The PvPvE Compromise

Then everyone not playing in single player and offline should be penalized, too as this was one of the Kickstarter goals, too.

 

I just feel, the decisions they made makes nobody really lucky.

I for myself, if thinking egoistic is
Get rid of pvp and make a great Cooperative Roleplay Game

Maximum of pvp i need is an optional flag.

I just tried to discuss from the other side, because im nit allways egoistic and i think pvp players are good for the game.
More people, more money as already was said.

Not just Felucca, we have FM and SPO to avoid Felucca äh pvp

@Earl Atogrim von Draken
yep seroiusly dedicated, but all easy i dont want to wake up too much feeling, just constructive discussion that maybe leid one day to a well compromise for both playstyles, but maybe not, well then let it just be, o am happy with the game, not very happy, because of the pvp only scenes, but as i said i can live with that ofc.

 

If I recall right, isn't offline mode already greatly accelerated?

 

The 3 to 5 people that "feel locked out of content" need to get over themselves, quit whining, and enjoy all aspects of the game.

The only problem here is the way people are choosing to "feel", and trying to propagate this idea that it is unfair they feel that way.

There really is no problem other than mildly annoying threads on the forums.

 

The only problem I have with "locked content" is if it is story related. Being shoved into some undeground ghetto if I don't want to participate in PvP on the cool map is not ok. PvP-only scenes that are totally unrelated to the story I don't care about.

 

@2112Starman i just had an idea the other way around and was arguing for more PVP. I dont find your posts very constructive.
When i think over it. I just was willing to trade PVP only scenes are not PVP in FM and SPO for all (pve) scenes are PVP only scenes in MP.
Maybe thats it in short.

@Thwip nobody can get rid of his feelings and we should everybody grant to respect that, therefore i made a pro and more pvp suggestion, although i am just for having all scenes also available without pvp - just for FM and SPO.

I understand @Lord_Darkmoon and also @curt very well.

Hej it was really just a spontaneous idea and i know some are just dont want to talk anymore about it - sorry.

 

the thing about meeting strangers while pve and maybe group with them or find a new guildmate - that leads me to the Hospitaller thing - is the best argument against my own idea!!!

and hey i am the very last one that will gank you - believe me - i'll be more of this type dying by a mob while i constantly try to heal you and don't get that you are not in my goup

 

This shouldn't be an issue. The vast majority wouldn't notice or care if PVP was completely removed from the game. There is only a tiny group that wants to participate. Any focus on PVP shifts resources to that tiny group and negatively impacts the rest of the player base. Port should be concentrating resources and effort on the people that pay the bills.

Here's a much simpler approach. Have a PVP login mode. Since the skills and goals of the PVP game are entirely different, have all experience in PVP mode be special PVP experience. If you need to nerf a skill because it's unbalanced for PVP, let that nerf apply only in PVP mode.

Don't let PVP detract from the game for the vast majority of the player base.

 

Democracy isn't enforcing the will of the (not even proven in this case) majority. It's protecting the rights of the minoritys.

Never worked in mmo history. There is not a single example out there where this system proved to be a good idea.

Again, there is no way for you to actually know what this imagined majority is.
Beside, let's get back to the KS goals, shall we?
Meaningful pvp.
And not the kind of doll dress box game with a bit of action and questing you seem to prefer.

 

Both Everquest and World of Warcraft have special PVP servers with different rules. Both quite successful.

 

But if they had only PvP servers then both games would have failed.

 

Absolutely true. The PVP audience is dwarfed by the people that don't like it, and don't want it.

 

Eve Online is probably the most cutthroat and successful games that emphasize PVP, but it possible to participate in everything the game offers and never engage in PVP combat. This is true even in null sec. That is why it is such a successful game.

 

I prefer SOTA to focus on PvE and have just some PvP options... I think it's good how it is now, no need to change anything, have a few areas for PvP, where PK kids can jump at each other throats, but leave the rest of the world alone..

 

@Andrew Silverston I believe that's what the shardfalls and Blood Bay are. And, I agree with you completely.

 

Most probably, with SotA i am sure they would have a bigger playerbase if there would had been a PvP+ server. They lost all the PvP/PK-Guilds and a lot had been here but Portalium chased them away.

 

If its related to the single player story, sure, but why shouldnt there be a part of the story which on can only experience if you PvP? AFAIK thats not against the kickstarter goals. No one would complain if there would be a story-side line which is only playable. for lets say, bards. Therefore i dont see any reason why there shouldnt be a part of the story which is only for PvP players. As long as any PvEr can finish the main story line.

// Armar

 

Sure, as long as the main storyline is not affected why not.

 

They simply cant lock out PvE'ers from the main story line. I dont have any idea how this will work out with shardfalls beein PvP zones though

 

Nothing is permanent. They already paid for the game and, once Portalarium gets PvP worked out better, they'll be back.