Poll: PVP or PVE - Which Are You? [UNOFFICIAL]

In this, I think you are absolutely correct.

So, now what are you going to do?

 

Oh. A private chat from someone who heard it from a developer. Well then...

I heard mages will have staves that fire photon torpedoes. Do you believe that?

 

I guess I just don't understand why people are so interested in non-consensual PvP. The only real difference is that, if PvP is consensual, you can kill people with no flagging / karma penalty. i.e. because you'd declared yourselves enemies, the other party is considered a red to you (and vice versa)

If the goal is to deny people access to something like a rare resource, then I agree. They should use the “control point” mechanism to have some PvP mini-game over said node.

 

Pretty much this. The existence of the Selective Multiplayer aspect at all pretty much negates the concept of a return to a pre-UO:R type of game.

The goal, then, becomes to make PvP have more substance than killing a miner for their ingots. To that end, so far we have heard of "Control Points", basically, control of certain hexes on the map of strategic importance (this would also include Town Sieges), and specific quest types, generally moving resources illicitly or hunting those moving said resources, that involve the possibility of PvP. Of course, then the question becomes is it necessary in the process of these reasons for PvP to have "Full Loot" as well.

 

I'm leaning more towards PVE, my idea here is that we should all have fun together. Many (poorly balanced) PVP games tend to degenerate into curbstomp battles where the maxed out and well equiped players completely dominate everybody else, this will only be fun for a couple of people involved.

Though that's just my experience, I don't know what type of safeguards the devs are going to implement here.

 

And you think i care the slightest what you think?

I believe the guy i spoke too and thats good enough for me.

 

It creates an athmosphere of rewards with a spice of danger in the world both for criminals (if there is consequences), PvP players and PvE players that you dont get from consensual PvP. I played both styles and i prefer the non-consensual one.

As a gatherer in UO i enjoyed gathering north of Minoc looking over my shoulder all the time. It gave me a thrill i didnt experience in other game styles.

I never been on the other side but i knew many PK:s and they loved the hunt and the risk of getting into statloss which were there way of feeling what my miner felt. They had put a reward on their heads that the brave ones could gather if they had the balls.

It is not always fair in the non-consensual game world but it beat consensual any day in the week.

And without full loot it will be as interesting as watching paint dry.

 

That is my business.

 

Aion basically had all of this. I had 4 choices of where to go:
1) My own instanced "safe" territory
2) My own non instanced territory where there was threat of invaders (you could effectivly play anti-pk here)
3) The Abyss, there there was PvP all the time
4) The enemy's non instanced territory, which was hostile to me in many ways and over time with many kills I'd get small stat loss and show up on their maps as a target

Anyone could dial up their risk vs reward. All PvP was consensual because you could go to a safer zone if you really wanted. (Although the risk of getting killed on your own territory as #2 was pretty low.)

 

When i heard RG talk about contraband quests that really got my attention. Problem is, ive been hearing people say things like "if the only way to a certain reward is PvP i wont play". PvE players dont want a contraband quest available to people who enjoy PvP because they feel that it forces them to PvP in a way, to be able to get certain rewards. Its unfair to them in other words, that the PvP style of play is rewarded more than PvE.....

But if you really think about it, if Im doing an optional quest involving me being potentially exposed to a bunch of pk's why shouldnt I get an extra reward? Im doing more work dealing with actual players than some NPC monster that just walks straight toward you to melee and cast random spells. A contraband quest I imagine would be much more challenging than a PvE quest. If im willing to take up the challenge I ought to be rewarded. I think if im out fishing in the ocean with a bunch of pirate ships full of actual players who are pirates I should be rewarded more than a person who chooses to go out fishing in a bare ocean with nothing but fish and treasure. Its no different from a player who chooses to slay sheep and skin them for their income, rather than slaying dragons and skinning them for their scales which are worth much much more but is much more dangerous to do.

 

It doesn't matter what I think, and it doesn't matter what the guy you spoke to thinks, or his mother's brother's sister's cousin.

What matters is what Richard Garriott thinks, and when we hear it from him, or officially announced on the web site, or when we see it in game during testing. Until then, you are just another guy with an opinion, just like the rest of us.

 

The issue is not the existence of the contraband quest. The potential issues are:

- Rewards from PvP content, that have no equivalent obtainable through pure PvE, that help players in PvE.

- PvE content that is locked behind PvP requirements.

- Tuning the PvP rewards to be so above the PvE ones that players that prefer PvE over PvP end doing PvP just for the rewards (and, thus, enjoying the game less than they should).

If those are avoided - in other words, if PvPers don't have an unfair gearing advantage over PvE players, if PvE players are still able to do all PvE content, and the difference in rewards is not enough to push players into doing the kind of content they dislike just for the increased rewards - I don't care about which PvP content exists or how it's rewarded.

If you are exposing yourself to PvP because you find it more fun, why would you ever need extra rewards? Or is your interest merely in slowing down the progression of PvE players so PvPers can feel somehow special?

IMHO PvP progression speed should to be tuned to be roughly the same as PvE progression speed. Players should never feel forced to choose PvP over PvE, or vice versa, due to increased efficiency. If PvP players fail more and have higher losses, their rewards should be somehow increased to compensate for that reduced amount of rewards they get, but not any higher.

I've seen enough proficient PvPers fail utterly in PvE content I consider "simple" to know this isn't automatically true; it's a matter of tuning. And without first seeing the PvE content of SotA we have no way to tell how challenging it will be.
BTW, any PvE content that takes, on average, more than two tries for a player to get through is, by definition, more challenging than PvP content (if you define challenge by how likely the player is to fail, which is the definition I tend to use).

You get as extra rewards the thrill of the danger, the fun in the PvP combat, the bounties (and, if player looting exists, the loot) if you defeat the pirates. Sincerely, if that isn't enough for you to choose PvP over PvE at least some times, then perhaps you are not really a PvPer.

On a side note, I like how Elite Dangerous is planning to handle this: playing PvE-only will make players meet more, and more dangerous, NPCs. In other words, choosing PvP will be, on average, easier, with spikes in challenge when the player meets a hostile player. Exactly what I want here too

 

If you do not like PvP, you can still obtain the PvP rewards by purchasng them from other players. Its just like those bulk order deeds in UO, many people didnt want to create an account with 5 smiths to get the BOD's they needed, instead they did some other activity they actually enjoyed and purchased the BOD's from other players. PvP content is PvP content, of course we shouldnt lock any PvE content behind PvP content. Otherwise... what will the single player offline players do? I think that if your in a more dangerous PvP environment a little tune up wouldnt hurt, if a person is good enough at the game that they can acquire resources in that environment they should be entitled to an extra reward. And of course you dont need to tune it up SO high that PvEr's could never compete. Tough to determine how much you can tune it up though, guess theres only one way to find out, beta test. Plus MMO's have a habit of adapting and fixing overtime. If the game ends up being way out of balance due to extra rewards for PvPers im sure its something that we can go "whoa, lets just not do this anymore". I think that you could potentially tune up the rewards for PvP so high, that the PvEr's would pretty much all go to PvP JUST to obtain the rewards and end up not enjoying themselves, but same thing can almost be said for those who like a PvP environment. If the only reward for PvP is the extra excitement, then that could end up pushing PvPers into the PvE environment which they dont enjoy, because theres no actual gain in resources or rares for them in the PvP environment which only increases their chances of losing something. If theres an option for PvP no one is forced in it, and no one should be forced into the PvE either. If theres a certain special reward that you can acheive doing a certain thing in a game then you dont have to do the work to obtain the reward if you dont want to. If you dont want to fight with a dragon to get his scales you can stick with killing zombies for the 60 gp a peice. If you dont want the PvP rewards then you dont have to PvP.
Bounties and loot work well. The hardcore PKer could roll in quite a bit of loot, and the Hardker PKKer could do the same and also pick up the bounty. So a great PvPer ill admit *grrr!* does get a reward. And yes you are right, im not really a PvPer! But I like the environment, its exciting, sometimes its horrible yea... getting pked and looted is never fun even when you overall like the environment. So what I would like is to be able to do my thing in this dangerous environment and be rewarded for it. Such as the contraband quest, stealthing was something I really enjoyed in a full loot PvP environment. I could scavenge corpses and steal things. It was exciting. I imagine it would be lots of fun to get a semi rare or something once in awhile by picking up an item that flags me criminal or something and as a result all players nearby are able to see me and attack me, then I can put my stealthing skills to use and hopefully escape them and bank the item eventually! =P And then theres resource gathering. Mining or fishing in areas I can be attacked by pk's was... interesting even though I knew I could be killed. If all I get for this is the excitement theres no reason to do it. So I just wont opt in for pvp while resource gathering. Ill still enjoy the game though but if I can get more than just excitement that would be cool.

 

Im going to use a better analogy here....
Dragon scales can only obtained slaying dragons, Obtaining contraband rewards or certain PvP only semi rares you can only obtain through PvP. And what are the values of these items? Well thats one things thats really cool about this fictional capitalistic environment, the market will determine that. So what is wrong with having dragon scales only obtainable thru slaying dragons, or ingots only obtainable through mining, wood being obtainable only through lumberjacking? Different players do different things and have different trades. If you MUST PvP to obtain a certain item, what is the harm? You can still purchase the item earning gold through your trade of choice. If your a PvE only smith and you want to purchase a PvP only semi rare your free to do so. The PvPers will probably be more than happy to trade/sell the item to you. Thats the beauty of free enterprise right? =P

 

I think the argument, in terms of your example, are similar to this... If you get, for example, an item that has a +1 to hit another player but has no effect on monsters/NPCs, that would be appropriate. But if you get a really rare metal that a blacksmith could not get any other way and will affect PvE stats if used in a weapon, that would be much less okay. (Again, only an example.)

 

Nope, that's the thing, Blizzard made terribly wrong with it's "Buying Equipment from Other Players" (or short: the "Auction House") in Diablo 3. Since you weren't able to find the items you need ingame (for the dropping chances are near zero), you were forced into buying the important stuff from other players, or else you weren't well equipped for the content.

What happened? If you didn't buy from the other players, you had no chance of competing the content. And for players, who equipped themselves completely over other players, the content became too easy.

What followed?

1. Balancing was broken: The difficulty of the content was more and more based on buying from other players, since Blizzard had only two chances: either making the content much too easy for players buying from other players or much too hard for players who don't want to buy from other player; Blizzard did the second => forcing players to buy stuff from other players, if they want to compete for the content

What was the fallout of this?

1. People lost the bond to the equipment they weared => There was no feeling of achievement anymore, no visible reward for your hard work => people became bored and asked themselves, why they have to play this game at all...
2. People who didn't want to buy the content necessary equipment from other player, left the game, since they were under equipped for the content
3. Blizzard realizing it's error and taking out the Auction House of the game

Diablo 3 is just one example for a balancing problem, I encountered in nearly every MMO I played so far (for me it was worst in Lord of the Rings Online, where the normal content became ridiculously easy)

What does this mean for me and SotA?

1. I hate, when extra reward is catered towards specific playstyles, since it destroys the balancing of the game. The advantage, players gain through this playstyle (doesn't have to be PvP, could be Raid content, too) over other players leads to an imbalance in ressources and equipment => forcing the developers to balance the difficulty according to one of the two emerging groups (the under equipped and the over equipped players) => on the long run it completely destroys the balance of the game
2. most MMOS I know tend to create "special" content for the over equipped players, which leads to elitism in this crowd (doesn't matter if PvE or PvP) => it forces players into this playstyle, if they want to see the most challenging content => for players of this playstyle the "normal" content became much too easy and boring
3. In the end nobody wins: the one group stuck to it's litttle island of hard content, since everything else became too easy and wasn't a challenge anymore; and the other group was annoyed by the elitism of the other group and wasn't too happy, because the felt, that the challenging content was withhold from them
4. In my experience players, who earn items and ressources through their playstyle, don't automatically sale this stuff to players of other playstyles, but first equip themselves, then their friends, guild, etc. And the rest of the players have to buy the expensive leftovers, when they hit the market some day.
5. Auction Houses have to be included with great care. I like that Portalarium doesn't want a global auctionhouse, but even the local markets can lead to a massive imbalance in ressources and equipments (when important items become too expensive for players of some specific playstyle)

=> I support Silent Strider, that no playstyle should be rewarded with more and better ressources/equipment over the others. But I'm all for compensating the risk. Balancing is difficult, but it has to be done...

 

@AndiZ275
Ok, as one previously of that elite hardcore set, I have a problem with your rundown, mostly in points 1)-3): I played that "special" content, met a LOT of other people who did so some better than me some not so much, and it seemed totally appropriate that those who tried harder and worked harder and succeeded at really difficult tasks should have nicer stuff. I never begrudged anyone his or her cool goodies, and I never had anyone express displeasure to ME about the cool stuff I had. I got a lot of "where did you get that!?", but never any hatin'. I hear you saying that it made you unhappy, but consider this...

Bill Nobody and I join the game on the same day. Bill and I do NOT know each other, though in this little story we can occasionally cross paths just for amusement's sake. I am a MUCH better player than Bill, hands down. Anything you can use to measure playing ability, from PvP to PvE to crafting to marketing, I do better. I even manage to do the /dance emotes better than he does.

When we go out adventuring, I can kill stuff he cannot, I socialize better, get more friends, found a larger, more powerful, and more effective guild. Hell, he doesn't found his guild, he just joins a bunch of similar players, so his entire guild is kinda meh.

After six months of that, what do I have to show for being better? Does he miss out on anything for being kinda lame?

If the answer is that I have more stuff, then not ONLY am I a better player, but now I have better stuff to show for it. Bill, quite understandably, will feel kinda envious of my better stuff. This diminishes his game experience.
If the answer is that Bill get's a "fair" crack at everything I do, with me never gaining an advantage, then what is the point of me putting in effort? I feel like I'm riding a conveyor belt, with everyone forced into the exact same speed of progress, and my game experience is diminished.

There is no "everybody wins" to that scenario.

Personally, I think that there SHOULD be a reward to being in some way exceptional. In real life, it's gonna be real hard to find Bill Nobody, since almost everyone is good at SOMETHING. But when Ara is much better at PvP than I am and spends five times as much gametime IN PvP as I do, I really think some sort of benefit should accrue. When I organize a large team of players to tackle really hard content, there should be some reward for us accomplishing our goals. Those benefits, whatever they are, should be neither inconsequential nor temporary, a pat on the head just isn't good enough. If, however, a reward is given, then the players who play better, harder, and longer will gradually develop a distinct advantage over the players who just fart around and play a mediocre and intermittent game. That's just life.

The diablo loot system, not only in D3 but in D2, and even in D1 to some degree, was an attempt to force co-dependence on the player base. I don't know if you ever noticed, but in D2, two to three times as much loot dropped for some OTHER class as dropped for yours in single player, and it was almost always the SAME 'other class'. It was a preset rotation expressed as an algorhythm in the loot tables. The point was to force your character to enguage in trade with other players, so everyone had a reason to interact. It didn't work too well, but that's what it was.

 

@Malak: it's fine, that it worked for you, but you didn't get my point: I'm looking for a game, where challenging content stays challenging and doesn't get trivialized, when you outequip the content (like in most MMOs).
You can show your amazing skills through trophies, rankings, decorative stuff, etc. too without destroying the game balance.

 

If you take bigger risks you should get the bigger reward.

Giving everyone as big rewards nomatter the risk you take is ruining any competitive behaviour and also ruin the balance.

Why give same rewards to someone that play it safe in the PvE world?

That if something ruin the balance AND the economy.

PvP players that take the biggest risk should of course get the biggest reward. Taking on both PvE and PvP players same time is a higher risk then only fighting PvE mobs.

The reward should also be much higher since it will promote players taking risks. Playing in the safe PvE game mode should give maybe 50% of the reward you get in the high risk PvP areas.

 

This greedy, grasping attitude, and the love of gear and goods that lies behind it is a bit nauseating. If this were true, soldiers in Afghanistan should come back and start shopping for Ferraris. It's a good thing that most of them are not in it for the bigger reward they aren't getting.

Your reward in PvP should be your continued survival, and the sense of accomplishment that comes with overcoming foes more predictable than your typical AI. I certainly hope the devs do not implement a system where if you flag for open PvP, they reward you with a cookie.