I personally like the way WAR has done PVP with areas to do both. It is actually quite balanced in that regard.. However I have to say they really dropped the ball on the PVE aspect.. To the point it is not worth doing if you want any chance to be competitive at all in PVP.
I prefer open world pvp, it is more exciting, and unpredictable, and if done right, it feels like you are advancing the game/story/agenda more with it.
BG's - They can be fun, but they should have mechanisims to make them not hamper open world pvp imo...These can get repetative. It also doesn't seem to add much in the way of furthering the game/story/agenda. I know WAR I think did some tie ins with it, but I prefer open world.
Arena - I have zero interest in Arenas, it is very repetitive, and does not feel very mmorpg to me. I can see the appeal for a lot of people, but its not my thing...as it is like a smaller BG, and I even tire of BGs.
World PVP measures your ability to zerg, and results in battles which are snore-fests (one-sided slaughters.)
Instanced PVP measures all other game skills, and results in battles which are battles.
The best PVP is found in other genres entirely (FPS, RTS, Fighting, DOTA-like, etc) which remove (or substantially limit) the element of Time Investment.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
WoW should allow factions to take over each other's major cities. If the horde take stormwind, it's theirs until the alliance rallies to get it back. Until then, they're cut off from class trainers, quests, auction house, flight paths, etc.
That'd even get me playing WoW again.
Twelve Sky 1 and 2 does this too.. You can take over cities by raiding.
World PVP measures your ability to zerg, and results in battles which are snore-fests (one-sided slaughters.)
Instanced PVP measures all other game skills, and results in battles which are battles.
The best PVP is found in other genres entirely (FPS, RTS, Fighting, DOTA-like, etc) which remove (or substantially limit) the element of Time Investment.
This times 100,What is the point of Open World pvp without a decisive end?Two guilds fighting each other until one guild gets tired decide to stop. No decisive victory and without permadeath it becomes Zevg vs Zerg destroying skill even in objective based open world pvp like holding a objective or city ,You can have 50 of the most skilled players versus 100 average players and the 50 players have surprise and gear and they still lose because the zerg keeps coming back and back.
What would make Open World PvP good is a PvP cap or Fatigue for the day
-Either the more you pvp a daily fatigue meter goes down until you are useless
-After certain amount of pvp player deaths daily you are useless
That creates the decisive victory scenario,If your smaller more skill group of players don't die you with a small group could possibly beat a large more disorganized group and have decisive victory.
Why did people stop World pvp in WoW there was no point to world pvp plus Battlegrounds and Arenas give you good rewards,a guarantee battle,a good chance at a fair fight,a chance at a win,an organized skill versus skill battle where numbers don't influence the outcome , it be done in a short period of time at a casual pace.
They are lot of people who proclaim world pvp but if it was much fun people would not stop doing it and this coming from a person who likes world pvp there something about battle taking place anywhere that is fun for me but lack of a clear victor is not as good thrill of close match,I have been playing CoD black ops a lately and nothing is more than when a game is tied up 6500 and you are hunting as team for those last ten kills and winning the game by one point.
You can play Darkfall or AoC world pvp all day and at the end of day what did you really win or You can play WoW,War,AoC battlegrounds win 80 matches in row which in which you where lead person on team kills,flag captures or heals. You actually did something which could be noted and documented and get reward for it. Their an interesting middle ground is War and Aion RvR which is mixture of both sides of coin but it suffers when one side has more players.The best pvp option is probably RvR with three sides like DAOC and if done right even if the two sides are larger than the third side,The third side can take advantage of two side focus one each other and have a impact.
So if decide not read anything i said this sums it up 3 or 5 side RVR is the best choice
So folks, my point about all this is that we are at a turning point in MMO history where WoW, the behemoth that has dominated online gaming for about 5 years now, is beginning to show signs of crumbling. A time when some good-looking MMO's that, although still early in development, have a very large fanbase. The time has come for us to decide how we want our PvP.
Opinions or comments appreciated. Begin the ranting.
Different players look for different things and experiences in the PvP side of an MMO.
If you are someone who likes to play competitively and prefer all players to have equal ground, then heavily instanced,smaller skirmishes (think Global Agenda) are the way to go.
If you like some sort of unpredictability in your PvP and larger battles, but would still like to see some form of control, then RvR is your choice (WAR, Aion and other faction based games).
If you prefer a more all-encompassing type of PvP in your game, a stronger resemblance to the real world (politics, organization of troops, etc.), then open world PvP is your heaven.
World PVP measures your ability to zerg, and results in battles which are snore-fests (one-sided slaughters.)
Instanced PVP measures all other game skills, and results in battles which are battles.
The best PVP is found in other genres entirely (FPS, RTS, Fighting, DOTA-like, etc) which remove (or substantially limit) the element of Time Investment.
This times 100,What is the point of Open World pvp without a decisive end?Two guilds fighting each other until one guild gets tired decide to stop. No decisive victory and without permadeath it becomes Zevg vs Zerg destroying skill even in objective based open world pvp like holding a objective or city ,You can have 50 of the most skilled players versus 100 average players and the 50 players have surprise and gear and they still lose because the zerg keeps coming back and back.
What would make Open World PvP good is a PvP cap or Fatigue for the day
-Either the more you pvp a daily fatigue meter goes down until you are useless
-After certain amount of pvp player deaths daily you are useless
That creates the decisive victory scenario,If your smaller more skill group of players don't die you with a small group could possibly beat a large more disorganized group and have decisive victory.
Why did people stop World pvp in WoW there was no point to world pvp plus Battlegrounds and Arenas give you good rewards,a guarantee battle,a good chance at a fair fight,a chance at a win,an organized skill versus skill battle where numbers don't influence the outcome , it be done in a short period of time at a casual pace.
They are lot of people who proclaim world pvp but if it was much fun people would not stop doing it and this coming from a person who likes world pvp there something about battle taking place anywhere that is fun for me but lack of a clear victor is not as good thrill of close match,I have been playing CoD black ops a lately and nothing is more than when a game is tied up 6500 and you are hunting as team for those last ten kills and winning the game by one point.
You can play Darkfall or AoC world pvp all day and at the end of day what did you really win or You can play WoW,War,AoC battlegrounds win 80 matches in row which in which you where lead person on team kills,flag captures or heals. You actually did something which could be noted and documented and get reward for it. Their an interesting middle ground is War and Aion RvR which is mixture of both sides of coin but it suffers when one side has more players.The best pvp option is probably RvR with three sides like DAOC and if done right even if the two sides are larger than the third side,The third side can take advantage of two side focus one each other and have a impact.
So if decide not read anything i said this sums it up 3 or 5 side RVR is the best choice
I love the idea of open world pvp, but as stated above...it just can't be balanced. You never get 1 on 1 fights, or 5 on 5 fights. It's either 7897435 to 1 or zerg vs. zerg. Folks just respawn until one side gets bored.
World PVP measures your ability to zerg, and results in battles which are snore-fests (one-sided slaughters.)
Instanced PVP measures all other game skills, and results in battles which are battles.
The best PVP is found in other genres entirely (FPS, RTS, Fighting, DOTA-like, etc) which remove (or substantially limit) the element of Time Investment.
This times 100,What is the point of Open World pvp without a decisive end?Two guilds fighting each other until one guild gets tired decide to stop. No decisive victory and without permadeath it becomes Zevg vs Zerg destroying skill even in objective based open world pvp like holding a objective or city ,You can have 50 of the most skilled players versus 100 average players and the 50 players have surprise and gear and they still lose because the zerg keeps coming back and back.
What would make Open World PvP good is a PvP cap or Fatigue for the day
-Either the more you pvp a daily fatigue meter goes down until you are useless
-After certain amount of pvp player deaths daily you are useless
That creates the decisive victory scenario,If your smaller more skill group of players don't die you with a small group could possibly beat a large more disorganized group and have decisive victory.
Why did people stop World pvp in WoW there was no point to world pvp plus Battlegrounds and Arenas give you good rewards,a guarantee battle,a good chance at a fair fight,a chance at a win,an organized skill versus skill battle where numbers don't influence the outcome , it be done in a short period of time at a casual pace.
They are lot of people who proclaim world pvp but if it was much fun people would not stop doing it and this coming from a person who likes world pvp there something about battle taking place anywhere that is fun for me but lack of a clear victor is not as good thrill of close match,I have been playing CoD black ops a lately and nothing is more than when a game is tied up 6500 and you are hunting as team for those last ten kills and winning the game by one point.
You can play Darkfall or AoC world pvp all day and at the end of day what did you really win or You can play WoW,War,AoC battlegrounds win 80 matches in row which in which you where lead person on team kills,flag captures or heals. You actually did something which could be noted and documented and get reward for it. Their an interesting middle ground is War and Aion RvR which is mixture of both sides of coin but it suffers when one side has more players.The best pvp option is probably RvR with three sides like DAOC and if done right even if the two sides are larger than the third side,The third side can take advantage of two side focus one each other and have a impact.
So if decide not read anything i said this sums it up 3 or 5 side RVR is the best choice
I love the idea of open world pvp, but as stated above...it just can't be balanced. You never get 1 on 1 fights, or 5 on 5 fights. It's either 7897435 to 1 or zerg vs. zerg. Folks just respawn until one side gets bored.
That is where game design must come into play. For instance lets say you have a group of people that are in a game world. They get together and form a new community(A guild, cohort or whatever)...they start by building a village, then a town. This will be their center of operation. Little to their knowledge, just a few miles up the road another group is forming. This group is not interested in building anything...they are nothing but rabble...their whole purpose is to try to tear down what others build. They are raiders...think of them as Vikings. They get everything they need from raiding other groups.
So group one has a nice town going. It has a few player houses, a community mill, a blacksmith, a stable, a lumbermill, and couple of watch towers - even a wall that surrounds the town made of hewn logs. All in all the start of a nice little town with plenty of room to grow. The longer they all work together, the richer they all become and their community can grow. This catches the notice of the raiders. All they see is a town ripe for plunder. So in they come. Let's say the town has 25 players. Let's say the raiders number 35. One thing the town has going for it is the fact because it is a town it also has NPC guards. Some can use bows and some are melee'rs -- so the town may seem easy pickings to the raiders until they attack..and soon they realize that they town has them out numbered 3 to 1! 25 players - plus the NPC town guards! The guards are no push overs either...they are well armed and well trained troops - ones maintained by the towns coffers.
Here is the main point. As the players that make up the raiders are dispatched during the raid. That's it. They cannot rejoin the battle. They are done with that battle and cannot rejoin it for 24hrs - period. To bad so sad. You tried and failed. Better luck next time. Same goes for the defenders. If you are taken out during the batttle...you cannot continue to defend. You, just as one of the raiders, were to badly injured to continue. The fate of the village rest with those defenders that are left. Pray they succeed, because if they don't...you may find the village has been looted and burned to the ground.
Players that are taken out during the battle find themselves at a respawn point of their choice. For raiders it would be no less than an hrs real time ride in game to get back to where the raid took place - you were hit in the head silly...lucky for you the towns folks left you for dead on the side of the road some distance from town or in a state of delirium, you managed to ride your horse away from the main battle where you eventually collapsed. Waking to find your head pounding wondering where the hell you are. As for villagers...you're in for the long haul. It's your village. If you are incapcitated...you'll have to wait until the party is over. Once it is over...then you will see what your fate is. Or...you might find yourself in a large town laying in a bed. Your village was not able to perform the necessary surgery to remove the two arrows stuck in your body. So they took you to a larger towns surgeon. All better...you can ride back. Probably take on hour.
What matters is...the players could not just respawn and keep fighting. Once you are that seriously injured...you are no longer able to function - so no more battle for you right now. That is how a world PvP should be done. No respawning and immediately back in the fight you go. There has to be some kind of serious attrition game play mechanics for world PvP to actually work so that one does not feel overwhelmed and defenseless.
In my opinion, instanced PvP is only good if there is equal ground i.e. most multiplayer shooter games. To me, MMORPGS are all about the world and the people around you and that's what players should be fighting over.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
IMO WoW only had both world and instance PvP for a short period before people farmed BG's for gear and honor. In fact they tried so hard to drive people out of world pvp that the honor grind to get the titles was insane. It got to be where 1337 people running BG's would set honor caps in the forums to game the system to get GM or HW in an order based upon seniority. So WoW never really had both for more than a month in any real numbers. Warhammer tried to be too much like WoW, all people did was scenarios and this killed open world PvP. In addition to having 3 zones for each faction to run in, this further split people leveling and wanting PvP. EvE is a big PvP box, no scenarios there. Global agenda has no world hence no world PvP. Its basically TF2 with a chat room. I didnt really play Darkfall (for more than a day) so I cant comment on that. One you dont mention is DAOC. Its what is generally accepted what Warhammer should have been (DAOC2). It has open pvp, no instances. IMO you cant have both in any great quantity, also IMO the PvP in DAOC trumps all. It matters, its fun, its endgame, and its dynamic (its what happens with a 3rd faction that you dont get with 2). What is the objective of isntanced PvP? To grind gear in most cases (WoW, Warhammer, GA). What is the objective of World PvP? Hopefully tactical and strategic meaning in game as well as end game rewards. Just my 2 cents.
i want the fun of evenly numbered and fair battle grounds large and small, but also the freedom to kill anyone anywere in the world as well.
WoW pvp servers have it just right, the only problem being the fact that you do not need to travel throug the world anymore at all. that was a big mistake by WoW imo.
i want the fun of evenly numbered and fair battle grounds large and small, but also the freedom to kill anyone anywere in the world as well.
WoW pvp servers have it just right, the only problem being the fact that you do not need to travel throug the world anymore at all. that was a big mistake by WoW imo.
WoW has changed this with the last patch by removing portals from Dalaran and Shattrath so you are forced to move through the world however 50% of the current populace is no used to that. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in a week. PvP servers could become alot more fun again if this is the case.
wile i actualy like that particular change it just doesnt go far enough imo. people still only have to use flight paths, which do nothing for world pvp. still it's nice to actually see people outside capital cities for a change.
i'm am more talking about the random dungeon button which teleports you inside the dungeon. it should not instantly transport you there, you whould still have to travel to it. same with BGs, you should be forced to actually click the BG portal (located in all cities) once your que pops.
I want both in an MMO. But I would actually like them to be more integrated than they are in any game I’ve played.
In real wars you have a lot of support staff for front line soldiers. In an MMO this could translate into crafting, stealth operations, healers – front line and back line (buffers), engineers (building trenches, siege weapons).
I imagine a game where the PvP flagged area shifts depending on who controls it. While three factions can help with server balance a lot, I would also appreciate NPC factions (which could be grunts from the player aligned factions) a la Tabula Rasa that could take territory to affect balance as well.
Some areas particularly dungeon type areas would require battleground style - even players on a side victory to control.
Within the currently flagged PvE areas under your factions’ control, PvErs could contribute to the war effort via various activities:
-harvesting and crafting war supplies, shoring up defenses, ammo
-fighting NPC hostile stragglers or non-playable race ‘creatures’
-reconnaissance – forays into hostile territory sneakily – with a SvS (spy v spy) flag, allowing you to fight with other spies to which you don’t have good stealth, but not other players (until exposed).
-other questing in traditional MMO style
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I enjoy World PvP the most, Battle for Hillsbrad back in the days of WoW anyone? was awesome.
I dont mind Battlegrounds tough, afterall i did grind in them until rank 14. But when battlegrounds came out World pvp pretty much died. Besides the small encounters you meet around the world while lvling / questing.
Now arena i dont like at all! that was the worst adition to WoW ever imo (well, back when TBC came out anyways, they have slaughterd the game even more the last years)
But World PvP is the way to go! Its so much more fun then Battlegrounds and arena! In any game.
prefferably my next MMO wont have any kinds of Battlegrounds or Arena. But alot of people seem to enjoy battlegrounds =/ and when they have battlegrounds people dont tend to do World PvP very much.
Atm im Playing Mount and Blade: Warband cRPG mod, that's pure "Battleground" PvP but thats what the game is based on so its kinda diffrent.
Mimic DAOC and you have a great PvP game that has a good mix of open world PvP + instanced BG PvP. Then release 1 special ruleset server for FFA PvP enthusiasts like DAOC did. There's really no need for such discussion, it's been done before. It's just sad Mythic got bought out by money and they went with a big name production and totally screwed it up.
Opinion: The only decent PvP games are able to combine both open world PvP AND instanced battleground / arena PvP without issue.
Can you name one that does this?
--EDIT--
Spelling correction
WoW - Before it got bad and/or before world PvP died.
There isn't a single game (outside of MAYBE EvE online, and I struggle to agree with this) that I can honestly say has impressed me PvP wise, delivering a "full content" feeling. WoW seamlessly integrated both (again, before world PvP died) proving it isn't impossible to do so.
I admit leaving as World PvP was dying in WoW, after I hit level 60, and as other have mentioned there is absolutely no meaningful open, governed or semi-open world PvP in WoW.
Though this is another re-hashed topic that is ever-present on these forums, veiled as one topic or another, it is a very deep and broad topic that is too broad and deep for the limited time I have, to get really engaged with.
However, I will say this in parting, that one of the major reasons why I am following Rift more closely is their planned encorporation of open-world, or semi-open world, non-instanced dynamic and frequent Rift events that will pull opposing players together in competition and cooperation at times to tear, claim, close, and battle in open-world dynamic locations that contribute to game-play rewards, territorially perhaps, and gear and status related, for game-play meaning and purpose.
The issue with world PvP is that it is unorganized, unbalanced, and infrequent, seldom does a good battle arise from world PvP and for every good battle you have 20 lame or uneventful ones.
Using battlegrounds and arenas, you have balanced numbers (per fight, it does not matter the total population on each side), balanced power, ready to fight any time you want, multiple battle types, maps designed for PvP battles, clear goals for better organization and a clear condition for victory.
All around battlegrounds and arena is better for fun competitive PvP than an open world. I think that the big reason that people like open world PvP is because it is more unpredictable and has a physical connection to the rest of the world.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
The issue with world PvP is that it is unorganized, unbalanced, and infrequent, seldom does a good battle arise from world PvP and for every good battle you have 20 lame or uneventful ones.
Using battlegrounds and arenas, you have balanced numbers (per fight, it does not matter the total population on each side), balanced power, ready to fight any time you want, multiple battle types, maps designed for PvP battles, clear goals for better organization and a clear condition for victory.
You are absolutely right, I couldn't agree more, but I'd like to say it's easily more than 20 battles for one good one.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
The issue with world PvP is that it is unorganized, unbalanced, and infrequent, seldom does a good battle arise from world PvP and for every good battle you have 20 lame or uneventful ones.
Using battlegrounds and arenas, you have balanced numbers (per fight, it does not matter the total population on each side), balanced power, ready to fight any time you want, multiple battle types, maps designed for PvP battles, clear goals for better organization and a clear condition for victory.
All around battlegrounds and arena is better for fun competitive PvP than an open world. I think that the big reason that people like open world PvP is because it is more unpredictable and has a physical connection to the rest of the world.
BG's and arenas are anything but balanced. Seriously, how can anybody who's ever played WoW's BG's and Arenas say they provide balanced power? Don't take my words for it, go read WoW's PvP forum and see how many people complain about the BG's and the arena. Go look how many are upset about people paying money to get carried by high ranking, super geared players in the arena and how they absolutely destroy anybody trying to rank up legitely. As for BG's I don't need to mention you win or lose based on how many real players you have that are decently geared vs how many bots you have in your round that do nothing but stand afk while leeching honor points.
Of majority of the BG's I've been in, I could tell whether I'm going to win or lose within the first minute. Of the majority of the arena matches I've been in, I could tell whether I'm going to win or lose simply by the class composition and their gear! Talk about the 20 to 1 ratio, I'd think BG's and Arena's have a much worse ratio finding good battles. Your mileage may vary, but I know I'm not alone in my experiences judging by WoW's PvP forum.
If you compare the world PvP in WoW to when they transitioned into BG based, yes, it was for the better for many reasons. 1) lag issues, how it crashed continents & servers, 2) honor points & ranks, 3) BG faction vendors. But that's just one example. Look at DAOC and you'll see many examples to why open world PvP is better. How the castle sieges, even when you are the underdog realm, outmatched, outnumbered, how you *could* still pull off a successful castle defense. Now that is true fun. Open world PvP in DAOC allowed people to either run in a single group gank group, or in a raid as a zerg, or solo by defending towers & castles. It has the balance people seek, it's just too bad Mythic sold out and went with WAR instead of creating a DAOC 2.
Many people today have never even tried DAOC during its prime. You really missed out. It truly has the right balance between world PvP and Battlegrounds. Yes DAOC had battlegrounds, but they are persistent, so you can play in it and have a blast all you want. The objective to DAOC's BG's was to hold the keep in there, so if your realm holds the keep you can stay and defend it all night if you want to. People today think world PvP means WoW's wintergrasp that occur every 2 hours. LOL are you kidding me? World PvP should be persistent, should always be something for you to fight for. If I want to flip a castle I should be able to do it, not wait for the right time for it to "open". WoW does a lot of things right, but really, it doesn't have world PvP right. It's why world PvP isn't as fun in WoW, so newer players who have only played WoW only knows what it's like between WoW's open world PvP vs WoW's BG/Arena's.
I'm waiting to hear more about GW2 and the Mists that they talk about as a multi server PvP world. Here's a bit of info so far on them: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_PvP There's some more talk from the Devs about the Mists but still nothing to concrete yet.
I never played DAOC but it sounds like those describing PvP in DAOC would be interested in the PVP in GW2.
The issue with world PvP is that it is unorganized, unbalanced, and infrequent, seldom does a good battle arise from world PvP and for every good battle you have 20 lame or uneventful ones.
Using battlegrounds and arenas, you have balanced numbers (per fight, it does not matter the total population on each side), balanced power, ready to fight any time you want, multiple battle types, maps designed for PvP battles, clear goals for better organization and a clear condition for victory.
All around battlegrounds and arena is better for fun competitive PvP than an open world. I think that the big reason that people like open world PvP is because it is more unpredictable and has a physical connection to the rest of the world.
Exactly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Open world pvp is good if you don't have ridiculous level divides. I mean you look at Battlefield, or maybe Planetside- they don't have levels making skirmishes badly balanced.
Comments
I personally like the way WAR has done PVP with areas to do both. It is actually quite balanced in that regard.. However I have to say they really dropped the ball on the PVE aspect.. To the point it is not worth doing if you want any chance to be competitive at all in PVP.
I prefer open world pvp, it is more exciting, and unpredictable, and if done right, it feels like you are advancing the game/story/agenda more with it.
BG's - They can be fun, but they should have mechanisims to make them not hamper open world pvp imo...These can get repetative. It also doesn't seem to add much in the way of furthering the game/story/agenda. I know WAR I think did some tie ins with it, but I prefer open world.
Arena - I have zero interest in Arenas, it is very repetitive, and does not feel very mmorpg to me. I can see the appeal for a lot of people, but its not my thing...as it is like a smaller BG, and I even tire of BGs.
World PVP measures your ability to zerg, and results in battles which are snore-fests (one-sided slaughters.)
Instanced PVP measures all other game skills, and results in battles which are battles.
The best PVP is found in other genres entirely (FPS, RTS, Fighting, DOTA-like, etc) which remove (or substantially limit) the element of Time Investment.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Twelve Sky 1 and 2 does this too.. You can take over cities by raiding.
Kain_Dale
Best new MMO would be just pure PvE w/out any PvP crap.
This times 100,What is the point of Open World pvp without a decisive end?Two guilds fighting each other until one guild gets tired decide to stop. No decisive victory and without permadeath it becomes Zevg vs Zerg destroying skill even in objective based open world pvp like holding a objective or city ,You can have 50 of the most skilled players versus 100 average players and the 50 players have surprise and gear and they still lose because the zerg keeps coming back and back.
What would make Open World PvP good is a PvP cap or Fatigue for the day
-Either the more you pvp a daily fatigue meter goes down until you are useless
-After certain amount of pvp player deaths daily you are useless
That creates the decisive victory scenario,If your smaller more skill group of players don't die you with a small group could possibly beat a large more disorganized group and have decisive victory.
Why did people stop World pvp in WoW there was no point to world pvp plus Battlegrounds and Arenas give you good rewards,a guarantee battle,a good chance at a fair fight,a chance at a win,an organized skill versus skill battle where numbers don't influence the outcome , it be done in a short period of time at a casual pace.
They are lot of people who proclaim world pvp but if it was much fun people would not stop doing it and this coming from a person who likes world pvp there something about battle taking place anywhere that is fun for me but lack of a clear victor is not as good thrill of close match,I have been playing CoD black ops a lately and nothing is more than when a game is tied up 6500 and you are hunting as team for those last ten kills and winning the game by one point.
You can play Darkfall or AoC world pvp all day and at the end of day what did you really win or You can play WoW,War,AoC battlegrounds win 80 matches in row which in which you where lead person on team kills,flag captures or heals. You actually did something which could be noted and documented and get reward for it. Their an interesting middle ground is War and Aion RvR which is mixture of both sides of coin but it suffers when one side has more players.The best pvp option is probably RvR with three sides like DAOC and if done right even if the two sides are larger than the third side,The third side can take advantage of two side focus one each other and have a impact.
So if decide not read anything i said this sums it up 3 or 5 side RVR is the best choice
Different players look for different things and experiences in the PvP side of an MMO.
If you are someone who likes to play competitively and prefer all players to have equal ground, then heavily instanced,smaller skirmishes (think Global Agenda) are the way to go.
If you like some sort of unpredictability in your PvP and larger battles, but would still like to see some form of control, then RvR is your choice (WAR, Aion and other faction based games).
If you prefer a more all-encompassing type of PvP in your game, a stronger resemblance to the real world (politics, organization of troops, etc.), then open world PvP is your heaven.
The End.
Santa Claus says such cruel things.
I love the idea of open world pvp, but as stated above...it just can't be balanced. You never get 1 on 1 fights, or 5 on 5 fights. It's either 7897435 to 1 or zerg vs. zerg. Folks just respawn until one side gets bored.
That is where game design must come into play. For instance lets say you have a group of people that are in a game world. They get together and form a new community(A guild, cohort or whatever)...they start by building a village, then a town. This will be their center of operation. Little to their knowledge, just a few miles up the road another group is forming. This group is not interested in building anything...they are nothing but rabble...their whole purpose is to try to tear down what others build. They are raiders...think of them as Vikings. They get everything they need from raiding other groups.
So group one has a nice town going. It has a few player houses, a community mill, a blacksmith, a stable, a lumbermill, and couple of watch towers - even a wall that surrounds the town made of hewn logs. All in all the start of a nice little town with plenty of room to grow. The longer they all work together, the richer they all become and their community can grow. This catches the notice of the raiders. All they see is a town ripe for plunder. So in they come. Let's say the town has 25 players. Let's say the raiders number 35. One thing the town has going for it is the fact because it is a town it also has NPC guards. Some can use bows and some are melee'rs -- so the town may seem easy pickings to the raiders until they attack..and soon they realize that they town has them out numbered 3 to 1! 25 players - plus the NPC town guards! The guards are no push overs either...they are well armed and well trained troops - ones maintained by the towns coffers.
Here is the main point. As the players that make up the raiders are dispatched during the raid. That's it. They cannot rejoin the battle. They are done with that battle and cannot rejoin it for 24hrs - period. To bad so sad. You tried and failed. Better luck next time. Same goes for the defenders. If you are taken out during the batttle...you cannot continue to defend. You, just as one of the raiders, were to badly injured to continue. The fate of the village rest with those defenders that are left. Pray they succeed, because if they don't...you may find the village has been looted and burned to the ground.
Players that are taken out during the battle find themselves at a respawn point of their choice. For raiders it would be no less than an hrs real time ride in game to get back to where the raid took place - you were hit in the head silly...lucky for you the towns folks left you for dead on the side of the road some distance from town or in a state of delirium, you managed to ride your horse away from the main battle where you eventually collapsed. Waking to find your head pounding wondering where the hell you are. As for villagers...you're in for the long haul. It's your village. If you are incapcitated...you'll have to wait until the party is over. Once it is over...then you will see what your fate is. Or...you might find yourself in a large town laying in a bed. Your village was not able to perform the necessary surgery to remove the two arrows stuck in your body. So they took you to a larger towns surgeon. All better...you can ride back. Probably take on hour.
What matters is...the players could not just respawn and keep fighting. Once you are that seriously injured...you are no longer able to function - so no more battle for you right now. That is how a world PvP should be done. No respawning and immediately back in the fight you go. There has to be some kind of serious attrition game play mechanics for world PvP to actually work so that one does not feel overwhelmed and defenseless.
In my opinion, instanced PvP is only good if there is equal ground i.e. most multiplayer shooter games. To me, MMORPGS are all about the world and the people around you and that's what players should be fighting over.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
IMO WoW only had both world and instance PvP for a short period before people farmed BG's for gear and honor. In fact they tried so hard to drive people out of world pvp that the honor grind to get the titles was insane. It got to be where 1337 people running BG's would set honor caps in the forums to game the system to get GM or HW in an order based upon seniority. So WoW never really had both for more than a month in any real numbers. Warhammer tried to be too much like WoW, all people did was scenarios and this killed open world PvP. In addition to having 3 zones for each faction to run in, this further split people leveling and wanting PvP. EvE is a big PvP box, no scenarios there. Global agenda has no world hence no world PvP. Its basically TF2 with a chat room. I didnt really play Darkfall (for more than a day) so I cant comment on that. One you dont mention is DAOC. Its what is generally accepted what Warhammer should have been (DAOC2). It has open pvp, no instances. IMO you cant have both in any great quantity, also IMO the PvP in DAOC trumps all. It matters, its fun, its endgame, and its dynamic (its what happens with a 3rd faction that you dont get with 2). What is the objective of isntanced PvP? To grind gear in most cases (WoW, Warhammer, GA). What is the objective of World PvP? Hopefully tactical and strategic meaning in game as well as end game rewards. Just my 2 cents.
personaly i want both in my mmo.
i want the fun of evenly numbered and fair battle grounds large and small, but also the freedom to kill anyone anywere in the world as well.
WoW pvp servers have it just right, the only problem being the fact that you do not need to travel throug the world anymore at all. that was a big mistake by WoW imo.
WoW has changed this with the last patch by removing portals from Dalaran and Shattrath so you are forced to move through the world however 50% of the current populace is no used to that. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in a week. PvP servers could become alot more fun again if this is the case.
wile i actualy like that particular change it just doesnt go far enough imo. people still only have to use flight paths, which do nothing for world pvp. still it's nice to actually see people outside capital cities for a change.
i'm am more talking about the random dungeon button which teleports you inside the dungeon. it should not instantly transport you there, you whould still have to travel to it. same with BGs, you should be forced to actually click the BG portal (located in all cities) once your que pops.
I want both in an MMO. But I would actually like them to be more integrated than they are in any game I’ve played.
In real wars you have a lot of support staff for front line soldiers. In an MMO this could translate into crafting, stealth operations, healers – front line and back line (buffers), engineers (building trenches, siege weapons).
I imagine a game where the PvP flagged area shifts depending on who controls it. While three factions can help with server balance a lot, I would also appreciate NPC factions (which could be grunts from the player aligned factions) a la Tabula Rasa that could take territory to affect balance as well.
Some areas particularly dungeon type areas would require battleground style - even players on a side victory to control.
Within the currently flagged PvE areas under your factions’ control, PvErs could contribute to the war effort via various activities:
-harvesting and crafting war supplies, shoring up defenses, ammo
-fighting NPC hostile stragglers or non-playable race ‘creatures’
-reconnaissance – forays into hostile territory sneakily – with a SvS (spy v spy) flag, allowing you to fight with other spies to which you don’t have good stealth, but not other players (until exposed).
-other questing in traditional MMO style
"Never met a pack of humans that were any different. Look at the idiots that get elected every couple of years. You really consider those guys more mature than us? The only difference between us and them is, when they gank some noobs and take their stuff, the noobs actually die." - Madimorga
I enjoy World PvP the most, Battle for Hillsbrad back in the days of WoW anyone? was awesome.
I dont mind Battlegrounds tough, afterall i did grind in them until rank 14. But when battlegrounds came out World pvp pretty much died. Besides the small encounters you meet around the world while lvling / questing.
Now arena i dont like at all! that was the worst adition to WoW ever imo (well, back when TBC came out anyways, they have slaughterd the game even more the last years)
But World PvP is the way to go! Its so much more fun then Battlegrounds and arena! In any game.
prefferably my next MMO wont have any kinds of Battlegrounds or Arena. But alot of people seem to enjoy battlegrounds =/ and when they have battlegrounds people dont tend to do World PvP very much.
Atm im Playing Mount and Blade: Warband cRPG mod, that's pure "Battleground" PvP but thats what the game is based on so its kinda diffrent.
Currently Playing Path of Exile
Mimic DAOC and you have a great PvP game that has a good mix of open world PvP + instanced BG PvP. Then release 1 special ruleset server for FFA PvP enthusiasts like DAOC did. There's really no need for such discussion, it's been done before. It's just sad Mythic got bought out by money and they went with a big name production and totally screwed it up.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
I admit leaving as World PvP was dying in WoW, after I hit level 60, and as other have mentioned there is absolutely no meaningful open, governed or semi-open world PvP in WoW.
Though this is another re-hashed topic that is ever-present on these forums, veiled as one topic or another, it is a very deep and broad topic that is too broad and deep for the limited time I have, to get really engaged with.
However, I will say this in parting, that one of the major reasons why I am following Rift more closely is their planned encorporation of open-world, or semi-open world, non-instanced dynamic and frequent Rift events that will pull opposing players together in competition and cooperation at times to tear, claim, close, and battle in open-world dynamic locations that contribute to game-play rewards, territorially perhaps, and gear and status related, for game-play meaning and purpose.
The issue with world PvP is that it is unorganized, unbalanced, and infrequent, seldom does a good battle arise from world PvP and for every good battle you have 20 lame or uneventful ones.
Using battlegrounds and arenas, you have balanced numbers (per fight, it does not matter the total population on each side), balanced power, ready to fight any time you want, multiple battle types, maps designed for PvP battles, clear goals for better organization and a clear condition for victory.
All around battlegrounds and arena is better for fun competitive PvP than an open world. I think that the big reason that people like open world PvP is because it is more unpredictable and has a physical connection to the rest of the world.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
You are absolutely right, I couldn't agree more, but I'd like to say it's easily more than 20 battles for one good one.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
BG's and arenas are anything but balanced. Seriously, how can anybody who's ever played WoW's BG's and Arenas say they provide balanced power? Don't take my words for it, go read WoW's PvP forum and see how many people complain about the BG's and the arena. Go look how many are upset about people paying money to get carried by high ranking, super geared players in the arena and how they absolutely destroy anybody trying to rank up legitely. As for BG's I don't need to mention you win or lose based on how many real players you have that are decently geared vs how many bots you have in your round that do nothing but stand afk while leeching honor points.
Of majority of the BG's I've been in, I could tell whether I'm going to win or lose within the first minute. Of the majority of the arena matches I've been in, I could tell whether I'm going to win or lose simply by the class composition and their gear! Talk about the 20 to 1 ratio, I'd think BG's and Arena's have a much worse ratio finding good battles. Your mileage may vary, but I know I'm not alone in my experiences judging by WoW's PvP forum.
If you compare the world PvP in WoW to when they transitioned into BG based, yes, it was for the better for many reasons. 1) lag issues, how it crashed continents & servers, 2) honor points & ranks, 3) BG faction vendors. But that's just one example. Look at DAOC and you'll see many examples to why open world PvP is better. How the castle sieges, even when you are the underdog realm, outmatched, outnumbered, how you *could* still pull off a successful castle defense. Now that is true fun. Open world PvP in DAOC allowed people to either run in a single group gank group, or in a raid as a zerg, or solo by defending towers & castles. It has the balance people seek, it's just too bad Mythic sold out and went with WAR instead of creating a DAOC 2.
Many people today have never even tried DAOC during its prime. You really missed out. It truly has the right balance between world PvP and Battlegrounds. Yes DAOC had battlegrounds, but they are persistent, so you can play in it and have a blast all you want. The objective to DAOC's BG's was to hold the keep in there, so if your realm holds the keep you can stay and defend it all night if you want to. People today think world PvP means WoW's wintergrasp that occur every 2 hours. LOL are you kidding me? World PvP should be persistent, should always be something for you to fight for. If I want to flip a castle I should be able to do it, not wait for the right time for it to "open". WoW does a lot of things right, but really, it doesn't have world PvP right. It's why world PvP isn't as fun in WoW, so newer players who have only played WoW only knows what it's like between WoW's open world PvP vs WoW's BG/Arena's.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
I'm waiting to hear more about GW2 and the Mists that they talk about as a multi server PvP world. Here's a bit of info so far on them: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/World_PvP There's some more talk from the Devs about the Mists but still nothing to concrete yet.
I never played DAOC but it sounds like those describing PvP in DAOC would be interested in the PVP in GW2.
Exactly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Open world pvp is good if you don't have ridiculous level divides. I mean you look at Battlefield, or maybe Planetside- they don't have levels making skirmishes badly balanced.