no opt in pvp?

The most fun PVX game I ever played was dark ages of camelot. Which had zone based opt in pvp.

Mostly I am concerned with the abilitity for a small group of PVP players to kill the server/world and what systems are in place to prevent that. A group of 3-4 roving pvpers on coms can generally roll any single player with no chance for them to survive. Most people enjoy solo play.
Most players are filthy casuals who play when they can and don't always have friends on at the same time to harvest or whatever. If there is not a way of stopping this conduct then solo players and casuals will just quit and play something else.

New world's biggest failure was in allowing a small group of pvp players to swap between 4 companies and take all of the territories, set the taxes to maximum and then took all of pve players gold killing servers and ending the game.

With limited towns and the same style of pvp conquest how do you prevent a small group of pvp players from ruining the entire game.

I was really hoping for a PVE server with opt in PVP, but it looks like that is not in the cards. Convince me that this won't be new world 2 "the continued shitting on of casuals."

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

Otr wrote: »

Yes. So on a server where PvP-ers are aware that they are the majority, will not tolerate greens to protect their server as a PvP oriented server.
Lowbies will PvP with other lowbies.
People will make ALTs on all servers.

Yeah, it will probably come down to that and alienate the remainder of the pvers from the server. They'll just go to the "pve" server and this is why I hate the idea of separated servers. They just speed up this process to the extreme and kill off the pvp part of the game, while having it be society-based might let the pvp-inclined servers even out and/or self-regulate if they see that they're killing too many lowbies.

Also, imo if a high lvl pvp has to make an alt to get more pvp or for farming reasons, while there's still lowbies on the server - there's something wrong with the design of the game.

Mag7spy

Part of it will be decided in forums / reddit with big guilds of certain types deciding what servers to jump on.

CROW3

Mag7spy wrote: »

Part of it will be decided in forums / reddit with big guilds of certain types deciding what servers to jump on.

Sure, but it's going to take a while to get a picture of what the server will look like, and I'd argue it would take a significant amount of time to approximate any kind of accurate understanding of the actual relative 'pvpness' of a server. The data will be almost entirely anecdotal, and thus completely subjective.

Which - don't get me wrong - I think is 100% ok, and I'd hope that Intrepid doesn't release any form of objective data to try and inform players. There's a certain good for the game (and players) to joining a server, observing, and adapting.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Part of it will be decided in forums / reddit with big guilds of certain types deciding what servers to jump on.

Sure, but it's going to take a while to get a picture of what the server will look like, and I'd argue it would take a significant amount of time to approximate any kind of accurate understanding of the actual relative 'pvpness' of a server. The data will be almost entirely anecdotal, and thus completely subjective.

Which - don't get me wrong - I think is 100% ok, and I'd hope that Intrepid doesn't release any form of objective data to try and inform players. There's a certain good for the game (and players) to joining a server, observing, and adapting.

Well, both Steven and Jeffrey have stated that players will be able to assess the communities on each server before choosing to join - so there will be some form of viewable data/info.
We might be able to decide by viewing the procedural lore of each server.

Mag7spy

Hailee wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

Part of it will be decided in forums / reddit with big guilds of certain types deciding what servers to jump on.

I have nothing against this at all. If the community seeks to try and establish rulesets itself that's pretty cool. But I think this also gives troll pkers a clear place to target people. Because they'll know where to go.

And as crowe says it'll take time to establish what server communities are really like. And in some cases (outside EU and NA areas) I don't think people will really have a choice where they want to play because the populations just won't be sustainable. Unless people want a dead server for whatever reason.

I think alot of people will just have to come to terms with PVX and if it's not for them, then there's other games that cater to their needs.

100% some groups might make guilds on those types of servers, nothing is ever for certain but if you hear a bunch of big pve guilds jumping on a server it but be a good place to go regardless. Doesn't mean there won't be pvp its just having the people with the right mind sets to game with.

If i had all the time in the world id jump on for pvp on the server but i need to be pretty picky on choosing the right one for the guild. I need the most interesting but streamer free server. I need good pvp content when we conquer the server lmao.

FuryBladeborne

Amrothe wrote: »

The most fun PVX game I ever played was dark ages of camelot. Which had zone based opt in pvp.

Mostly I am concerned with the abilitity for a small group of PVP players to kill the server/world and what systems are in place to prevent that. A group of 3-4 roving pvpers on coms can generally roll any single player with no chance for them to survive. Most people enjoy solo play.
Most players are filthy casuals who play when they can and don't always have friends on at the same time to harvest or whatever. If there is not a way of stopping this conduct then solo players and casuals will just quit and play something else.

New world's biggest failure was in allowing a small group of pvp players to swap between 4 companies and take all of the territories, set the taxes to maximum and then took all of pve players gold killing servers and ending the game.

With limited towns and the same style of pvp conquest how do you prevent a small group of pvp players from ruining the entire game.

I was really hoping for a PVE server with opt in PVP, but it looks like that is not in the cards. Convince me that this won't be new world 2 "the continued shitting on of casuals."

Your not limited to using friends to help you fight. In this situation, it probably won't be long before people are calling out in various chats (guild, alliance, discord, map chat, etc.) and players will be looking to kill the PKers. Particularly if they have gone red named. In other words, Intrepid doesn't doesn't have to put in a system to deal with this. It is self balancing at the discretion of the players.

Ludullu

Otr wrote: »

I would like to have a feature in game, to be able to find out to which guild a player belongs and who it's leader is, so that I can contact and message him.
Guilds who respect themselves might not want to be known as toxic by other players and by other guilds. Good guilds will provide trainings, like to soldiers in an army, for new members.

In L2 you saw the Guild's icon and name when you targeted a person from that guild. Then you just ask around for the name of that guild's GL and sooner or later someone will tell you. There was also a server-wide guild UI element where you could see all the guilds on the server, but I dunno if that was an official thing or a private server thing and when exactly it got added to the game. And I'm not sure if people in Ashes would want to have that kind of info disclosed.

But yes, we should always know which guild a player belongs to, not only to hold them accountable for their actions, but also to build the story of the game/server. If I see a super strong party from the same guild farming a boss in a super cool way, I'd want to share info about them with others, and soon enough that party and guild would be popular and prestigious (if they weren't already).

Dygz

We will know which guild a character belongs to.
Players are not part of the story. Characters are part of the story.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

We will know which guild a character belongs to.
Players are not part of the story. Characters are part of the story.

And in a PvX game, especially the one like Ashes, players are a part of the story. EVE has a ton of stories and all of them came from player on player action, be it combat or subterfuge or betrayals or whatever else. That's the story of a PvX game.

Dygz

No. Characters are part of the story; not players.
For some, that distinction might be a bit blurred.
You say player on player action, but I'm pretty sure that is actually character on character action.

The story of any MMORPG is the characters; not the players.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

No. Characters are part of the story; not players.
For some, that distinction might be a bit blurred.
You say player on player action, but I'm pretty sure that is actually character on character action.

The story of any MMORPG is the characters; not the players.

Ah, you mean it in that way. Then we agree. Just got lost in the semantics, as is usually the case when it comes to disagreeing (or even agreeing) with you

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

We will know which guild a character belongs to.
Players are not part of the story. Characters are part of the story.

This notion of yours that players and characters are distinct in this regard is really, umm, unique.

When a player creates a different character in order to join a rival guild, or to otherwise find out information that could not be obtained on their main, that is absolutely a story of players, not characters. The player is using the character to gain something and use it in a way that character wouldn't, but the player would.

In 20 years of playing MMO's, you are the only person I have met that has this view point. Even some of the most RP minded people I know are still aware that it is the player, not the character, that ultimately matters in the story.

Noaani

Otr wrote: »

Do RP players feel themselves as those characters they play or they are detached from their story?

In my experience, they do not feel detached from their characters, but that works both ways - the characters are not detached from the players.

As such, the notion of the story of a server being about characters rather than players is just odd.

CROW3

Not that hard. In an RPG you’re role-playing through your characters. Two characters can be played entirely differently, with entirely different goals & wants.

Thus the unit of measure is characters not players.

Noaani

CROW3 wrote: »

Not that hard. In an RPG you’re role-playing through your characters. Two characters can be played entirely differently, with entirely different goals & wants.

Thus the unit of measure is characters not players.

The goals and wants of a character are just the goals and wants of the player.

Sure, a player may attribute different goals to different characters, but they are all goals of the player.

Characters have no inherent goals or wants. They are just database entries.

Mag7spy

I don't see players and character as different its literally the same thing, its just a subset. Even fi you are trying to go hard on the rp you have to delude yourself to think its not you on the characters.

1. The knowledge of defeating mobs and learning the area, learning the systems is at the root of player. There for your character can't seriously pretend its a new experience as the player has experienced it.
2. Players ego still exist, even if they try really hard to rp in game. There will still be bias in their actions and feelings towards others.
3. Other people have to be accepting of their rp else you are just a player to them. If someone knows who your characters are through information any rp of being a different character is mute as you are just a player to them.
4. Shared bank or shared resources between your characters is part of the overall goal of your character. If you try to benefit from multiple kinds of craft to help both character that is all the action of the player and their goals.

It doesn't really matter how much you try to work things, if you beat a boss on one character you can still say this character has beat the boss while saying on another character has not beat the boss. It depends on hwo you are asked though as if someone says have you beat the boss they mean you as a player.

If you are on a hardcore rp server someone might be like

-Looks towards (name) with a sense of worry of the challenge ahead (insert other rp details etc not tryping a post) have you faced this for before (name)-

That would be more in relation to character as the dialogue and actions connect to it and are not asking about the player but the character are they are both in rp mode.

Overall on forums and in general most people aren't heavy rpers and even if you are doing content and story, gameplay like it still be kind of rough to be like tis not the player. But more fair t say yes it is the player but I try to create unique stories for my characters and rp servers I play on or groups of people do things like this and this (example of a situation, a post and how its accepted) and why players I paly with see me as my character over the player.

Mag7spy

Otr wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

I don't see players and character as different its literally the same thing,
...
Players ego still exist, even if they try really hard to rp in game.
.

Sometime my character has more ego than me
https://youtu.be/8_wA5VlqTnQ

I don't mean ego in a way of he has a big ego but more so sense of self consciousness haha .

Mag7spy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UycoVx3vvfw

bloodprophet

Mag7spy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UycoVx3vvfw

I have shared her pain a time or two.

If the character dies during RP. Do the people playing delete them where they are or go full Shakespeare? Funeral's and resurrection ceremonies.

Child Item