Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Arena PvP, equalized gear ?
Is there any information regarding potential Arena PvP ?
If yes, are they planning to make the gear equalized in it ? I can understand that people want to just "kill noobs" in PvP when they achieved higher gear levels, but since this game will have Open World PvP, I think it's still important, espiecially in 1v1, 3v3 Arena modes to provide an equalized gear environment, to give a real access to PvP to all the players and letting skill alone (providing a good balance of the classes) determine the winner(s).
If yes, are they planning to make the gear equalized in it ? I can understand that people want to just "kill noobs" in PvP when they achieved higher gear levels, but since this game will have Open World PvP, I think it's still important, espiecially in 1v1, 3v3 Arena modes to provide an equalized gear environment, to give a real access to PvP to all the players and letting skill alone (providing a good balance of the classes) determine the winner(s).
0
Comments
Hopefully gear will be equalised in the arenas in order to allow skill and tactics to shine through.
Hopefuly, we get more information about it soon !
The biggest aspect of the game to take account of here, I think, is gear degradation. If gear degrades at a fast enough rate, and is expensive enough to repair/replace, players that are geared out may not want to use their best gear in a fight they could easily win without it.
That said, I would be happy to see both, though I don't see a need for equalized gear arenas at launch.
As for sieges, they are likely to be less about an individual in PvP combat and more about large scale tactics.
People that want any kind of 1v1 fight will go to the arena.
As I said though, I do see a place for an equalized arena - I just don't see that place being at launch, but rather after a few years of being out when the gap in gear is actually a valid complaint.
As said before, and I agree with that, Open World PvP and even batttlegrounds like in Blade and Soul are fine as non gear-equalized game modes, but it makes no sense imo to have a 1v1 arena mode with gear disparities. Especially since there's a ranking system that's scheduled to go live, you should rank up by being actually good and understanding matchups / windows of opportunities, rather than just brute-forcing your way out with superior gear.
And for the PvE part, I don't believe you can compare it to PvP. It makes no sense to equalize gear in PvE because you fight AI's, whose patterns are predictable. That's the fundation of PvE instances. You can play around the patterns, and as long as you play the patterns correctly, having sufficient gear (not necessarily maxed) will always permit you to clear the instance.
Furthermore not equalizing gear isn't a problem as if an overgeared player joins, it just makes the run easier for everyone. If an undergeared player joins, well maybe they should first read / search for the requirements.
Arena 1v1 with no equalization is basically like those max geared guys challenging new players to duels in the Open World. It makes no sense. Being even slightly undergeared leaves you close to no room for outplay, if not at all.
I truly think that Arena 1v1's and even Arena in slightly bigger teams should always be equalized (like up to 3v3 for example).
Plus, if I remember correctly, didn't the devs state that there would not be PvP / PvE gear, but only 1 set of gear ? Not sure about that one but I vaguely remember something similar.
Lol...
Not everyone is a care bear you know.
https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/38136/pvp-or-pve/p1
58% : 41% atm with large amount of votes (considering what rest of polls have in these forums). So yeah, that much about how many people will focus on PvE vs PvP.
Thing is, even more people don't like it (by "it", I mean non-consensual PvP, not PvP in general).
When it comes down to it, which way do you think Intrepid will go, with the few subscribers, or with the many subscribers?
The flagging, corruption, guild war and bounty hunter mechanics exist for a reason, as do the arenas. Using a little critical thinking to figure out what Intrepid are doing and you will come to a similar conclusion to my own.
You also underestimate how many PvPers are not following games till they are actually released. It's an actual tendency among PvP players to not follow on stuff, but just play when something is actually available.
PvE players more often follow things in advance and are more active in posting stuff in alpha forums then PvP players. That usually skews the picture how many PvP vs PvE people will play the game.
Yeah I know, you will ask me for a source on that. I don't have it. I'm writing this from my own personal observations over decade+ of playing and following MMOs. I never did an actual scientific survey.
What I've seen is a few PvP posters pre-release saying they want fully open PvP, and no developer ever addressing the subject at all as fully open PvP is an obviously terrible idea. A fully open PvP game only caters to those that want fully open PvP, where as a PvP system that has mechanics in place to limit where PvP is likely to happen leaves the game open for those that don't like PvP at all, those that like PvP sometimes (the group I personally fit in to), and those that like PvP all the time but understand the need for limitations.
The only people a restricted PvP system doesn't suit are those few that want nothing but PvP, and fail to understand the need to attract a wider audience than those few people with the same mindset as themselves.
Now, lets take a look at what PvP this game DOES offer.
First of all, there are arenas. The developers have said 1v1, 3v3 and 5v5 are likely, and have also said that equalizing gear is a possibility. They have also hinted at a 20v20 FFA arena. As in all games, this is an opt in instanced PvP setting.
Next, we have caravans. This is essentially open world PvP that defenders opt in to by starting a caravan, and attackers opt in to by, well, attacking it. The flagging/corruption system is in full play here, the idea being the rewards from the caravan should outweigh the penalties.
Next, we have the bounty hunter system - this is the kind of thing someone that likes "surprise PvP" should be keen on. Basically, you opt in to hunt down characters that have killed others (aka, opted in).
Then we have node/castle sieges, large scale objective based PvP that players opt in to by either owning a node/castle or attacking one. This is organised PvP where both sides know days in advance when and where the battle will take place.
Lastly, we have guild wars. We don't have heaps of information on this other than knowing it is objective based, there are multiple types and there are rewards for the winner.
Any player that looks at all of that and says that is not enough PvP can only want one thing - ganking.
Edit: I should point out, we don't know what PvP will take place on the ocean, as we have literally no information in that regards as far as I am aware.
BDO had a limit to how many guilds you could add to the list, so guilds were forced to prioritized, and as such PvP focused guilds always added their largest enemies there, to have more PvP available.
Small guilds in practice never got added to that list, besides by other small guilds on occasion for some PvP. And solo players were exempt from that system.
I do not understand why Intrepid does not implement such system (that worked very good in practice), rather then requiring mutual agreement that doesn't fix problems at hand at all, and allows guilds to use "green exploit" undisturbed.
It is one of the few things I've not seen a whole lot of info on. My assumption was that it would function more like the guild wars in Archeage - a cost to declare war, any guild above a particular level was a viable target, lasted a fairly short duration (an hour, iirc), and had a declared result for the whole server to see. The main differences I have seen with them in AoC over Archeage are that there are different types of wars, and there are definite objectives to them (which would suggest a limited duration).
@Noaani
oh...
wait...
It didn't. It was the last nail in the wow PvP's coffin...
PvP without need to gear is basically only kills the reason to actively do PvP. Not to mention that most players just want to own weaker players, so you would "just" lose ~50% of the potential playerbase this way. Nice insights...
Plenty of full on PvP games for those types.
Here picking on under levelled players and such will just merit you mountatins of corruption for you to enjoy....or not as the case may be.
As that awesome gear will be going bye bye with all your combat stats crippled
I've not heard anything at all about the size of guilds in relation to guild wars, maybe see if you can get the question in to the next dev Q&A as it is a really good question - and one that they likely have at least an idea of their intent.
There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?
Something like that can always be left to player choice.
Give them a +- level range they are happy to fight against.
If you think that a low lvl player will join PvP, then you are very very worng. (Yep, there are a few exceptions, but they are like 0.01%)
I can agree that progression, and especially gear progression, is one of the key factors that attract people to MMO's.
However, if we're talking about Arena tournaments with a ranking system, what drives players is the progression in terms of ranking, which can be a direct measure of class mastery rather than "gg, you spent 1000 hours more than your opponent so you one shot them. You clearly deserved to have your ranking up, and your opponent lost ? they clearly deserve to have their ranking down".
I don't really care that Open World PvP or Guild PvP uses non equalized gear. I even think that it shows the dedication of the players to the game, which is logical to translate into benefits for their guild / faction imo, so I'm all for it.
I don't think anything other than Skill / class mastery / matchup knowledge / strategy, should impact Arena PvP. And you get as a reward for your efforts / success to see your ranking go up.
You need to start making sense at some point. All I've seen from you in this thread is a comparison to a game that is totally different to AoC in almost every way two games of the same genre can be different - I don't even know what your opinion on the topic is.
My opinion, as stated, is that having two arena ranking systems - one for your own gear and one with equalized gear - is a very valid idea. However, my opinion is also that an equalized arena ranking system is not needed at launch, but will become more valid after a few years when there is a gear gap.
Now, none of this has any relation to the open world, the part of the game where both progression and the outcome of PvP has an actual impact.
Now, please start making some sense
You talk about Arena tournaments, but you know how much players do it? Let me answer you, hundreds... If you include everyone, even the noobs that doesn't even know where are they, you maybe endup with a few thousand, but still how many % is it from a sucessfull mmo with millions of players? 0.1%? ...
There are very very few players who play just for the rank. Most(95%) play for gear. Some play for other rewards (achi, season end reward etc.), and only a very few percent play only to have high rank.
There are no (sucesfull) game, where it would take 1000hour to get the actual gear anyway, but if you won't even spend that minimal effort on the game, then you are worthless anyway, and you have no place in the competitive realms.
Well from me, they can use equalized gear, but don't be suprised, if the playerbase will be so low there, that you will going to need wait for long time for a single match, and even then, you get a entierly diferent level player, as there are no opponent.
But remember, I warned in time...
I take it you have access to a statistical site that also isnt prejudiced in some way and remains neutral without an agenda that influences what preferential data is added to the mix.
No ? Thought not.
There are highly competitive players that love superiority and desperately need to sate their power craving addiction.
There are players that love a fair fight and parity to test each other on equal terms.
There are those that need to feel protected and hanker after those who could protect them the most.
Tyrants, sycophants and everyone else.
To cater to all of them means understanding all of them and what drives them.
And you need to cater to all of them in an MMO.
Preferably in a way that doesnt add a self destruct button to the game.
Idk where you get your idea that rank isn't a good enough motivation by itself for players to play a mode. It's litterally the only thing that motivates people to play ranked modes in MOBA's, or to play games like Fortnite, PUBG, etc... where the only remarkable achievement is to end up in the top.
So I think I understand that you don't really like it, you prefer playing to get you gear up and this is understandable. What I don't think is acceptable in terms of respect is that you use your OPINION as a fact to pretend that my opinion is worthless. I'm pretty convinced my opinion on the matter isn't "irrelevant" and that there's a solid population of players that enjoy gear-equalized Arena PvP.
Moreover, don't pull up numbers if they aren't from actual sources. Even if most people you hear about confirm those numbers, it doesn't mean that the 95% of people who don't react to it follow the same trends.