Instanced PvP ?

Battlegrounds and arena?
I do hope you put in instanced PvP
The game has great interest to me and that is a rarity after 25 years of MMOs. I do not know much about it yet but it does interest me.

As a MMO player since the days of UO, I do have some suggestions.If you put in Battlegrounds and Arena. Do it the same way Guild Wars 2 did it. Log in Day 1, go into a lobby, spec your char, pick your gear and enchantments and then queue.

It accomplishes a couple big things
1. People with very little game time, such as an hour or 2 a night, will be able to log in and get their pvp fix. Think games like CS. Most people do not have 6-8 hours a day to devote like WoW ended up requiring. Im married and have kids. I already have a job. I do not need a 2nd job just to farm the stuff i need to do PvP.

2. It ends all debate over skill vs gear. Put in every item in game on a menu and let players choose when they go into instanced pvp. Then nobody can say I got beat because you outgear me.

Ill be frank, if this is another WoW/UO., Id love to play but sadly I will have to pass. I have discovred as Blizzard is also discovering, most people these days just do not want to grind any longer. Life is to short and demanding to be spent logged into a game all day every day trying to farm yet another item just to be able to compete.

If you do BGs. Please follow WoW/Rift standards for size /format/goals. Guild Wars bgs sucked tbh.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Noaani

wherediditrun wrote: »

That's quite a display of ego.

You really do like to read in to posts and come up with things that are not there, don't you...

I mean, I never said in that post you quoted that I thought you were saying that an arena would be a part of progression - yet you assumed that is what I said.

As to your comment about most open PvP encounters being small scale ganks, I disagree.

I played Archeage for several years. In that time, I was involved in small scale PvP a handful of times (less than once a month).

I was involved in large scale PvP (10v10 up to about 500v200v150) every day I played other than a period where I was the only pirate on the server.

Ashes is very much geared towards large scale PvP in the open world, not small scale. Small scale will exist, but there will be a lot more PvP happen that is a result of caravans, guild or node wars and sieges than there will be small scale PvP.

wherediditrun

Noaani wrote: »

You really do like to read in to posts and come up with things that are not there, don't you...

I mean you tried to imply that I claim that pvp players will dominate servers or something. Maybe I red it poorly, happens. Not first language.

On the go part however, you promoted players who do world pvp as true pvp at expense of people who like arenas and later associated yourself with first group while expressing somewhat akin to contempt to the later. That's an ego trip gibberish. Not sure how else I should sum it up.

Noaani wrote: »

As to your comment about most open PvP encounters being small scale ganks, I disagree.

I played Archeage for several years. In that time, I was involved in small scale PvP a handful of times (less than once a month).

Not my experience with lineage II. I mean good old let the mob do the last hit :>
Later wotlk wow if someone is attacking in you in open world it either number advantage or level advantage.
Fun times too, holy pala, lets waste your time as you intend to waste mine.

Also my experience that past opening rotation people generally have no idea what to do. Hence from where my impression of world pvpers to be somewhat bad. But as I've mentioned perhaps that's just reflection of average mechanics of MMO player in general. Not that high. Neither the games focuses on it much.

Noaani wrote: »

I was involved in large scale PvP (10v10 up to about 500v200v150) every day I played other than a period where I was the only pirate on the server.

Ashes is very much geared towards large scale PvP in the open world, not small scale. Small scale will exist, but there will be a lot more PvP happen that is a result of caravans, guild or node wars and sieges than there will be small scale PvP.

So you'd be fine with removing world pvp outside of these specific set of events? Or even equalizing syncing power of the players in those events?
Hah, just being facetious here. I don't think you would.

Although I have to agree with small scale ganking. Corruption system is a simple yet brilliant idea on behalf of Steven. I would still like to see bounty hunter tracker though.

Noaani

wherediditrun wrote: »

Not my experience with lineage II.

That is because that is a very old game with very old systems.

MMO's have progressed a lot since then.

PvP MMO's have had three distinct generations since L2 - not much from that game still applies.

wherediditrun

Noaani wrote: »

PvP MMO's have had three distinct generations since L2 - not much from that game still applies.

Well, I hope so. And that's a thing both of us can agree on, I suppose. The game which favors grieving other players while providing no recourse on behalf of ones who get whacked is not sustainable on the long run, at last not on the scale of populated MMO. You do not want player vs player aggression to take root (character vs character fine).

I'm worried how strict the moderation of the game will have to be. But hopefully the preventative systems like corruption will make world pvp only viable / incentivized in your mentioned scenarios. Among other things I do see arena as a place to vent and to promote honorable conduct as players. Even if that means robotically writing /gf in dms after the encounter.

Vyc

Noaani wrote: »

Vyc wrote: »

Do you know why a lot of Arena and BG, World PvP players left WoW in droves? They got tired of having to grind PvE content to do the content they wanted to do. Same principle applies here.

This is why the arena in Ashes is not going to be used as a draw card.

They have no intention of making the arena a viable place to level up or to gear up - even open world PvP is limited in how well you can do this.

As I said already, this type of game play is better suited to being it's own game, rather than being tacked on to an existing game and then trying to force it's desires on to the rest of the game, and crying like a child if the developer refuses.

I do not care about gear thru Arena. If you read my first post very carefully it says GUILD WARS 2 MODEL

GW2 when you enter an arena/instanced pvp you are like on a test realm. You pick your gear and spec in that realm. When you leave the instanced relam you are back to whatever level gear you have

Noaani

Vyc wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Vyc wrote: »

Do you know why a lot of Arena and BG, World PvP players left WoW in droves? They got tired of having to grind PvE content to do the content they wanted to do. Same principle applies here.

This is why the arena in Ashes is not going to be used as a draw card.

They have no intention of making the arena a viable place to level up or to gear up - even open world PvP is limited in how well you can do this.

As I said already, this type of game play is better suited to being it's own game, rather than being tacked on to an existing game and then trying to force it's desires on to the rest of the game, and crying like a child if the developer refuses.

I do not care about gear thru Arena. If you read my first post very carefully it says GUILD WARS 2 MODEL

GW2 when you enter an arena/instanced pvp you are like on a test realm. You pick your gear and spec in that realm. When you leave the instanced relam you are back to whatever level gear you have

In other words, it is literally a different game packaged in the real game.

This isn't a selling point like you seem to think it is. It is literally adding an additional system to the game that requires specific support, and brings nothing at all to the game as a whole - other than pulling players out of the game proper.

It would be bad enough just instancing off an arena, that in itself makes it worth considering making this a stand alone thing rather than a part of the game. However, with what you are talking about now, even your character isn't needed in this arena suggestion of yours. This means that the actual game is superfluous to the arena, and the arena is superfluous to the actual game.

As such, there is no reason at all to package them together.

Dolyem

Noaani wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

So do I get you right. You're worried that higher mechanical proficiency of the players will effect the outcomes of PvX engagement too much?

Not even close.

If anything, the opposite is true.

People used to playing in the arena will be completely at a loss when they are in open PvP and suddenly realize it isn't nvn, but rather xvx.

But this isn't my point, and has never been my point. This is simply your pre-coincieved notion that anyone against an arena must be shit at the game and so is scared of it. I have not mentioned anything along those lines, nor even suggested anything along those lines, and yet this is such a strong pre-concieved notion in your mind that it is all you can take away from any posts - even when there is nothing at all about it in said posts.

My issue with an arena is as stated - the game is supposed to be about an unrestriucted fight over resources, land, castles. Actual things (as actual as you can get in a computer game).

It is not supposed to be about sterile, staged match over some spot in some contrived ladder system (even for computer game standards).

Taking a game that is supposed to be about the former, and adding the latter, is killing the integrity of the game as a whole.

You're romanticizing a form of PvP you are biased towards...

Dolyem

Vyc wrote: »

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

Beating "competitive" pvp through sunked time, however, is hand holding.

Ashes isn't going to let you download the game and then jump into an instanced battleground with max gear and stats, @wherediditrun. Best to get that out of your head earlier than later.

@Dolyem summarized it pretty well (above) with the gear and level progression ... which is a hallmark of any MMO.

Why not? Guild Wars 2 did that very exact thing. People limited on time that love pvp just queued into the instanced PvP?

You could even Do WvWvW on day 1 and had your char boosted to a bare standard

Thats a rough example. You get absolutely stomped in WvW in that fresh gear. And in any case how is that fair to the team you play with as well? "Heres a complete noob who has no practice playing their class that just decided to jump into scaled up PvP. Good luck" That was rough in WvW pugs

Edit: I wouldn't be completely against this if there was a separating "Ranked" Arena mode where you had to use a character you have progressed to endgame and geared yourself. That way when it "Mattered" you wouldn't need to worry about getting grouped in with a freshy testing out a character.

HazardNumberSeven

I really hope to see as few themepark elements (instancing) as possible.
I really hope we can't queue up and be teleported anywhere, ever. That stuff is disgusting.

Noaani

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

So do I get you right. You're worried that higher mechanical proficiency of the players will effect the outcomes of PvX engagement too much?

Not even close.

If anything, the opposite is true.

People used to playing in the arena will be completely at a loss when they are in open PvP and suddenly realize it isn't nvn, but rather xvx.

But this isn't my point, and has never been my point. This is simply your pre-coincieved notion that anyone against an arena must be shit at the game and so is scared of it. I have not mentioned anything along those lines, nor even suggested anything along those lines, and yet this is such a strong pre-concieved notion in your mind that it is all you can take away from any posts - even when there is nothing at all about it in said posts.

My issue with an arena is as stated - the game is supposed to be about an unrestriucted fight over resources, land, castles. Actual things (as actual as you can get in a computer game).

It is not supposed to be about sterile, staged match over some spot in some contrived ladder system (even for computer game standards).

Taking a game that is supposed to be about the former, and adding the latter, is killing the integrity of the game as a whole.

You're romanticizing a form of PvP you are biased towards...

You've been around here long enough to know that any bias I may have is likely to be against open PvP, not for it - or at the very least any bias I may have would be towards restrictions to open PvP in specific situations.

Rather than discussing things based on what I want in the game, I am discussing them based on what I see laid out in front of me.

Dolyem

Noaani wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

So do I get you right. You're worried that higher mechanical proficiency of the players will effect the outcomes of PvX engagement too much?

Not even close.

If anything, the opposite is true.

People used to playing in the arena will be completely at a loss when they are in open PvP and suddenly realize it isn't nvn, but rather xvx.

But this isn't my point, and has never been my point. This is simply your pre-coincieved notion that anyone against an arena must be shit at the game and so is scared of it. I have not mentioned anything along those lines, nor even suggested anything along those lines, and yet this is such a strong pre-concieved notion in your mind that it is all you can take away from any posts - even when there is nothing at all about it in said posts.

My issue with an arena is as stated - the game is supposed to be about an unrestriucted fight over resources, land, castles. Actual things (as actual as you can get in a computer game).

It is not supposed to be about sterile, staged match over some spot in some contrived ladder system (even for computer game standards).

Taking a game that is supposed to be about the former, and adding the latter, is killing the integrity of the game as a whole.

You're romanticizing a form of PvP you are biased towards...

You've been around here long enough to know that any bias I may have is likely to be against open PvP, not for it - or at the very least any bias I may have would be towards restrictions to open PvP in specific situations.

Rather than discussing things based on what I want in the game, I am discussing them based on what I see laid out in front of me.

Thats fair enough, but to say one type is the super hardcore and one isnt nearly so, thats a bias. I have played in both types and love them each for different reasons, and both are difficult for differing reasons. They also have a great crossover because arena teaches more class specific fights and abilities which carry over to large scale fighting and timing abilities, while large scale puts more emphasis on communication and synergy

Noaani

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

So do I get you right. You're worried that higher mechanical proficiency of the players will effect the outcomes of PvX engagement too much?

Not even close.

If anything, the opposite is true.

People used to playing in the arena will be completely at a loss when they are in open PvP and suddenly realize it isn't nvn, but rather xvx.

But this isn't my point, and has never been my point. This is simply your pre-coincieved notion that anyone against an arena must be shit at the game and so is scared of it. I have not mentioned anything along those lines, nor even suggested anything along those lines, and yet this is such a strong pre-concieved notion in your mind that it is all you can take away from any posts - even when there is nothing at all about it in said posts.

My issue with an arena is as stated - the game is supposed to be about an unrestriucted fight over resources, land, castles. Actual things (as actual as you can get in a computer game).

It is not supposed to be about sterile, staged match over some spot in some contrived ladder system (even for computer game standards).

Taking a game that is supposed to be about the former, and adding the latter, is killing the integrity of the game as a whole.

You're romanticizing a form of PvP you are biased towards...

You've been around here long enough to know that any bias I may have is likely to be against open PvP, not for it - or at the very least any bias I may have would be towards restrictions to open PvP in specific situations.

Rather than discussing things based on what I want in the game, I am discussing them based on what I see laid out in front of me.

Thats fair enough, but to say one type is the super hardcore and one isnt nearly so, thats a bias. I have played in both types and love them each for different reasons, and both are difficult for differing reasons. They also have a great crossover because arena teaches more class specific fights and abilities which carry over to large scale fighting and timing abilities, while large scale puts more emphasis on communication and synergy

I'm not saying this isn't true, I am saying that an arena akin to what is being talked about here is not overly fitting for this game.

If you look at the most recent suggestion, having to even be logged in to the game on your account is a formality. There is no need to use your character you've created and leveled.

The suggestion is literally for a stand alone fighting game using Ashes combat system.

Dolyem

Noaani wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

Dolyem wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

wherediditrun wrote: »

So do I get you right. You're worried that higher mechanical proficiency of the players will effect the outcomes of PvX engagement too much?

Not even close.

If anything, the opposite is true.

People used to playing in the arena will be completely at a loss when they are in open PvP and suddenly realize it isn't nvn, but rather xvx.

But this isn't my point, and has never been my point. This is simply your pre-coincieved notion that anyone against an arena must be shit at the game and so is scared of it. I have not mentioned anything along those lines, nor even suggested anything along those lines, and yet this is such a strong pre-concieved notion in your mind that it is all you can take away from any posts - even when there is nothing at all about it in said posts.

My issue with an arena is as stated - the game is supposed to be about an unrestriucted fight over resources, land, castles. Actual things (as actual as you can get in a computer game).

It is not supposed to be about sterile, staged match over some spot in some contrived ladder system (even for computer game standards).

Taking a game that is supposed to be about the former, and adding the latter, is killing the integrity of the game as a whole.

You're romanticizing a form of PvP you are biased towards...

You've been around here long enough to know that any bias I may have is likely to be against open PvP, not for it - or at the very least any bias I may have would be towards restrictions to open PvP in specific situations.

Rather than discussing things based on what I want in the game, I am discussing them based on what I see laid out in front of me.

Thats fair enough, but to say one type is the super hardcore and one isnt nearly so, thats a bias. I have played in both types and love them each for different reasons, and both are difficult for differing reasons. They also have a great crossover because arena teaches more class specific fights and abilities which carry over to large scale fighting and timing abilities, while large scale puts more emphasis on communication and synergy

I'm not saying this isn't true, I am saying that an arena akin to what is being talked about here is not overly fitting for this game.

If you look at the most recent suggestion, having to even be logged in to the game on your account is a formality. There is no need to use your character you've created and leveled.

The suggestion is literally for a stand alone fighting game using Ashes combat system.

Yea I argued against that and would rather have arenas where you have to use your character and the gear made/earned through the game

Ramirez

And why not hellgates like albion? Portal that spawn in the map, when you enter match you with a team, keep people from staying out of the city looking for group and creat pvp hubs surranding the entrance of the Hellgate

truelyyy

tbh I'm not sure where I stand on this one.

- On one side having an instanced pvp where everything is available is nice and balanced for people that don't want to play 20+ hours a week. Gives casuals access and fairer competition.
- On the other side this is an MMORPG not a lobby game, perhaps MOBAs would be better for the casual crowd. You want to invest time in getting good armour etc so you can be stronger in PvP

I think I go more towards the 2nd opinion personally as I don't see it being an E-sports kind of game but more MMORPG and it then feels like your investments are worth it. However I would try to keep the gaps between the levels of gear small.

Enigmatic Sage

Technically the node sieges will be instanced to some degree. Unless you signed up for them, you wont be allowed to traverse through the barrier. This prevents open world interruptions of the event. You will be killed at the barrier for trying to enter it if not part of the event.
Castle sieges may be quite similar.
Arena's could potentially be more hard instanced with queues.
Open world PvP is open world PvP.

You will have to sign up for gated events like node sieges, castle sieges etc. They will have a time and date that they will occur at giving the teams times to prepare.

There will be a gated system post fight preventing nodes from being continuously attacked.
IE: cant be attacked or declaration for attack for X amount of days. Maybe wont be able to attack for X amount of days depending on design goals.

wherediditrun

truely wrote: »

On the other side this is an MMORPG not a lobby game.

Creating places / settings / environments for people to hang out in their in game avatars is huge part of MMOs. That's what gives the sense of world being alive. Folk dueling at the gates of the city, folk meming in the central square.

For grindfest to be a viable sustaining model you need hard server reboots which wipes character progression clean. Good example is PoE. If that's not an option, when the game must provide venues for people to hang out to justify them sticking around.

And to instill sense of belonging making those sieges feel like they have stakes. Ultimately MMO is about as good as the social interactions it manages to facilitate. And there are obviously more than way to do that, however, the grind loop runs out. Either of content of people's patience.

truelyyy

wherediditrun wrote: »

truely wrote: »

On the other side this is an MMORPG not a lobby game.

Creating places / settings / environments for people to hang out in their in game avatars is huge part of MMOs. That's what gives the sense of world being alive. Folk dueling at the gates of the city, folk meming in the central square.

For grindfest to be a viable sustaining model you need hard server reboots which wipes character progression clean. Good example is PoE. If that's not an option, when the game must provide venues for people to hang out to justify them sticking around.

And to instill sense of belonging making those sieges feel like they have stakes. Ultimately MMO is about as good as the social interactions it manages to facilitate. And there are obviously more than way to do that, however, the grind loop runs out. Either of content of people's patience.

Having those places is the opposite of it being a lobby game if that's what you mean....Lobby gamne means queing and playing

Noaani

wherediditrun wrote: »

truely wrote: »

On the other side this is an MMORPG not a lobby game.

Creating places / settings / environments for people to hang out in their in game avatars is huge part of MMOs. That's what gives the sense of world being alive. Folk dueling at the gates of the city, folk meming in the central square.

This is as good an argument as anything to not have instanced PvP.

You aren't adding to the game worlds sense of being alive if you are off hiding in an instance.

It is also worth noting that any argument for instanced PvP existing in any meaningful way is also an argument for instanced PvE existing in that same meaningful way.

Mangust747

Vyc wrote: »

Battlegrounds and arena?
I do hope you put in instanced PvP
The game has great interest to me and that is a rarity after 25 years of MMOs. I do not know much about it yet but it does interest me.

As a MMO player since the days of UO, I do have some suggestions.If you put in Battlegrounds and Arena. Do it the same way Guild Wars 2 did it. Log in Day 1, go into a lobby, spec your char, pick your gear and enchantments and then queue.

It accomplishes a couple big things
1. People with very little game time, such as an hour or 2 a night, will be able to log in and get their pvp fix. Think games like CS. Most people do not have 6-8 hours a day to devote like WoW ended up requiring. Im married and have kids. I already have a job. I do not need a 2nd job just to farm the stuff i need to do PvP.

2. It ends all debate over skill vs gear. Put in every item in game on a menu and let players choose when they go into instanced pvp. Then nobody can say I got beat because you outgear me.

Ill be frank, if this is another WoW/UO., Id love to play but sadly I will have to pass. I have discovred as Blizzard is also discovering, most people these days just do not want to grind any longer. Life is to short and demanding to be spent logged into a game all day every day trying to farm yet another item just to be able to compete.

If you do BGs. Please follow WoW/Rift standards for size /format/goals. Guild Wars bgs sucked tbh.

a very worthy and correct offer!

Child Item