. Every company that signs up is put into a vanguard lottery where the company that actually gets to do the war declaration and siege is chosen completely random. The system is so broke. 

    Is there any benefit to being the vanguard other than just getting to choose/recruit who fights in the War?
    The vanguard guild has 100% control over selecting the attacking roster and if they win they gain control over the settlement. That means they would set the taxes for crafting fees, housing rent etc as well as decide on any or what upgrades to go after or to provides settlement buffs etc. 
    On the surface at least, that sounds like it would significantly reduce the motivation for guilds to work at destabilizing the enemy faction. However, now that there is no pvp outside of the sieges is there anything else for guilds to do? 
    ....
  • BrainyBrainy Member RarePosts: 598
    Iselin said:
    Brainy said:
    The question is not about giving an extra incentive/reward.  The question is why does PVP Raiding NEED to have larger rewards than PVE.  People wont do it without the bonuses which sounds like PVP Raiding is like alot like WORK to most people.  You have to pay these people to go out to these areas.


    FTFY.

    I doubt many PVE'ers have issues with more difficult PVE content having higher rewards.  In classic WOW right now, world bosses actually have some of the best loot.  But either way its PVE.

    What I do agree with however, is that you shouldn't require PVPers to RAID PVE dungeons for PVP gear or resources.  Just like you shouldn't require PVE'ers to go to PVP zones to get their PVE gear/resources.

    If a game is going offer both play-styles then they should have two types of resources and keep the best PVP gear in PVP zones and the resources to make that gear in PVP zones.  They should also put the best PVE gear in PVE zones with the resources to make that in those zones.
    ultimateduck[Deleted User]
  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    Brainy said:

    I doubt many PVE'ers have issues with more difficult PVE content having higher rewards.  In classic WOW right now, world bosses actually have some of the best loot.  But either way its PVE.
    There's two types of PVE'ers: those that do not want PVP because they sincerely dislike conflict, and those that don't like to see others prove to be better than them out of petty jealousy. The second group dislikes higher rewards even in hard PVE content and they are actually quite vocal: you will see them complain about elitism, splitting up the community, unfair rewards etc. In my experience the ones complaining about rewards (not content) being higher for PVP players usually belong to that second group.
    Iselinultimateduck
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,546
    tzervo said:
    <snip>
    You are still under the false assumption that this is typically done to lure PVP-averse players in PVP. Putting high value resources in PVP areas is typically a design decision that facilitates risk vs reward.

    It is a one-sided risk based on play-style/preferences.  Where is the risk for the PvP centric player?



    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    Mendel said:
    It is a one-sided risk based on play-style/preferences.  Where is the risk for the PvP centric player?
    In well designed PVP games it is not one-sided:

    1) He may be killed by another PVP player while hunting.

    2) The gatherer may slip off if he is good (cat and mouse game, sometimes the mouse is faster/smarter and gets away with the cheese) and the PVP centric player ends up with nothing but wasted time. A good PVP game with resource gathering provides escape mechanisms and awareness tools for skilled/knowledgeable gatherers to balance things off and make them interesting.

    3) The gatherer might be able to fight him off (I was sometimes doing this to pick fights in Albion Online, gathering in fighting gear and getting into scuffles with gankers).

    4) He may be gathering in guild territory under the protection of his guild in exchange for part of his gathered mats, which in return get used so that the guild keeps holding the territory.
    ultimateduck
  • MendelMendel Member EpicPosts: 4,546
    tzervo said:
    Mendel said:
    It is a one-sided risk based on play-style/preferences.  Where is the risk for the PvP centric player?
    In well designed PVP games it is not one-sided:

    1) He may be killed by another PVP player while hunting.

    2) The gatherer may slip off if he is good (cat and mouse game, sometimes the mouse is faster/smarter and gets away with the cheese) and the PVP centric player ends up with nothing but wasted time. A good PVP game with resource gathering provides escape mechanisms and awareness tools for skilled/knowledgeable gatherers to balance things off and make them interesting.

    3) The gatherer might be able to fight him off (I was sometimes doing this to pick fights in Albion Online, gathering in fighting gear and getting into scuffles with gankers).

    4) He may be gathering in guild territory under the protection of his guild in exchange for part of his gathered mats, which in return get used so that the guild keeps holding the territory.

    None of these are additional risks to what the player expects as part of that play style.  With a PvE player, this is an additional risk beyond what they would normally expect.



    bcbullyYashaX

    Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.

  • tzervotzervo Member EpicPosts: 1,315
    edited July 2020
    Mendel said:

    None of these are additional risks to what the player expects as part of that play style.  With a PvE player, this is an additional risk beyond what they would normally expect.
    Why would a PVE player not expect the risk when going into the PVP area? This makes no sense.

    All I mentioned above are part of the risk vs reward design of such a gameloop for both sides:

    - the hunter is trying to get loot by killing gatherers and risks by getting killed by other hunters, more skilled gatherers or just getting back empty handed

    - the gatherer is risking their neck (and potentially their gear if full loot) for the potential of getting high value resources

    It is a PVP loop and I would expect only players that want PVP or that do not mind PVP to take part in it for both sides (hunter and gatherer). I would not expect PVP-averse players to do so.
    ultimateduck
Sign In or Register to comment.