Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
In What Way Would You Participate In World PvP?
ArchivedUser
Guest
I am surveying how the community would primarily like to participate in world pvp and the goal they have in mind for the decision they've made.
This poll is meant to gauge the roles of players in general skirmishes and the motives behind their actions/inaction.
This poll is meant to gauge the roles of players in general skirmishes and the motives behind their actions/inaction.
0
Comments
Just feel that all the descions to take "the pure pvp game" aspects into an mmorpg is just a going against the whole point of an mmorpg.
Efforts to try to have/force even matchups in power class vs class, in numbers etc etc. It's basically makes the mmorpg into several individual versions of a CS server. The mmorpg becomes an overdressed Lobby for the match plays.
The whole point of the mmorpg flies out the window.
What I hope for is that someone can make the reason to PvP actually be meaningful in terms of the gameplay and world of the game. What I've heard and seen sofar about AoC sounds promising.
I mean, yes you need to PvP to control a node/fort/land/tree/stub/whatever that is the first point but it's only a miniscule part of what I want to be there. The major question that needs to be answered is why should people want to control the node?
The incentive to control an object, it needs to have ramifications on how the game plays either locally or regionally (and not only to the individual) otherwise it's back to the basic question, why do we need to control this thing?
That is the only thing that would give the PvP part any longevity to me. It's not an event that is there to be done totally unsynced with anythingelse in the game world. As long as the incentive to pvp is just to pvp (be it for ranks, ladders, some meaningless fortresses etc), many of the non hardcore pvp players will just ignore it and probably be annoyed when game development resources is eaten up by trying to achieve the impossible of being total equality in 1 vs 1 (and 2vs2, 3vs3 etc etc) of all combinations of classes without the classes being the same with different names (and predefined group setups).
Ok, sorry for the wall of text.
It would be interesting to see how the benefits
and utilities you'd recieve with the status
of "Bounty Hunter" actually shake out.
A world that emerges through collective effort and is transformed by community conflict is the primary reason I invested in the game.
World PvP cannot be contrived or forced. It needs to be organically ingrained into the game so that it naturally happens for immersive reasons that seamlessly fit into the gameplay and events happening in the world.
The Southshore / Tarren Mill open world PvP was just epic as hell. No real rewards; no scoreboard. Just go take over their town, kill their flight point, kill the quest givers and make them come take it back from you, Good times.
Corrupted insinuates a criminal focused activity only.
I would like to participate in everything, and would like PvP to happen everywhere.
I chose corrupted because there is no better option in this poll, but what I would really chose is All-around-PvP, meaning I would not focus on PK criminal activity, but I would just PvP everywhere I have a chance, not focusing on "light" or "dark" side, but doing both.
As for the lack of an all-around-PvP option,
I wanted to see the drive behind distinct roles in common world pvp scenarios.