Low level PvP

I enjoy PvP, but one concern I have is being sub max level and being unable to participate fairly and enjoyably against players within a similar level bracket. PvP has a significant impact on any online game, and ineligibility to partake could potentially drive away new players interested in having a go.

New World had open world PvP, but nobody below 60 would flag for fights because higher level players would be in lower level zones for materials. Additionally, scaling was removed so that lower levels had no chance of fighting back. As there was no bracketed instanced combat for lower levels, PvP was pretty much non existent after 60s started to emerge.

Will there be buffers to who can attack who? I.e 60 can only attack a max level of 50 ( 10 level difference) this system is in OSRS wilderness

Will scaling exist in PvP? Exists in some games already

Will instanced battlegrounds be offered as an alternative for players in specific brackets?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Burnzey

So then there's no point bringing a low level to the fight as they offer nothing to the defense of the caravan. They're free kills

CROW3

Certainly, a perspective.

Ludullu

Burnzey wrote: »

So then there's no point bringing a low level to the fight as they offer nothing to the defense of the caravan. They're free kills

As they should be. A dude who played for 10h shouldn't do content that people, that have played for months, are doing. A lvl20 player probably won't have the quantity of resources to warrant a caravan run instead of just a mule. But if they do have that many resources, they'd probably want to sell them to higher lvled players. And if you need to run a caravan to those high lvl players - go talk to them and say "you want my resources? Go help me transfer them". And those high lvl players will be interested in helping the lvl20 player out because they want the resources.

If you're starting the game months after the release and for some reason there's no low lvl players around (this has its own terrible connotations), you could look for a guild to help you lvl. The chances are, if there's no new players - top lvl dudes would probably start leveling up their alt chars and would probably have low lvl parties that could pick you up for farm. And you'd now have protection while farming/gathering and a guild to socialize with.

Okeydoke

Burnzey wrote: »

So then there's no point bringing a low level to the fight as they offer nothing to the defense of the caravan. They're free kills

Having the low level there is better than nothing. But really that low level should be somewhere else, leveling up. He can participate if he wants to though in the meantime.

I kind of understand where you're coming from OP. Some games do take the routes that you're talking about. But that stuff is so against the grain of what Ashes is trying to be, there's pretty much no shot it'll even be considered much less implemented.

You're talking about a problem that is not permanent. People level up. They don't just stay perma low level. Everyone levels up at different speeds, but everyone who want's to, eventually reaches max.

You start doing that level scaling stuff and it throws games completely out of wack. I remember back in Warhammer Online people used to level up alts and then keep them at level 19, or 39 for as long as possible so they weren't put into the next bracket. Separates the player base, diminishes the value of character progression. Other side effects too.

Ashes is one world. One set of rules that everyone plays by. And everyone will be below someone else's level at some point, other than the day 1 speed levelers.

Okeydoke

Otr wrote: »

How will be the leveling up in this game?
I've seen opinions that the real gameplay in MMOs starts at max level.
Why there is a leveling-up phase really?

It will take longer than most modern mmos to level to max. Not sure how much longer, it's probably in the wiki somewhere though. You level up by doing quests and pve content. Other types of things might give XP too.

Why is there a leveling up phase? I mean that's like an existential mmo question lol. The answer is too long and varied for me to type out here.

HiddenDaggerInn

Burnzey wrote: »

I enjoy PvP, but one concern I have is being sub max level and being unable to participate fairly and enjoyably against players within a similar level bracket. PvP has a significant impact on any online game, and ineligibility to partake could potentially drive away new players interested in having a go.

New World had open world PvP, but nobody below 60 would flag for fights because higher level players would be in lower level zones for materials. Additionally, scaling was removed so that lower levels had no chance of fighting back. As there was no bracketed instanced combat for lower levels, PvP was pretty much non existent after 60s started to emerge.

Will there be buffers to who can attack who? I.e 60 can only attack a max level of 50 ( 10 level difference) this system is in OSRS wilderness

Will scaling exist in PvP? Exists in some games already

Will instanced battlegrounds be offered as an alternative for players in specific brackeI dont want to see a scaling system, if you feel underpowered... level like everyone else.

Burnzey wrote: »

I enjoy PvP, but one concern I have is being sub max level and being unable to participate fairly and enjoyably against players within a similar level bracket. PvP has a significant impact on any online game, and ineligibility to partake could potentially drive away new players interested in having a go.

New World had open world PvP, but nobody below 60 would flag for fights because higher level players would be in lower level zones for materials. Additionally, scaling was removed so that lower levels had no chance of fighting back. As there was no bracketed instanced combat for lower levels, PvP was pretty much non existent after 60s started to emerge.

Will there be buffers to who can attack who? I.e 60 can only attack a max level of 50 ( 10 level difference) this system is in OSRS wilderness

Will scaling exist in PvP? Exists in some games already

Will instanced battlegrounds be offered as an alternative for players in specific brackets?

Please no, if you want to be able to fight with the big boys then level like the rest. Corruption will keep or should keep most lower level players relatively safe. I don't want to see after the game has been out 6 months getting overwhelmed by groups of lowbies with equal power attacking caravans.

At some point games need to stop making shit easy mode for everyone (thanks WoW) It might take time, might be frustrating, but in the end you will be on the same level. tough it out cupcake.

Ludullu

Otr wrote: »

I've seen opinions that the real gameplay in MMOs starts at max level.

That's only an opinion because devs put themselves into a dead end. Intrepid's trying to get away from that dead end by having longer leveling process and having interesting content across all lvls. No one's stopping low lvl players from participating in some particular content, but they should expect to get killed, while interacting with said content, if there's high lvl players doing the same thing.

Otr wrote: »

Why there is a leveling-up phase really?

To have a sense of character progress. If you don't want that, there's quite a few genres that just give you all the tools immediately and you go and play with them.

Even if the leveling concept itself didn't exist, you'd still have some sort of stat progression or movement on a gear tiers ladder, or any other kind of mechanic where people that put in more time get more advantages over the people that didn't put in as much time. And for those that dislike the sheer concept of someone being stronger than someone else, I believe, GW2 has equalization and an almost completely horizontal gear progression, on top of being story-centered - so there already is an alternative to the usual way of doing things.

Dygz

CROW3 wrote: »

Corruption is suspended in structured pvp events. If you’re level 20 guarding a caravan and it’s attacked by a level 50 guild - you’re going to die a few times without repercussions.

Open pvp is a different story.

Depends on who chooses to defend the caravan.
If a Level 50 guild is nearby to attack a Caravan, there's a good chance that there will be plenty of Level 50 people nearby willing to defend the Caravan.

Dygz

Otr wrote: »

Okeydoke wrote: »

Burnzey wrote: »

So then there's no point bringing a low level to the fight as they offer nothing to the defense of the caravan. They're free kills

Having the low level there is better than nothing. But really that low level should be somewhere else, leveling up. He can participate if he wants to though in the meantime.

How will be the leveling up in this game?
I've seen opinions that the real gameplay in MMOs starts at max level.
Why there is a leveling-up phase really?

Because Ashes is an RPG.
And Ashes is designed for gameplay to be relevent at all character levels.

Dygz

Burnzey wrote: »

So then there's no point bringing a low level to the fight as they offer nothing to the defense of the caravan. They're free kills

You don't "bring low levels to the fight".
Low levels can choose to participate in the fight, if they wish.
Caravans are not a strictly max level activity.
Caravan raids will very likely include some low level attackers as well as some low level defenders.
And they might included max level attackers and max level defenders.

Burnzey

A bit of contraversy in this topic, but this is my conclusion

- No focused PvP content for sub 50 players. Some players may get bored of the repetitive PvE grind and leave

- They could join, but they will get rammed and make it an unjoyable experience for both player and their team. This may lead to conflict between social groups and then people quitting the game

- PvP objectives are supposedly a levelling progression path, but again getting rammed means you will lose a lot and participation award will be low. Additionally this suffers from diminishing returns. Losing more leads to frustrated players which leads to quitting which again leads to fewer overall players in game

The only real fix I see with open world without totally isolating sub level 50 group is scaling players up to a base set of stats which can be further improved through perks and "talents" achieved from PvP. These will only be effective during PvP objectives. Examples of these perks include increasing base stats/ speed/ Crit etc. Higher level players would inherently still be more powerful with access to more skills and abilities in combat while items would be cosmetic.

This opens up the opportunity for all players to engage in this content fairly, with progression systems still in place for those who participate more and allow higher levels to still have an edge through utility with more access to higher grade abilities

ClintHardwood

Burnzey wrote: »

The only real fix I see with open world without totally isolating sub level 50 group is scaling players up to a base set of stats which can be further improved through perks and "talents" achieved from PvP. These will only be effective during PvP objectives. Examples of these perks include increasing base stats/ speed/ Crit etc. Higher level players would inherently still be more powerful with access to more skills and abilities in combat while items would be cosmetic.

I disagree 100%. If people want to get stronger, they should grind mobs and invest in better gear. Having something to aim for gives people drive. There's no need to devalue the gains of players who have already been through the process by giving everyone else power boosts to close the gap. Not everyone needs to be on an equal playing field at all times.

Instead, I propose that killing players significantly below your level spikes up your corruption much faster than PKing someone closer to your own strength. That should be more than enough incentive to leave the noobs alone while also allowing for you to kill them (ie. scouts on fresh accounts) when absolutely necessary.

To further improve on the above, there should also be an exception for skillers. If you're a high level gatherer/processor/crafter with a low 'combat' level, people should be able to kill you without the threat of extra corruption. That way you can't just farm or transport through high level nodes without worry of getting PK'ed.

George_Black

Burnzey wrote: »

A bit of contraversy in this topic, but this is my conclusion

- No focused PvP content for sub 50 players. Some players may get bored of the repetitive PvE grind and leave

- They could join, but they will get rammed and make it an unjoyable experience for both player and their team. This may lead to conflict between social groups and then people quitting the game

- PvP objectives are supposedly a levelling progression path, but again getting rammed means you will lose a lot and participation award will be low. Additionally this suffers from diminishing returns. Losing more leads to frustrated players which leads to quitting which again leads to fewer overall players in game

The only real fix I see with open world without totally isolating sub level 50 group is scaling players up to a base set of stats which can be further improved through perks and "talents" achieved from PvP. These will only be effective during PvP objectives. Examples of these perks include increasing base stats/ speed/ Crit etc. Higher level players would inherently still be more powerful with access to more skills and abilities in combat while items would be cosmetic.

This opens up the opportunity for all players to engage in this content fairly, with progression systems still in place for those who participate more and allow higher levels to still have an edge through utility with more access to higher grade abilities

Not gonna happen.

Kovrm

Burnzey wrote: »

A bit of contraversy in this topic, but this is my conclusion

- No focused PvP content for sub 50 players. Some players may get bored of the repetitive PvE grind and leave

- They could join, but they will get rammed and make it an unjoyable experience for both player and their team. This may lead to conflict between social groups and then people quitting the game

- PvP objectives are supposedly a levelling progression path, but again getting rammed means you will lose a lot and participation award will be low. Additionally this suffers from diminishing returns. Losing more leads to frustrated players which leads to quitting which again leads to fewer overall players in game

The only real fix I see with open world without totally isolating sub level 50 group is scaling players up to a base set of stats which can be further improved through perks and "talents" achieved from PvP. These will only be effective during PvP objectives. Examples of these perks include increasing base stats/ speed/ Crit etc. Higher level players would inherently still be more powerful with access to more skills and abilities in combat while items would be cosmetic.

This opens up the opportunity for all players to engage in this content fairly, with progression systems still in place for those who participate more and allow higher levels to still have an edge through utility with more access to higher grade abilities

No one cares that you're a casual and want to have equal footing in pvp against people that are not. You won't. This game isn't supposed to be fair. And if you're not a "casual", what the F do you care anyways?

You've been given plenty of reasons why there won't be as much of an issue as you think there will be. Seems like you just want to argue for the sake of argument.

Burnzey

Kovrm wrote: »

No one cares that you're a casual and want to have equal footing in pvp against people that are not. You won't. This game isn't supposed to be fair. And if you're not a "casual", what the F do you care anyways?

Ashes has gathered a lot of traction over the years, more so recently with larger content creators. Of these new players, a lot will be casual. I care because players should feel and deserve to be valued members in an MMO. Players regardless of their status contribute to the game which is important for the health and longevity. Because the game currently offers nothing sub 50 for PvP content, that's a fair chunk of new or rerolling players missing out on a whole mode of content.

It's one thing to be inspired to reach higher level, it's another to be locked out of content which you can normally participate in most mmorpgs. The cost of living is rising globally which means more players would be casual players in order to maintain their lifestyle

But I guarantee you you'd retract your "it's not meant to be fair" if you're being repeatedly clapped by a certain class over and over with no means of winning yourself.

Good games are designed to be challenging, but fair. If you weren't challenged you'd get bored and if they weren't fair you wouldn't keep playing.

Ludullu

Burnzey wrote: »

Ashes has gathered a lot of traction over the years, more so recently with larger content creators. Of these new players, a lot will be casual. I care because players should feel and deserve to be valued members in an MMO. Players regardless of their status contribute to the game which is important for the health and longevity. Because the game currently offers nothing sub 50 for PvP content, that's a fair chunk of new or rerolling players missing out on a whole mode of content.

And all of that traction is useless if all those casual players are only interested in completely changing core design choices of the game.

There's already a ton of stuff for casual players to do and the pvp system has already gotten casual-friendly changes. If that's not enough - this game might not fit their casual playstyle and that's completely ok, they have a ton of other games to go and casually play.

Literally any pvp event/action can be done at any lvl. The only thing that differs is your impact on that event/action. Especially when compared to the impact of higher lvled/geared people. As I already said, if you want an equalized pvp environment - there's a ton of games that can provide you that. There's currently no plans to have that in Ashes, and I highly doubt they'll suddenly appear down the road.

George_Black

Burnzey wrote: »

Kovrm wrote: »

No one cares that you're a casual and want to have equal footing in pvp against people that are not. You won't. This game isn't supposed to be fair. And if you're not a "casual", what the F do you care anyways?

Ashes has gathered a lot of traction over the years, more so recently with larger content creators. Of these new players, a lot will be casual. I care because players should feel and deserve to be valued members in an MMO. Players regardless of their status contribute to the game which is important for the health and longevity. Because the game currently offers nothing sub 50 for PvP content, that's a fair chunk of new or rerolling players missing out on a whole mode of content.

It's one thing to be inspired to reach higher level, it's another to be locked out of content which you can normally participate in most mmorpgs. The cost of living is rising globally which means more players would be casual players in order to maintain their lifestyle

But I guarantee you you'd retract your "it's not meant to be fair" if you're being repeatedly clapped by a certain class over and over with no means of winning yourself.

Good games are designed to be challenging, but fair. If you weren't challenged you'd get bored and if they weren't fair you wouldn't keep playing.

Nobody is going to retract anything. Some ppl have played goodgames. You havent.
It shows in the things you take issue with that you dont know how fun low lv pvp is when you get to fight other low lvl players, you get to pk them (you wouldnt know what the difference of pvp and pk is, but anyway) without worrying about low lv gear loss, you wouldnt worry about guild plans and personal reputation, and if a high lv player showed up to clean house we'd laugh it off and say "ye it's time to get back into progressing after half a day of messing around and having fun".

Some people here have been through all those fun times, but you with your attitude burnZeYyy dont want to understand that it's a non-issue. Want scaling? ESO is that way. All players are the same lv and you can have fun raiding with npcs and PvPing in a safe zone.
Come back when you get bored of the same old risk averse gaming, but this here game design wont change. Perhaps by then you'd wanna be educated instead of giving direction. You havent said anything new btw.

Kovrm

Burnzey wrote: »

But I guarantee you you'd retract your "it's not meant to be fair" if you're being repeatedly clapped by a certain class over and over with no means of winning yourself.

I can promise you I would not. I only play games for the PvP. Doesn't matter the genre. The best example I can give you, in regards to "getting clapped repeatedly", is Escape from Tarkov. That game is brutal, and punishingly unforgiving, and it's fun as hell. You ever been Tarkov'd?

Dygz

Burnzey wrote: »

Ashes has gathered a lot of traction over the years, more so recently with larger content creators. Of these new players, a lot will be casual. I care because players should feel and deserve to be valued members in an MMO. Players regardless of their status contribute to the game which is important for the health and longevity. Because the game currently offers nothing sub 50 for PvP content, that's a fair chunk of new or rerolling players missing out on a whole mode of content.

I am a casual challenge player.
What you are describing is not an issue - by design.
Corruption is designed to deter ganking - especially level gap ganking.
And Sieges and Caravans are objective-based Battlegrounds where characters of every level can find stuff to do.

We will just have to test to see if the implementation of the designs actually work as intended.
Gloom and Doom before testing is meaningless.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Child Item