Forum Settings
       
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

The main reason I avoid PvPFollow

#52 Feb 11 2011 at 9:56 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Danex317 wrote:
If they were intelligent this would be accounted for somehow. It isn't that hard for a game to know that somebody is healing somebody in a PvP fight. It has obviously been done before. And he didn't say you are going to move 30% slower for every point of Karma. It is an accountable amount not a f*** you amount. It worked fine whenever I have seen it.

There are ways to fix the latter two problems, but you can still use the system to grief.

Effectively though, this is just a PvE system, except you get to choose after the fact. You flag yourself by returning fire.
Danex317 wrote:
For one you aren't going to see a level 6 person that you can one shot in Scarlet Gorge. If they have low health then they are fair game because you were going to attack them anyway if you hit them at all to find that out.

You won't usually find a level 6 in a high level zone, but sometimes people like to explore, sometimes people have bank characters they need in high level locations, and sometimes people flat out feeling griefing other.

You can't attack someone you know is injured, because you don't know how injured they are. Even if they intended to fight me, if I accidentally killed them before they return fire, I get penalized.

People can also de-equip all their gear to grief you as well.

Quote:
This system does not work in games where you show what you are wearing. I specifically remember that Tibia refused to implement making your gear visible to all to prevent people from killing you knowing exactly what you would have on you. And in games like this (like in Tibia) when you die you are teleported back to town you dont return to your body. Losing equipment does suck but the whole game is built differently as well.

And it's a net unfun system. To someone who kills me, there is a high probability that my gear is vendor trash to them; something they can't wear or trade. It means I lose out big, but they only gain a little. On average everyone should lose as much as they win, but when losing is far, far worse than winning is good, it's a net negative.



If any of these were implemented in Rift, I would cancel my pre-order immediately. The game would no longer be worth playing for me.
#53 Feb 11 2011 at 10:09 PM Rating: Decent
*
200 posts
Allegory wrote:


People can also de-equip all their gear to grief you as well.

If any of these were implemented in Rift, I would cancel my pre-order immediately. The game would no longer be worth playing for me.


Almost agree because Rift can't handle these the way it is set up. It doesn't fit the game at all. They are systems that apply to completely different architectures. I don't agree it is an unfun system though. It is just a different way of doing things and Rift didn't do it that way.

And if the system were like it is in Tibia de-equiping their items would mean that they DEFINITELY lose their equipment :P And in Tibia everybody could wear everything.

#54 Feb 11 2011 at 10:28 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Danex317 wrote:
I don't agree it is an unfun system though.

Of course this is just my opinion, but I've known about such a system since the days of Lineage, and I always thought it was a terrible one.

It just seems to me that in any case the amount of fun you have in receiving other player's items is vastly outweighed by the frustration and annoyance you have at losing your own. If I've got a 50% chance to win $50 and a 50% chance to lose $100, then it's not a game I want to play.
#55 Feb 11 2011 at 11:28 PM Rating: Decent
10 posts
I still fail to see why some of you are still looking at ways to sugar-coat PvP... If you don't like open-world PvP just roll on a PvE server and stop trying to think of ways to nerf the PvP servers.

This is a war between the 2 factions... there's no sugar coating that (like you'll find on the PvE servers)... in war... it's kill or be killed. In war, you move in groups, not solo. Even snipers have spotters.

All this talk about "griefing" is just nonsense. If you don't want to get ganked by a higher level, then get a higher level bodyguard from your guild to help protect you. I mean, there are plenty of more positive thinking ways to survive in an open world PvP server than trying to nerf it down because you have thin skin.

It's simple... play on the PvP servers and expect to get ganked quite a bit... despite the motive or level differences. It just goes with the gameplay and it's what the PvP risk is all about and what gets the blood flowing.

*sighs and returns back to build planning on the soul planner*
#56 Feb 12 2011 at 1:35 AM Rating: Decent
i guess i would be one of those pvpers who would kill you without knowing my presence and your turning in a quest at 50% hp...but never 5 levels lower or so, but yeah i would still jump on that for a kill. know why? it's a pvp server your pvp and chose this.

i have been ganked numbers of times until i learned: Stay aware of whats around you, know what to do for emergency situations, if this happens can i successfully counter this way? being able to easily apply these can make you deadly ganking or fending off one

you can bet this will happen in a warfront it makes you a better pvper and you become quicker making your classes offensive and defensive skills second nature...^^; wow that's a lot of text oh and also rogue ganking is best people seeing a guy pop out of nowhere scares the crap out of em...of course I've had warrior catch me with my pants down *shudder*

ganking just gives the game flavor specially for rogues
____________________________
Our mission is t' punish any heretic who would deny the word of The Defiants! We will crush yer unholy body and salt th' earth w' yer dust! Amen!

Translation : Marksman/assassin/Riftstalker has 5 Combo points on you with his pyromancer friend...GL
#57 Feb 12 2011 at 8:05 AM Rating: Good
Sage
*
130 posts
HoundDawg wrote:
It's simple... play on the PvP servers and expect to get ganked quite a bit... despite the motive or level differences. It just goes with the gameplay and it's what the PvP risk is all about and what gets the blood flowing.


Main problem is that there is no risk or consequences in ganking. And there is hardly any risk in dieing from a gank, except the time you lose.

I agree though that you should not get mad when you die. It is part of OW PvP, just accept it. In OW PvP you will die a lot and if you are thin skinned, you won't last long. Dieing in an internet game is not serious business :)


#58 Feb 12 2011 at 11:09 AM Rating: Decent
7 posts
I can understand why many will avoid pvp in rift, though as a PvP'er that, with age, will never roll on a pve server, but maybe is becoming more 'moderate' in my pvp spree, I will still be rolling on a pvp server.

Though even with Rift, there are absolutely no, none, zilch, mechanics in-place to blunt griefing. Not even in an opposing factions village or town. NPC's in an opposing factions player town are 'yellow' to them; they are not agressive or hostile towards the opposing factional player. So I've seen an opposing factional player, whether a Defiant or Guardian, stealth into a town and gank an opposing factional player reading an npc's quest story without even the npc's being hostile towards that player.

There are undeniably 2 extremes of server choice; heavy pve or heavy pvp. On the PvE server side, A PvE server is an rpg server witout any interference or influence by any other player at any time. If you like pve and joining in groups to kill computer-coded objects without any player of an opposing faction getting in the way of your grind, this is where you want to be. There is a pvp flag, but just keeping it off all the time, as the vast majority will do on a pve server, will net you a purely pve game-play experience. You never have to be pvp flagged, not even in a contested zone, since your quest-line and story will continue without having to pvp at all.


And on the PvP server side, it is open, unabashed all the time. Even though I can appreciate the recent roll-back on the pvp servers, I’d consider this, as it relates to a pvp server. I happen to think that most pvp enthusiasts that are involved in mmo's do NOT roll on a pve server, but on a pvp server as PvPvE enthusiasts. I happen to think that most did NOT like the B6 sweeping PvE changes applied to the PvP servers with a few caveats.

1. Griefing is hated. With the B7 roll-back Trion is pandering to griefers (period). No moderate PvP enthusiast, including me, appreciates open environments where there is absolutely no buffer, no breathing room, no respite. Non-invincible guards should be stationed at Quest hubs. Not as beefy as Guards that you might have on a PvE server, but Guards that can "blunt" griefing of a Quest hub. Without it, the mechanics feed chaos, not organized and meaningful game-play. So, yes, I certainly can understand why “Guards” might have been 'subtly' implemented on a PvP server to minimize griefing, and I accept it as a small pvp price to pay. I do not think it steals from the value of open-world pvp, but blunts griefing, especially when it doesn’t interfere with meaningful Open-World PvP without favoring defenders.

2. Quest Wardstones should be captureable, but be a bit harder to take down then what we experienced in B5. Game-play meaning and 'organized' pvp should be at the cornerstone of a PvP server, rather than encouraging small group easy gains. Again, it does not interfere with open-world pvp, but encourages pvp community vs pvp community. Trion is really just pander to the lowest common denominator and enable an easy capture-the-flag mode.

3. Quest NPC's should be killable, however, not only should they be hostile (Red) to the opposing faction, they should also re-spawn quickly, and when they re-spawn, they should be "invulnerable" to attack for 10 minutes to enable players to be able turn-in quests. Not doing-so, again, is pandering to griefing, not meaningful and purposeful community oriented pvp in the slightest.

#59 Feb 12 2011 at 11:47 AM Rating: Decent
14 posts
PvP has to have a purpose. If it's a PvE MMO with PvP flagging, you're still playing a PvE game. Rolling a toon on the PvP server doesn't open the game up to a richer gameplay. Typically, the devs ignore certain elements that are required in this case. For instance; is there going to be any sort of population control on the shards? Blizzard didn't take this into consideration when they launched WoW. I ended up playing on a PvP server where the Alliance outnumbered the Horde 3 to 1. I can't express to you how immensely POINTLESS it was playing on that server for a year. Later, I transfered to a different server to play with some other friends. The server was 2:1 for the Horde, and equally stupid in regards to OWPvP.

Both sides being equal, you're still going to be 'safe' around half of the server's population. That to me is just as carebear as playing on a PvE server. I think if you want a richer sense of OW PvP without any risk of loss, everyone has to be an underdog. A game would need to either have player-formed factions (like EVE) or at least 3 factions on the server (like DAoC). 2 factions means one group typically outnumbers the other and puts them at an advantage. with 3 factions, even if you had an ufair split; say 45:25:30, the largest faction is still outnumbered on the server. The more factions, the better the OW PvP as the safety size of each group shrinks, relative to the population. But generally, 3 factions is the minimum requirement for OW PvP to be worthwhile in an MMO, imo.

It's a wide topic where certain outcomes derive from core game machanics. Server population is a foundation for PvP. Risk/Reward is another. Class balance. Relative purpose to the gameplay - is PvP required for unique access to elements of the game? or is it just something to do, with no real outcome? etc. PvP has to have the full attention of the Devs during the design of an MMO. If it doesn't; you're not missing anything worthwhile by rolling on a PvE server.
#60 Feb 12 2011 at 4:35 PM Rating: Decent
11 posts
For me, the easiest way to avoid griefing is to make it impossible for a player more than x lvls higher to be able to initiate pvp combat (10 level disparity would be reasonable). This allows the lowbie to initiate pvp combat if they wish, but avoids the whole "top tier griefing" that you find on so many pvp MMO games.

Griefing is the whole reason I DONT play on pvp servers. I love pvp .. but only when its me fighting in a reasonably balanced fight (i.e. I'm lvl 20 and get attacked by a lvl 30 is fine.. but not being attacked by a lvl 80.. that's just pointless). it makes no sense to me that so many MMO games don't even try to incorporate such a simple mechanic into their pvp matrix

#61 Feb 12 2011 at 5:50 PM Rating: Default
10 posts
You do realize that when a higher level ganks a lower level, it's NOT always this evil "griefing" you keep referring to. They're just making you bait for higher levels to come out of the woodwork. Honestly though, you may like to do the occasional casual PvP where they're controlled even matches like the WoW arena brackets. If you can't handle getting ganked, then you shouldn't roll on a PvP Rift server.

Again... Rift is about a war between 2 factions.... it's not about friendly and fair sparring between players... it's all out war... and a religious one at that. In war, nobody looks at level and/or gear differences. You don't have time to analyze your opponent and contemplate whether you can win or not. If you can't handle it, then you're really not *that* into PvP. Stick to PvE servers and enjoy the warfronts.

All this talk of "griefing" is getting old and it sounds more like whining than from someone that really enjoys PvP and knows the risks involved.

Edited, Feb 12th 2011 6:51pm by HoundDawg
#62 Feb 12 2011 at 6:28 PM Rating: Default
1 post
some very interesting posts here and I thought I would share my thoughts as well. If you dont like PvP, roll PvE; SIMPLE. If you are a fair weather PvP player (ie only Warfronts whatever) and want people to attack you nicely (with full health and fully expecting it) roll PvE and flag yourself PvP. Feel free to sign up for all the Warfronts that make you happy. For people that want hardcore down and a dirty PvP, let us have our OW PvP servers. Its no sweat to you how many times we get griefed, you have your carebear server to keep you nice, safe and cozy. If I am playing a rogue and I see a Warrior calling fighting a mob, you are **** straight I am going to attack him while he is fighting that mob! How is that any different than if he were PvPing a Necromancer, Beast Master, Ranger or Elementalist? I chose that mob to be my pet for that fight. If I cause someone to quit, log off, re-roll PvE; I am LoLing because they were too weak to play PvP. There is griefing, there is corpse camping, there are higher level players that roll through lower level zones. If you are strong enough you too will earn your higher levels and will have more freedom. Only the strong survive and this is war. There are no time outs in war, there are no play nice rules in war. If an overwhelming force destroys an inferior force we call it conquest and move forward to the next objective. If you dont like it, please.. PLEASE play PvE. I promise PvP players will not be crying about not being able to ninja loot you on your carebear server. Let PvP have PvP, dont nerf PvP because of a person who has no interest in it anyway decided to roll on the wrong server. (EQ, DAoC, AO, SWG, Eve, AoC) PvP FTW
#63 Feb 12 2011 at 7:36 PM Rating: Decent
17 posts
I have alot of fun lvling in pvp servers. yeah sometimes you meet top lvl players that gank you once, so what. i knew that when i rolled on a pvp server. Most of the time i do end up meeting of same lvl range, most of time slightly higher. And its so much fun. Indeed you can do things against top lvl players just to annoy them. i frapsed it once, it was hilarious

that rogue was top-geared and would have killed the shaman if not for my lvl 35 rogue :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfFU--BKgxY
#64 Feb 12 2011 at 10:10 PM Rating: Default
**
269 posts
Two things pve carebears forget.
1. Red equals dead. Tahts it the factions are at war, and war isnt fair. Sun Tzu knew that war was dirty and that only those that are willing to get dirty will win.

2. There is no such thing as griefing in PvP. See statement above, war is not honorable.
____________________________
MUTED
#65 Feb 13 2011 at 5:05 AM Rating: Decent
Sage
*
130 posts
It is a little narrow minded to say if you do not like PvP roll on a PvE server. You all realize that Rift is a PvE centric game ? Where PvP is an afterthought and there is no risk/reward system in place (or where in a certain place the reward is huge but no risk at all). Besides there is also no consequences in player killing. This will result in imbalance, being it levels, faction numbers, gear or whatever.

Like someone said. You hardly miss anything if you roll on a PvE server in a PvE centric game, sad but so true.

Trion made a good decision to let wardstones be destroyable on PvP servers. Not for PvP purpose but because they show that it is possible to have a separate ruleset in game design between PvP and PvE. Something which no game developer ever did. If this is becoming a trend in MMO development we are in for some good MMO's in a few years where PvP and PvE could work in the same graphical environment.

Also :)
** You are not a griefer if you roll on a PvP server
** You are not a carebear if you roll on a PvE server

Each should roll on the server which they feel comfortable to play and think they will have the most fun. I also believe that a PvE-er don't mind what happens on a PvP server or vice versa but the problem stays the same. PvP in a PvE centric game where the only difference is that you can PK in certain zones (and where gameplay changes have an impact on PvE and PvP servers), does not work very well and only results in shallow gameplay imo.


Edited, Feb 13th 2011 6:19am by Shoomy
#66 Feb 13 2011 at 9:25 AM Rating: Decent
10 posts
Shoomy wrote:
It is a little narrow minded to say if you do not like PvP roll on a PvE server.

I strongly disagree and statements like this just confuse players when selecting servers. It should be common sense.

Shoomy wrote:
You all realize that Rift is a PvE centric game ? Where PvP is an afterthought and there is no risk/reward system in place (or where in a certain place the reward is huge but no risk at all). Besides there is also no consequences in player killing. This will result in imbalance, being it levels, faction numbers, gear or whatever.

Disagree. Although Rift has a ton of PvE content, that doesn't mean that PvP was an afterthought. Also, unlike PvE, there doesn't really need to be a risk/reward system for PvP beyond the personal gratification of the fight. The risk is failure, the gain is success. It's completely natural. FYI, there is gain for PvP kills, which is worked into the invasion system and you gain XP as well as PvP ranks.
Shoomy wrote:
Like someone said. You hardly miss anything if you roll on a PvE server in a PvE centric game, sad but so true.

Disagree. If you really understood the difference between servers and how they'll play out, then you wouldn't have made such a false statement.
Shoomy wrote:
Trion made a good decision to let wardstones be destroyable on PvP servers. Not for PvP purpose but because they show that it is possible to have a separate ruleset in game design between PvP and PvE. Something which no game developer ever did. If this is becoming a trend in MMO development we are in for some good MMO's in a few years where PvP and PvE could work in the same graphical environment.

Yes, it was definitely a positive decision as they were losing the PvP base since OW PvP is so crucial for those that really love PvP. Although, I disagree with your next comment.

It was for PvP purpose... and had absolutely nothing to do with showing off what they're capable of doing. That was just your personal perspective, which was wrong to make as a blanket statement. It is more of a byproduct of their decision, which will definitely be great for the Rift community.

Shoomy wrote:

Also :)
** You are not a griefer if you roll on a PvP server
** You are not a carebear if you roll on a PvE server

Although I finally agree with you here, that doesn't eliminate the perspective of each and how they look at the other. Unfortunately, that will remain in many player's minds.
Shoomy wrote:
Each should roll on the server which they feel comfortable to play and think they will have the most fun. I also believe that a PvE-er don't mind what happens on a PvP server or vice versa but the problem stays the same.

Agreed.
Shoomy wrote:
PvP in a PvE centric game where the only difference is that you can PK in certain zones (and where gameplay changes have an impact on PvE and PvP servers), does not work very well and only results in shallow gameplay imo.

Disagree... but at least you suffixed it with "imo"... so I'll leave it as your opinion. If it boils down to Rift having "shallow gameplay", then why are you even interested in it? For the PvE experience? Based on your comments, you seem to be a bit ignorant about open world PvP.
#67 Feb 13 2011 at 1:57 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Shoomy wrote:
You all realize that Rift is a PvE centric game ? Where PvP is an afterthought and there is no risk/reward system in place (or where in a certain place the reward is huge but no risk at all).

But this is just entirely wrong. PvP isn't an afterthough, it is one of the main paths of advancement in the game.

There are entire souls designed specifically for PvP. There is the warfront system which is entirely designed to match players up for PvP. There is a PvP reputation system that allows you to buy gear designed for PvP. There are even special character stats that apply only to PvP. If this is all an afterthought, then PvE must have also been an afterthought.
Shoomy wrote:
Like someone said. You hardly miss anything if you roll on a PvE server in a PvE centric game, sad but so true.

Well, you do miss out. It's likely something you don't care for, and so you don't care that you're missing out, but PvE servers do lack a gameplay element that PvP servers have.

Open world PvP doesn't and can't occur on PvE servers. The ability to flag yourself is rather pointless, since it doesn't lead to consensual open combat; it primarily leads to baiting and griefing games.

Edited, Feb 13th 2011 1:58pm by Allegory
#68 Feb 13 2011 at 7:34 PM Rating: Decent
5 posts
to each his own...

We all play for different reasons. You mainly specialize in PvE.. I've played with people in previous MMO's that couldn't understand PvE if you showed them videos and wrote it on paper. Molten Core (first raid in WoW) was hard for them and it was just like wow... I don't wanna be mean but I might have to be.

PvP has attracted so many players to these genre of games that it kind of demands a player to understand it and roll with the punches.
It's almost inevitable unless the PvE server is completely PvP free which I'm guessing is? (I've never played on normal server).

I say just keep practicing and just find your balance. Dynamics of PvP just come with time and such. You'll be ok
#69 Feb 14 2011 at 11:46 AM Rating: Decent
14 posts
Allegory wrote:

There are entire souls designed specifically for PvP. There is the warfront system which is entirely designed to match players up for PvP. There is a PvP reputation system that allows you to buy gear designed for PvP. There are even special character stats that apply only to PvP.


(Ok, my first paragraph is in response to that. The rest is further expansion on the idea, but don't feel like I'm adressing you specifically, allegory.)

And all of what you mentioned exists on a PvE server as well. It is all removed and isolated from the open world. Anyone who wants to grind out PvP gear will most likely do so in the most efficient way available to them - much like leveling. Is OW PvP going to level you to 50 faster than anything else? No. In actuality, it's probably the slowest. Not to mention PvP in a leveling sense grants you exp gains. Leveling from questing/dungeons/rifts however, is a constant flow of exp, gear, souls, and money. Is OW PvP going to allow you to grind prestige faster than warfronts? Again, not likely. And so, the richest elements of PvP in this game can exist completely outside of OW PvP. Players are min/max number crunchers. Anyone who wants to be the best of their class tries to get more out of the time they put in. This defaults to warfronts being the main venue for PvP. Ask yourself how much of RIFT's content would you miss out on if you didn't choose a PvP server? That is the difference between a PvE centric game, and a PvP centric game.

Look at a game like DAoC if you want to understand what it is to make a PvP based MMORPG. I mean, really look at that game's end game content. Look at the community. And look at how OW PvP defined the game. So much so, that if you didn't participate in RvR, you missed out on most of the game. I don't know anybody who played DAoC and didn't fight in RvR for the control of keeps or relics.

Now, having said that... I admit that the dynamic rift system leaves potential for RIFT to have meaningful OW PvP. If both factions really embrace combating eachother while attempting to open/close rifts, there can be some awesome battles. That staement however, comes with a huge BUT. And the reason is because the devs have implemented this isolated Warfront system. Ask yourself: If players are grinding pvp gear/soul levels/rep, and are using Warfronts as the most effiecient route; aren't they going to be completely oblivious to dynamic rift spawns in the OW? This comes down to the player's preference. Some will want to stay informed. Some won't care. Either way, you're not going to have the entire community on board to make it work. It'll be devided, which only harms OW PvP's success.

I'm sure there will be niche guilds who play OW PvP as if there was nothing else, and be ready at a moments notice to get in there and stir things up. But the entire warfront idea not only lends itself to the more casual player who maybe doesn't have a lot of time, or want to put in a lot of effort to get to their end goal of gear/prestige/rep level. It also seems appealing to the hardcore PvPer who wants to max out prestige gains over time spent playing. Look at WoW. OW PvP is practiacally non-existant in the sense of faction vs. faction battles. Everyone is PvPing their a** off in BGs and arenas for their gear. In fact, any PvPer in WoW who cares to measure his/her success goes solely by their arena rating, not by how many people they've killed in OW PvP.

OW PvP has to have an infrastructure in place to facilitate meaningful battles. If you don't have that, all you have is random ganking. Players looking for that structure will flock to the instanced PvP.... Even on the PvP realms.

It would be nice to see OW PvP as a main feature. Those who participate gain access to unique content, such as keeps/relics/land that provide bonuses to; exp gains, unique crafting materials/recipies, dungeons or raids, benefits towards an entire guild, etc. But RIFT doesn't offer that, which is fine, because that's what I expect from a game that wasn't designed with PvP as the focal point.





#70 Feb 14 2011 at 5:25 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
130 posts
HoundDawg wrote:
Shoomy wrote:
It is a little narrow minded to say if you do not like PvP roll on a PvE server.

I strongly disagree and statements like this just confuse players when selecting servers. It should be common sense.


Agree, I was merely trying to point out that if someone says something negative about PvP in general, the default response is "If you do not like PvP, go to a PvE server". Which is narrow minded because the one who tries to write a constructive post, is not necessarily against PvP.

HoundDawg wrote:

Shoomy wrote:
You all realize that Rift is a PvE centric game ? Where PvP is an afterthought and there is no risk/reward system in place (or where in a certain place the reward is huge but no risk at all). Besides there is also no consequences in player killing. This will result in imbalance, being it levels, faction numbers, gear or whatever.

Disagree. Although Rift has a ton of PvE content, that doesn't mean that PvP was an afterthought. Also, unlike PvE, there doesn't really need to be a risk/reward system for PvP beyond the personal gratification of the fight. The risk is failure, the gain is success. It's completely natural. FYI, there is gain for PvP kills, which is worked into the invasion system and you gain XP as well as PvP ranks.


Risk versus reward system is out of balance in Rift. And I do not mean emotional risk/reward because that is different for everyone, but factual risk/reward.

You get like 50 favor and 250 XP for a solo kill in OW PvP
You get like 200-300 Favor and 4k XP in 10 minutes if you win a warfront. If you lose it, it is 20-70 favor and 2.5k XP (both at level 30+)

In warfront, there is no risk, but the gain is huge, especially if you compare this to OW PvP. Out of balance. Also do I have a choice ? If I want more risk, will my reward be higher, unfortunately not.

Past MMO's has showed that instanced PvP is THE killer for OW PvP. Above gives you the reason as most players want the easy road to fame.

HoundDawg wrote:
Shoomy wrote:
Like someone said. You hardly miss anything if you roll on a PvE server in a PvE centric game, sad but so true.

Disagree. If you really understood the difference between servers and how they'll play out, then you wouldn't have made such a false statement.


It is alright if you disagree and that I make a false statement. Would be nice if you actual argumented your disagreement.

HoundDawg wrote:
Shoomy wrote:
Trion made a good decision to let wardstones be destroyable on PvP servers. Not for PvP purpose but because they show that it is possible to have a separate ruleset in game design between PvP and PvE. Something which no game developer ever did. If this is becoming a trend in MMO development we are in for some good MMO's in a few years where PvP and PvE could work in the same graphical environment.

Yes, it was definitely a positive decision as they were losing the PvP base since OW PvP is so crucial for those that really love PvP. Although, I disagree with your next comment.

It was for PvP purpose... and had absolutely nothing to do with showing off what they're capable of doing. That was just your personal perspective, which was wrong to make as a blanket statement. It is more of a byproduct of their decision, which will definitely be great for the Rift community.


You know what Blizzard said when PvP-ers asked for a seperate ruleset for PvP servers ? "It can not be done with the resources they have". Besides no other game developer did it.

Trion showed us it can be done, which could have a huge impact for the future of OW PvP in a possitive way as it is proven now that there can be a seperate ruleset for PvE and PvP. Besides what does destroyable wardstones really do ? I already could walk in the opposite quest hub without being attacked by guards. And those wardstones will just respawn.

I think you have a to high expectation of what destroyable wardstones really does for OW PvP. I hope I am wrong. We will see in three months ;-)

HoundDawg wrote:
Shoomy wrote:
PvP in a PvE centric game where the only difference is that you can PK in certain zones (and where gameplay changes have an impact on PvE and PvP servers), does not work very well and only results in shallow gameplay imo.

Disagree... but at least you suffixed it with "imo"... so I'll leave it as your opinion. If it boils down to Rift having "shallow gameplay", then why are you even interested in it? For the PvE experience? Based on your comments, you seem to be a bit ignorant about open world PvP.


In a discussion as this, it is always an opinion, never a fact. You can not measure the statements I make. You can however agree with me or not. Also saying I am ignorant without ever knowing what my experience is in OW PvP or PvP games in general is amusing and says more about you then it says about me.


Allegory wrote:
Shoomy wrote:
You all realize that Rift is a PvE centric game ? Where PvP is an afterthought and there is no risk/reward system in place (or where in a certain place the reward is huge but no risk at all).


But this is just entirely wrong. PvP isn't an afterthough, it is one of the main paths of advancement in the game.

There are entire souls designed specifically for PvP. There is the warfront system which is entirely designed to match players up for PvP. There is a PvP reputation system that allows you to buy gear designed for PvP. There are even special character stats that apply only to PvP. If this is all an afterthought, then PvE must have also been an afterthought.


Edit:
True and i can see the misunderstanding now, PvP is not an afterthought. I meant PvP server or OW PvP.


What game play elements do I miss ? What I can think of is:
- The thrill of being attackable at any time

Other game play elements are also available on PvE server. PvP quests, invasions. Same goes for gear, PvP ranks, PvP attributes, PvP souls and PvP faction experience. Lastly warfronts. Every PvP element is available on PvE servers, every single one, with the only difference that you have a choice if you participate in PvP or not on a PvE server.

The only difference in game design is that there are zones on a PvP server which are contested, something a PvE server has not (and recently the added destroyable wardstones and non-bolstered guards). But there are rumors that there are contested zones in Rift (or will be implemented in the future) for PvE Servers.

Your choice of server (PvE or PvP) can have a huge impact on your game play or fun factor. But that has more to do with the community then it has with game design. As game design on both servers is (almost) identical with a few exceptions.

----------

The focus of developers is on PvE with PvP elements for the majority of their playerbase (PvE server), not on OW PvP (PvP server). If the focus is on OW PvP you will see that certain PvE game mechanism will be taken out of the game. PvE mechanism that contradicts OW PvP.

If you look at MMORPG games, where PvP is the focus. You will see there is a system in place where more risk gives better rewards. Also there are consequences if you make a decision in the persistent world. A game where the focus is PvP, is a game where PvE is an afterthought and does not have any real impact in PvP.

Edited, Feb 14th 2011 7:27pm by Shoomy
#71 Feb 14 2011 at 5:35 PM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Atreidestw wrote:
That is the difference between a PvE centric game, and a PvP centric game.

I didn't say it was a PvP centric game. I said that PvP wasn't an afterthought, and it isn't. It seems like your whole post is built around the supposition that I believe Rift is a pvp focused game. I don't.
Atreidestw wrote:
And all of what you mentioned exists on a PvE server as well. It is all removed and isolated from the open world. Anyone who wants to grind out PvP gear will most likely do so in the most efficient way available to them - much like leveling. Is OW PvP going to level you to 50 faster than anything else? No. In actuality, it's probably the slowest. Not to mention PvP in a leveling sense grants you exp gains. Leveling from questing/dungeons/rifts however, is a constant flow of exp, gear, souls, and money. Is OW PvP going to allow you to grind prestige faster than warfronts? Again, not likely. And so, the richest elements of PvP in this game can exist completely outside of OW PvP. Players are min/max number crunchers. Anyone who wants to be the best of their class tries to get more out of the time they put in. This defaults to warfronts being the main venue for PvP. Ask yourself how much of RIFT's content would you miss out on if you didn't choose a PvP server?

I think you're confused about what content is.

Content isn't the trophy you get for the completion of a task, it's the task itself. OW PvP is content because it provides an experience players can choose to partake in. Whether or not players receive some sort of trinket or are going after some carrot dangling on a stick is completely irrelevant.

I don't PvP to grind out prestige, exp, or gear. I think it's nice to happen to earn those things while I PvP, but I primarily PvP for the sake of the experience itself. I think it's awful to believe in the idea that players only--or even primarily--do anything in a game to get some virtual item or achievement that you will soon make obsolete or that will become irrelevant the moment the player stops playing the game. That isn't a game; that is a job that pays you in pictures of 3D swords.

Edited, Feb 14th 2011 5:37pm by Allegory
#72 Feb 14 2011 at 6:16 PM Rating: Good
Sage
*
130 posts
Allegory wrote:
I don't PvP to grind out prestige, exp, or gear. I think it's nice to happen to earn those things while I PvP, but I primarily PvP for the sake of the experience itself. I think it's awful to believe in the idea that players only--or even primarily--do anything in a game to get some virtual item or achievement that you will soon make obsolete or that will become irrelevant the moment the player stops playing the game. That isn't a game; that is a job that pays you in pictures of 3D swords.


Fully agree, good read :)
#73thehellfire, Posted: Feb 14 2011 at 7:25 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Actually you get 400-1500 xp per kill in Open world PvP. I get 600xp on noobs 8 lvls under me, so Open pvp is where the xp is at.
#74 Feb 14 2011 at 7:55 PM Rating: Decent
14 posts
Allegory wrote:

Content isn't the trophy you get for the completion of a task, it's the task itself. OW PvP is content because it provides an experience players can choose to partake in. Whether or not players receive some sort of trinket or are going after some carrot dangling on a stick is completely irrelevant.

I don't PvP to grind out prestige, exp, or gear. I think it's nice to happen to earn those things while I PvP, but I primarily PvP for the sake of the experience itself. I think it's awful to believe in the idea that players only--or even primarily--do anything in a game to get some virtual item or achievement that you will soon make obsolete or that will become irrelevant the moment the player stops playing the game. That isn't a game; that is a job that pays you in pictures of 3D swords.


I would disagree with what you classify as content. I'd define content as something designed by the developers as an activity to participate in. Being flagged for PvP is nothing more than a value - 0 or 1. Now, if there was an activity for players to collectively work towards in OW PvP, sure, I'd call that content. In fact, that was my entire post. That all the 'contnent' for PvP is instanced and removed from the open world - taking away from the OW PvP experience. As for the afterthought comment, I think it was more along the lines that WoW's PvP was a definite afterthought, and the devs for RIFT looked to WoW when designing their PvP. I doubt it's an accedent that RIFT's PvP almost identically mirrors WoW's PvP after the first year.

I would extend your definition of what you consider OW PvP to be user-created content. In where, the devs have left something completely wide open for the users to come up with something to do. But that still requires the community to be onboard, and that's tough to do. Like I mentioned, you might have a few guilds that dedicate themselves to OW PvP. But it turns out to be more of a niche thing on the server. And grats to you if you can get a lot of players to subscribe to it.

And the idea that players do something in an MMO to gain a reward is EXACTLY the primary goal to which players set to attain. This game isn't even out and people are asking about.... end game content. As in "Once I hit level 50, how am I going to stay occupied?". New conent is released in MMOs contunually for the sole purpose of giving new things for players to do and achieve. MMOs hold players' attention for months, if not years because of the structured long-term goals set for players. If the end-game content isn't there or is unsatisfactory, players will quit (see: Warhammer Online). Sure, there's a social aspect of it too. But a lot of people might not want to pay $15 a month to sit in town and chat with friends if that's all there was left to do. <- which is pretty much what happened in WoW between friends and I, only a month after Cata came out.

Content might not be just the trophy, but players will still set out to get that trophy. And when they get it, they'll have usually burned themselves out on the experience required to get it. And so they either move on to the next experience that offers a reward, or they become bored and quit. How often do guilds lose raiders once a player gets all his gear and suddenly stops showing up to raids. It happens. It happens a lot.

I will agree that PvP can be a fun experience just for the sake of PvP. I had a 29 twink rogue in WoW that I played for months. I didn't do it for any type of gear, but rather to enjoy a BG in a lower bracket. Playing CTF with less CDs and no mounts was a lot more fun at times than the level 60 bracket. But even then, that was battleground PvP (structured content) because there was nothing in terms of OW PvP to do (yes it was a PvP server).

Anywho, I think it's interesting to get other player's insight into games a vast as an MMO. There's definately a lot of ground to cover, and it's all open to each player's point of view. If my posts seem long, it's because I feel it's important to fully explore the resons behind the point of view someone believes in. I didn't type all this out to say "you're wrong!" in as many words as possible. In fact, I try to keep an open mind and make concessions where possible. Beta starts tomorrow, so rather than commenting on the game, I think I'll spend my free time playing it. I'm sure you all will as well :p
#75 Feb 15 2011 at 12:44 AM Rating: Decent
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Atreidestw wrote:
I would disagree with what you classify as content. I'd define content as something designed by the developers as an activity to participate in.

That's pretty much my definition. Though I'd broaden it to "activity to participate in," as I don't think it needs to necessarily be explicitly intended by the developers.
Atreidestw wrote:
Being flagged for PvP is nothing more than a value - 0 or 1. Now, if there was an activity for players to collectively work towards in OW PvP, sure, I'd call that content.

Being flagged isn't just some "value." It enables you to do things you could not do before. You cannot OW PvP without being flagged. Add in all the goals and rewards to work for and you still have zero content if people can't flag to kill each other.

You don't need rewards or goals. People participating in OW pvp simply for the sake of pvping with no further goal or objective is content. A complete lack of OW pvp objectives does not equal a complete lack of OW pvp content, and certainly does not equal a lack of pvp content (which was the original point of contention).

This may not be the type of content you desire, but it is pvp content, and it is more than an afterthought.
Atreidestw wrote:
And the idea that players do something in an MMO to gain a reward is EXACTLY the primary goal to which players set to attain. This game isn't even out and people are asking about.... end game content. As in "Once I hit level 50, how am I going to stay occupied?". New conent is released in MMOs contunually for the sole purpose of giving new things for players to do and achieve. MMOs hold players' attention for months, if not years because of the structured long-term goals set for players. If the end-game content isn't there or is unsatisfactory, players will quit (see: Warhammer Online). Sure, there's a social aspect of it too. But a lot of people might not want to pay $15 a month to sit in town and chat with friends if that's all there was left to do. <- which is pretty much what happened in WoW between friends and I, only a month after Cata came out.

Content might not be just the trophy, but players will still set out to get that trophy. And when they get it, they'll have usually burned themselves out on the experience required to get it. And so they either move on to the next experience that offers a reward, or they become bored and quit. How often do guilds lose raiders once a player gets all his gear and suddenly stops showing up to raids. It happens. It happens a lot.

In my opinion, the present model of primarily reward driven gameplay is a bad model for MMORPGs to follow. At best, it's an evil of convenience because it can be difficult to design real content for an MMORPG. What I believe is wrong with most MMORPGs is that primarily at end game, people don't care much about the actual content, they just want the rewards.

Take end game raiding. Present the player with two choices: you can either 1) go through the raid as you have to now and receive your loot, or 2) skip the raid entirely and simply receive your loot. Probably the first few times the majority of players would pick option 1, but after having been through the raid maybe three time I'm almost certain most would pick option 2. When people are only experiencing content because they are required to do so to gain something else and they would honestly rather not do it, then that means your content is a chore and not fun.

You can ask the same question about leveling. What would most players pick if you offered them the choice between starting as a level 1 character and starting as a max level character?

This is severely different from most single player games. I don't think anyone would choose to start Super Mario 64 with all 120 stars unlocked for them. Earning each of those stars isn't a chore; it's something they want to do for the sake of doing it. Stars aren't so much a reward as they are a guide through the game. This is how MMORPGs should be built. The quests should be something I would do even without receiving exp or gold. I shouldn't be grinding to get gear; gear should be a byproduct of having fun.
#76 Feb 15 2011 at 6:32 AM Rating: Decent
10 posts
Allegory, you're so on the money with the replies, there's really no need for me to continue replying. Other than saying, I agree with you 100% and couldn't say it any better. Thanks.
#77 Feb 15 2011 at 8:29 AM Rating: Good
***
2,204 posts
I play on PvE servers because of two reasons...

I can go AFK (having a 4yr old and a wife does that sometimes) when I want and when I come back I don't have to worry about being dead because of another person killed you... but having an NPC kill you is another story.

I personally do not like trying to play the game while always looking over my shoulder. Being stressed out from always thinking you are getting ready to die isn't fun for me.... and since I am using my money to play I figure I should do something I enjoy doing and relax.

I played on a PvP server up to L.40 (when the cap was 60) and the "ganking" does get a little slower as you level up, but I am not going to sit here and generalize that everyone on PvP realms actively seek out lower level characters to kill because I know that isn't true.

The only thing that bothers me (no... it doesn't make me "mad") about the PvP vs. PvE arguement is when some PvPers constantly think that PvPing makes them better players. I am not saying PvEers are better players either...

I also don't like being called a "carebear" just because I want to play on a certain server, and on that same note I don't go around calling people who play on PvP realms names like Hitlers, Churchhills, Pattons, or Shermans either...

To each their own... IMO.


Edited, Feb 15th 2011 8:30am by PentUpAnger
#78 Feb 16 2011 at 2:28 AM Rating: Decent
3 posts
First!! This is an excellent point, Allegory:

Quote:
Take end game raiding. Present the player with two choices: you can either 1) go through the raid as you have to now and receive your loot, or 2) skip the raid entirely and simply receive your loot. Probably the first few times the majority of players would pick option 1, but after having been through the raid maybe three time I'm almost certain most would pick option 2. When people are only experiencing content because they are required to do so to gain something else and they would honestly rather not do it, then that means your content is a chore and not fun.


I used to play World of Warcraft. A lot. I did a lot of raiding, and I did a lot of Heroic dungeons. Even when I didn't need the gear, I still went back to older content and ran it with people because it was fun; working together with other players, as a team, to accomplish something more than you can do on your own. And for that matter, Karazhan was just plain awesome as an environment to play in. The Burning Crusade dungeons and raids were fun content. :D

But, that was back in WoW: Burning Crusade though. In Wrath of the Lich King, the content wasn't as good. None of the dungeons were enough fun that I wanted to go back to any of them; the only reason I ran them was for the points I could buy raid gear with. A couple of the raids were OK and tolerable, but most of them were ones I would gladly skip after having been through once or twice. It wasn't fun, and that's why I quit playing.

Content is worthless if it isn't fun.

And now, expanding on that: PvP.

When I got bored with instances and raiding, I turned to WoW's PvP. I did battlegrounds, I had an arena team, I did city raids and open-world PvP zones. I tried leveling a character on a PvP server. It just wasn't my thing. It felt like a chore: I had to muck through the lower levels of the Arena ratings in order to earn the points to buy PvP gear that would give me a decent chance against someone else who already had PvP gear (without it I was more or less a free kill, even in good raiding gear). Yes, I enjoyed some parts of it, but I enjoyed it the most when it was actually a decent fight. When my arena team wiped the floor with the other side, because they didn't have gear or know what they were doing, it was boring. When my BG got its **** kicked because the other team had better gear and was much more coordinated, it was boring. And, quite bluntly, getting trampled by a gank party when I'm trying to level was also boring. Snare/stun/stun/stun/dead. Twiddle my thumbs while I wait for them to leave/try to find a place I can rez out of LoS, whatever, I just want to finish my quest and go turn it in. Wasting time because I was ganked in the middle of a fight against a tough quest boss was just boring for me.

With the instanced PvP on the PvE server, I had a better chance of having a good, even match, and when I wasn't in the mood to deal with it, I wasn't forced to deal with the chore of open world PvP when I didn't want to be.

PvE can be just as challenging and entertaining as PvP is, and (this is directed at comments I read earlier in the thread) choosing a PvE server over a PvP one doesn't mean someone is a crappy player, a carebear, or a wimp. It just means that they don't enjoy the open world PvP as much and don't want it interfering with the other things they choose to do.

James2nd, I am looking at you specifically here. ("you have your carebear server to keep you nice, safe and cozy" and "I am LoLing because they were too weak to play PvP") (And to a lesser extent, HoundDawg: "there's no sugar coating that (like you'll find on the PvE servers)" What about the sugar coating of "You can die as much as you want with no penalty"? That doesn't sound very warlike.) I agree that a PvP server should be an all-out, no rules gank fest; that's the whole point of having a separate PvP server in the first place. In fact, all of the RP servers should probably be PvP as well - that'd make more sense than an RP PvE server. Aside from that point though, your post is full of crap. "Only the strong survive"? No, anybody with the time and patience to work through getting ganked survives. "Strength" has little to do with it; if you die five times or five hundred, it won't matter, you can still get to the level cap and collect the best gear with only a bit of time lost. I'm sure if I were to insinuate that you only wanted to play on an open world PvP server so you could avoid fair fights in PvP, gank people weaker than you, and that you're too incompetent to be able to raid in PvE, you would be offended. You do the open world PvP because it's fun. Fantastic. I don't do it, because I don't have as much fun with it. That should really be the whole end of the discussion, without any of this other crap about being a weaker or a stronger player.

If you like open world PvP, roll on a PvP server. If you don't, roll on a PvE one. If you're in the middle, you have to decide which way would bring you the most fun.
#79 Feb 17 2011 at 6:08 AM Rating: Decent
*
54 posts
Am I insane for reading most of this thread because the debate back'n'forth was touching a lot of common thoughts I've had regarding PvE and PvP rulesets? Hopefully not. :o

I see a lot of old timers here with mentions of DAoC, EQ, etc... So hopefully the points I'll expound upon will be heard and debated rather than QQ'd at. (At this time I digress and would like to say how reassuring having such a conversation is for the community - which I admit to being a big part of any MMO experience regardless of the actual game - I'm hoping to find solace in.) I've been looking for an MMO that will fill the voids I get from others for a really long time. Starting in UO-Felluca and moving through some 20'ish MMOs, my gaming experience has led me to be a picky focker. >.<

First off, I'd love to play on a PvP server. As it sounds Rift is, open world PvP with no community driven objectives (events withdrawn) is pointless to me. DAoC was built on controlling the frontiers and that worked really well for dynamics of ganking, organized group play (8v8, 16v16, etc.), or large realm battles. (Of course, Odin's Eye ruined a lot of it, yet added another element to the dynamics of PvP.) Simple open world PvP with no repurcussions to mold the gameplay is just dumb and fails. UO did it right when the bounty system was in place. Then, for whatever reason, they removed it and griefing just became griefing. Sure, it was griefing prior to that, but at least there was some balance to it...key word: some. WoW failed because there was lack of purpose for it other than HKs for gear. That quickly disappeared when the ranking system went away.

Shadowbane was my long time ideal system but it was destroyed by other reasons. :/

I've yet to try PvP'ing in Rift, but I'm still learning what I like about it first. A karma system would be nice, but only if it's integrated with the opposing factions and quests, npc community or guild systems with morality rankings - things of that nature. Oh to be back with running clean & tight groups that made a difference on the server. A gamer can dream, right? ^^
____________________________
..::|FFXIV|::.. Melmond - Maxire - http://lodestone.finalfantasyxiv.com/rc/character/status?cicuid=2815738
..::|WoW|::.. Mug'thol - Maxire - 80 Warrior 5865GS (Retired)
..::|FFXI|::.. Fairy - Maxire - Rank 8 - 75 SAM, 58BLM, 57 WHM, 52 WAR, 42 BRD, 40 RNG, 40 NIN, 39 THF, 38 BST, 38 DRK, 37 DNC (Retired)
..::|DAoC|::.. Merlin - Maxire 50 Hero R7.5 1156 Armorcrafting, Drakom 50 Mentalist R5.5, Talons 50 Nightshade R5.7, Maliky 50 Bard - R4.3 (Retired)
..::|UO|::.. Retired, long live the Talon
1 2 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 21 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (21)