PVP Design

1) Kind of concerned about the larger brackets 500 and 250 brackets 1000 people and 500 people even with cross server pvp innteraction might be hard to find all those people interested in those types of brackets. Instant que times for 25 five man raids sometimes went to 1 to 2 hours and that is every server within a certain area. In another post I said bigger was better but was thinking about 40 man maps.

2) Have not heard anything about 16 man bracket or 40 man bracket as fars as pvp is concerned. People may not have the time get a group of 100 plus groups. Players that play mobas mainly 5v5 bracket are looking for bigger maps so it is one way to appeal to moba players. Plus game structure for those brackets already there just a matter of plugging them in. Just like the 3v3 bracket is very different from 100v100 bracket. This smaller brackets reperesent a different syle of play and strategy. Larger brackets have a tendendy to be more chaotic and less structured but there is a certain fun element in that.

3)Now this is just guessing what is going to happen, point being devs know more about game than me but......
Gladiatorial Nodes wiil.....
a) attract pvpers naturally that being the case most likely be more populated than economice node casue well gladiatorial node just has a greater community to draw from. Sure there are some people that love economics and the auction house. I kind of like it to but does not have a 100 million plus player base like PvPers.

b) do not see a pve and pvp community beating what is basically and all pvp community in gladiatorual node in seiges

c) since people will be contending for mayor in gladiatorial nodes most likley attract best pvpers huge advantage. So if it was a PVE server with A PvP community (which Ashes is not. Ashes is all PvP with anti-cheapshot system not PVX) Which technically would be a PVX server. That would be like taking most of the PVpers in a PVX server (ounce again not a Ashes of Creation server) in one guild adding best pvpers to it and say ok guys PvP against rest of server. (Talking specifically about flagging system not amount of PVE content)

d) Do not think people are in a hurry to have node destroyed but in a hurry to be a part of node that does not get destroyed much or hardly ever So even PVEers will want to be part of gladiatorial node. Every one is already flagged for PvP any ways and there are from what I know very few safe zones so really why not just be part of Gladiatorial Node.

e) The more populated an area is the more fun it is to play in. (dead server vs full server) So thinking the snow ball effect could happen very similar to way server populations in WoW snow ball out of control. Alliance out numbered by Horde. so people leave the Alliance gets smaller so more people leave.

Some of the things I would like to see as part of Gladiatorial Node is a Dueling Tournaments. This is great way to see the who is who in same class vs same class and cool to see how one class fairs agains another. Plus would be pretty cool to have running totals of who wins the most duels kind of like a leader board. Also would like to have in game win loss records againts other toons and classes. Like well Bob beaten me ten more times in duels that I Beat him or have never beaten this toon ounce. Dueling win ratios would be good. Could also apply to teams in 5v5 bracket and 3v3 bracket.

Would like to see different style maps for 5v5 bracket than 3v3 personally find playstyle to similar if they are both arena like. Recommend smaller arena style maps with one or two pvp objectives for 3v3. And natually bigger maps for 5v5. Would not like to see exact same maps.

Already posted about in game factions but could in fact put team vs team guild vs guild faction vs faction gladiatorial node vs gladiatrial node and server vs server or servers vs servers type of game play all layered on top of another.

Finally would like to note that guards should stop pvp in some areas. Do not see the place sense of danger or risk vs reward has while banking or playing auction house or role playing in The MIghty Beard Or playing parlor games or meeting in a guild hall and so on in those cases it is just disruptive in my opinion. Either that or more Safe zones.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Jahlon

1. These events do not have to be balanced, they can be one sided

2. 1s, 3s, 5s, q0z, and 20 man FFA are are co formed.

Wandering Mist

I think that given the planned size of the world, at least in the beginning most players will just stick to their local node rather than seeking out a specific node type, also I think you underestimate just how strong economic nodes will be. Having access to an auction house is a huge deal and something that everyone, no matter the playstyle, can benefit from. By contrast, being part of a military node will only really be useful for dedicated PvPers who will benefit from the bounty hunter quests and reduced corruption.

As for different sizes of PvP battles, from my experience gaming communities will often drift towards one type which will become the most popular, with all the others falling to the wayside, so having lots of different brackets becomes a little pointless.

Gimlog

For now we don't know the restrictions around group for siege .
Personally I think that a siege could occur with 50 defenders vs 250 attackers as jahlon said .
No need to find people to participate with.

And for participate at it you just have to go near the battle field and sign as attackers or defenders before or even during the siege.( i guess)

For military node I don't find them attractive.
From my point view they are going to be very dangerous place to be , as you said they are going to attract pvpres but probably not the best kind , those who like attacking and not defending stuff.
With corruption reduction they take less risk.

And without economy and scientific nodes they won't have the best gear to fight with.

Hartwell

Guild alliances might create a greater motivation to cap out both sides of a siege, depending on the interests of the alliances involved. Another thing is that the wiki states that citizens willing to join the fight are auto-joined into defending, but has no mention of the attacking side having such thing. People from PvP nodes could potentially join the fight to defend the node if the attacking side gets capped and they want to still participate.

Believe

Based on the concepts I have seen - is there a significant plan to enable "open"-world PvP? Or will it be more forced with these larger scale sieges.

Gimlog

I think there are no pvp in nodes , but for the rest only corruption may prevent it.
I guess we need to wait for beta to know how effective they gonna set it.

Dygz

Wandering Mist wrote: »

I think that given the planned size of the world, at least in the beginning most players will just stick to their local node rather than seeking out a specific node type, also I think you underestimate just how strong economic nodes will be. Having access to an auction house is a huge deal and something that everyone, no matter the playstyle, can benefit from. By contrast, being part of a military node will only really be useful for dedicated PvPers who will benefit from the bounty hunter quests and reduced corruption.

I expect most people to find the node type they want sooner, rather than waste time progressing a node type they aren't interested. How far an individual is willing to travel to the node type they want may depend on how much of an explorer they are, but...
By launch time, those of us in Alpha and Beta will already have determined and posted where different node types are in relation to the starting areas.

Wandering Mist

Dygz wrote: »

Wandering Mist wrote: »

I think that given the planned size of the world, at least in the beginning most players will just stick to their local node rather than seeking out a specific node type, also I think you underestimate just how strong economic nodes will be. Having access to an auction house is a huge deal and something that everyone, no matter the playstyle, can benefit from. By contrast, being part of a military node will only really be useful for dedicated PvPers who will benefit from the bounty hunter quests and reduced corruption.

I expect most people to find the node type they want sooner, rather than waste time progressing a node type they aren't interested. How far an individual is willing to travel to the node type they want may depend on how much of an explorer they are, but...
By launch time, those of us in Alpha and Beta will already have determined and posted where different node types are in relation to the starting areas.

Huh, I was kinda hoping that the node types and locations would be unique to each server.

Noaani

Dygz wrote: »

By launch time, those of us in Alpha and Beta will already have determined and posted where different node types are in relation to the starting areas.

I was under the impression that the setup of node types in beta would not be the same as when the game goes live.

Could be wrong there, it's just the impression I got.

That said, I expect the bulk of players to gravitate towards the fastest leveling node, regardless of it's type. People like to be on the winning team, and to many players, getting in early to any node that will make metropolis is more important than the type of node.

I know I personally will be happy to join up to any node type other than military if I have a good reason to believe it will make it to metropolis - especially if I am able to get in to it at stage 3.

I mean, it's not like node choice is permanent.

unknownsystemerror

@noaani @Wandering Mist The node type, placement, and location will indeed be the same on the world map for every server. This was clarified a while back. Since the beta will use the same world map, those that participate will know where they want to head come live launch. No p2w, since anyone who decides to not participate in the testing can always watch one of the various streams. Imagine by launch there will be a full world map on the wiki with node type, environment, poi, and other breakdowns. Only the content, resources, and node level is server independent.

Gimlog

I'll go for the nearest scientific node of the gate I chose. If once the 5 metropolis are up my node isn't one of them I'll have to choose between fight to grow mine or move on to a scientific metropolis.
If there none I'll fine people interests in growing a
scientific metropolis , group and try to take a metropolis down and make the new one a scientific and so on.

But we need to way to know exactly what does each node before guessing which will be more attractive.
But for now to me scientific is the one that attract me.

Wandering Mist

Gimlog wrote: »

I'll go for the nearest scientific node of the gate I chose. If once the 5 metropolis are up my node isn't one of them I'll have to choose between fight to grow mine or move on to a scientific metropolis.
If there none I'll fine people interests in growing a
scientific metropolis , group and try to take a metropolis down and make the new one a scientific and so on.

But we need to way to know exactly what does each node before guessing which will be more attractive.
But for now to me scientific is the one that attract me.

I'm sure it won't be that hard to find people wanting a Scientific node. Unless the Divine Node gives you some absolutely insane advantages I reckon most people will either want the fast travel from the Scientific node or the auction house from the Economic node.

Gimlog

Yeah , and I think 2 scientific metropolis whole be a must, one on each continent and you got a fast travel between them

Child Item