PvX tilted towards PvE High Risk vs High Reward

Reading the recent threads regarding the Lawless Open Sea, i saw a sentiment from people more PvE oriented, it seems like they believe that the open seas are a area with PvX more tilted towards PvP High Risk vs High Reward and it made think of the possibility of a Area with PvX more tilted towards PvE High Risk vs High Reward.

In this thread, i would like people to discuss and give their opinions and ideas towards the concept of "PvX more tilted towards PvE High Risk vs High Reward".

Let me provide an idea:

Lorewise we know the Underrealm is the place the people who weren't able to leave from Verra fled to escape from corruption, how about making the Underrealm a Area with PvX more tilted towards PvE High Risk vs High Reward.

How so? How about making it an area where you gain more corruption when killing players, killing monsters and death reduces less corruption, monsters there are stronger than monsters on land or sea, you receive PK death penalty when dying to monsters there, some monsters can spawn and ambush you there and the place is as rewarding as the open seas.

Find more posts tagged with

Staff

Comments

Aerlana

Here is a global opinion of mine :

AoC is a PvP game ? no
They said they wanted to do high end PvE content, but, so you need people to reach it... if there is nothing before, no step, just have to jump the wall... sure not lot of people will simply TRY to do it.

What i hope for the game after wiki information : an open world, with various PvE activities, from the simple quests, to high end boss... and including mainly some territory with elite ennemies everywhere, not even need to be a dungeon, but lets imagine a village of those snakeman, with no real "boss" (or nothing strong enough to be consider a "boss" outside the lore)
In such area, getting on PvP is risky... sure it is easy gang, but it can also fast turn to a disaster due to respawn, or skill to redirect some hate or what else (could be fun ranger to be able to do it to any other PC even if not a party member :') )

Also, about the good old time games... People should need to stop the need to stick to it... i mean if L2 is so perfect why simply not continue to play it again and again ? not even need for throne and liberty or what else.

I want Ashes of Creation to return to old basis, including the need to travel for example, the loss of all change to please the large casual public could be an easy way to list most problem for current MMORPG in my mind. But i also want AoC to be a really new game.
Yes, old games did lot of good thing, but it would be a poor and soulless project to not do a real new game, fitting the current possibility, but also take in consideration what was bad, and what more recent manage to do good.
I don't want AoC to be a "2025 L2" but to be Ashes of Creation. This is also this way that this game could prove to industry there are other way to do MMORPG...

George_Black

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

When did I ever said that I want them to make a bdo, tera or AA?
I dont like any of them.

Literally everything you ask for is the way those games have done it, and any time anyone suggests anything that any of those games didnt do, you are against.

I'm curious, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again, you saying that I said those things doesnt make it true. I dont know what you are talking about, I dont want AoC to be like bdo, AA, or Tera.

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

When did I ever said that I want them to make a bdo, tera or AA?
I dont like any of them.

Literally everything you ask for is the way those games have done it, and any time anyone suggests anything that any of those games didnt do, you are against.

I'm curious, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again, you saying that I said those things doesnt make it true. I dont know what you are talking about, I dont want AoC to be like bdo, AA, or Tera.

Then why is it that every argument you make is for Ashes to be more like those games?

Also, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Ludullu

Aerlana wrote: »

I don't want AoC to be a "2025 L2" but to be Ashes of Creation. This is also this way that this game could prove to industry there are other way to do MMORPG...

I think the main problem is that Steven himself started this game out as "I want to make those old games but better". He's making a game that he himself loved and those happen to be the old pvp games that would probably not fly these days with the majority of mmo players.

And at this point I'm not sure if anyone would be willing to make a "new" mmo. Pretty much every mmo out there (and just games in general tbh) are just either copies of older stuff or are heavily inspired by that old stuff (not even counting all the remakes and remasters). And because of that we have ourselves a stale genre that's barely moving forward and quite often just moves back. But imo moving back to try and do "the old stuff" can be good because it can show that the old stuff is still good, which could potentially break vicious cycle. Old stuff liked to try new shit and experiment, so if a few games prove that this old experimental stuff still works, it might show to execs/investors that it's ok to experiment again (though I doubt it).

Dygz

Half normal death penalties and no Corruption is not "risky". It's just more PvP combat.

That being said, it's great to have a game that focuses on hardcore PvP.
Of course, that is not going to be a game for everyone.
As long as the game can maintain a high enough population to keep the servers going... that's great.

Ludullu

Dygz wrote: »

Half normal death penalties and no Corruption is not "risky". It's just more PvP combat.

That being said, it's great to have a game that focuses on hardcore PvP.
Of course, that is not going to be a game for everyone.
As long as the game can maintain a high enough population to keep the servers going... that's great.

Btw, what if there was some regular world event that changed the open seas flagging rules to the normal ones. Would you play the game then? You could explore the seas and most of its content during the event, while avoiding open seas outside of it.

Dygz

Events are probably too temporary for that.
I might play the flip of that suggestion: normal flagging rules for the majority of time and an Event that auto-flags the Open Seas until the end of the Event.

Keep in mind that you are basically trying to convince me to play on a PvP server. And I'm already reluctant and skeptical to play on a PvP-Optional server. Corruption might get me to agree to play on what is essentially a PvP-Optional server.
People who have played L2 say that Corruption should be a sufficient deterrent for PKing that players who aren't so PvP-avoidant that they can never be PKEd should be comfortable not having a PvE-Only server.
I was open to testing that in Alpha 2 (and I will still be testing features in Alpha 2), but I don't need to test to know that I won't play on a server that has zones that auto-flag me as a Combatant.

If a PvP server is a 2; a PvP-Optional server is a 1 and a PvP-Only server is a 0...
Your suggestion is still primarily a rank 1.5 PvP server that sometimes drops down to a rank 1.
And I'm already skeptical about playing on a rank 1 PvP server.

It's not really worth it to suggest any alternatives because there was already a good chance that Corruption would not work to my satisfaction.

Strevi

Dygz wrote: »

Keep in mind that you are basically trying to convince me to play on a PvP server. And I'm already reluctant and skeptical to play on a PvP-Optional server. Corruption might get me to agree to play on what is essentially a PvP-Optional server.

There will be PvE and PvP servers?

Ludullu

Strevi wrote: »

There will be PvE and PvP servers?

No.

Dygz

All servers have the same ruleset.
And I consider that ruleset to basically be a rank 1.5 PvP server.

Strevi

NiKr wrote: »

Strevi wrote: »

There will be PvE and PvP servers?

No.

Thanks! I checked the wiki too
https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Servers
There won't be separate PvE and PvP servers.[79]

Strevi

Rando88 wrote: »

I think I will stay out of the forums when the game comes out. Ruins my mood.

It is a good idea. I might do the same.

Rando88

It's like not playing runescape because the wilderness exists.

George_Black

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

When did I ever said that I want them to make a bdo, tera or AA?
I dont like any of them.

Literally everything you ask for is the way those games have done it, and any time anyone suggests anything that any of those games didnt do, you are against.

I'm curious, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again, you saying that I said those things doesnt make it true. I dont know what you are talking about, I dont want AoC to be like bdo, AA, or Tera.

Then why is it that every argument you make is for Ashes to be more like those games?

Also, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again that's just your words. Not mine.
And let me show you that you dont know what you are talking about and that you dont make sense. I want "AoC to be like AA Tera and BDO"? Get rdy son:

AA pvp outside of the sea seemed pointless because they turned map areas into pvp zones and then back to no pvp. You might as well jump areas to avoid pvp. There were no castle sieges to own influence over a town, there were no goals for guilds besides the sea.
There was just a zergfest over some gear scrolls with a tiny bit of pvp sometimes.

Same with Tera. It had 0 guild activities. Just instanced raiding for pve gear and BG raiding for PvP gear. The rest of the game was dailies. Again.. 0 guild activities. You lv up following a boring MQS and counted on hubs of quest npcs.

Bdo had channels you could jump across every time your grind area was full of people. Out of the 20 of them one was bound to be free and you could grind without seeing another player for days.
P2w pvp, ugly combat effects and motionless freezeframe moves that looked like a slide show.
What I did like about bdo was the class identity, the fact that every class could use 2 weapons with different playstyles and even though I didnt like the effects of the combat, the level of realism and physical power conveyed was perfect for an mmo. Not as ridiculous as ff14, not as boring as eso.

And let's go to the big one. L2 was perfect. I want AoC to do everything that L2 did except for
1. forcing you to create a dwarf for gathering and crafting
2. mp running out too quickly with long downtime to recover without an elven/d. elven healer
3. being tab target

Such a broad statement with such conviction. Yet so false. Feel free to carry on.

akabear

Dygz wrote: »

Haha! I was bit bewildered at first.
I am non-competitive so...

Similar, would not say non-competitive though more like only competing with self, and in no race!

I can see myself going either route in Ashes - PvX or PvE only.
(AoC - ashes, not to be confused with AoC - Age of Conan referred to earlier)

Mag7spy

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

When did I ever said that I want them to make a bdo, tera or AA?
I dont like any of them.

Literally everything you ask for is the way those games have done it, and any time anyone suggests anything that any of those games didnt do, you are against.

I'm curious, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again, you saying that I said those things doesnt make it true. I dont know what you are talking about, I dont want AoC to be like bdo, AA, or Tera.

Then why is it that every argument you make is for Ashes to be more like those games?

Also, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again that's just your words. Not mine.
And let me show you that you dont know what you are talking about and that you dont make sense. I want "AoC to be like AA Tera and BDO"? Get rdy son:

AA pvp outside of the sea seemed pointless because they turned map areas into pvp zones and then back to no pvp. You might as well jump areas to avoid pvp. There were no castle sieges to own influence over a town, there were no goals for guilds besides the sea.
There was just a zergfest over some gear scrolls with a tiny bit of pvp sometimes.

Same with Tera. It had 0 guild activities. Just instanced raiding for pve gear and BG raiding for PvP gear. The rest of the game was dailies. Again.. 0 guild activities. You lv up following a boring MQS and counted on hubs of quest npcs.

Bdo had channels you could jump across every time your grind area was full of people. Out of the 20 of them one was bound to be free and you could grind without seeing another player for days.
P2w pvp, ugly combat effects and motionless freezeframe moves that looked like a slide show.
What I did like about bdo was the class identity, the fact that every class could use 2 weapons with different playstyles and even though I didnt like the effects of the combat, the level of realism and physical power conveyed was perfect for an mmo. Not as ridiculous as ff14, not as boring as eso.

And let's go to the big one. L2 was perfect. I want AoC to do everything that L2 did except for
1. forcing you to create a dwarf for gathering and crafting
2. mp running out too quickly with long downtime to recover without an elven/d. elven healer
3. being tab target

Such a broad statement with such conviction. Yet so false. Feel free to carry on.

It is the most obvious answers but Noaani as usual is being bias and manipulative. Only ever has 2 things on his mind, instanced content and trackers, all his post relate to pushing that in some way even if its only slightly hinted.

Noaani

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

When did I ever said that I want them to make a bdo, tera or AA?
I dont like any of them.

Literally everything you ask for is the way those games have done it, and any time anyone suggests anything that any of those games didnt do, you are against.

I'm curious, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again, you saying that I said those things doesnt make it true. I dont know what you are talking about, I dont want AoC to be like bdo, AA, or Tera.

Then why is it that every argument you make is for Ashes to be more like those games?

Also, you claim that Archeage had pointless PvP - what is it that makes PvP not pointless to you?

Again that's just your words. Not mine.
And let me show you that you dont know what you are talking about and that you dont make sense. I want "AoC to be like AA Tera and BDO"? Get rdy son:

AA pvp outside of the sea seemed pointless because they turned map areas into pvp zones and then back to no pvp. You might as well jump areas to avoid pvp. There were no castle sieges to own influence over a town, there were no goals for guilds besides the sea.
There was just a zergfest over some gear scrolls with a tiny bit of pvp sometimes.

Oh, so your opinion on Archeage having pointless PvP is based on you not understanding Archeage.

In regards to "they turned map areas into pvp zones and then back to no pvp", well, not really. PvP zones had stages they would go through, and at the end of the fourth stage they would be non-PvP for an hour. The thing is, the sone would switch between those stages based on PvP kills. A few hundred people from each faction going at it for hours still wasnt enough to flip a sone to PvE for that one hour.

Since all zones reset to stage one at the start of the week, it was unusual to see any zones ever have that one hour PvE window.

Next, you couldn't "jump areas to avoid PvP". As an issue, this makes about as much sense as claiming that Ashes is just pointless PvP because people can just log out to avoid it. In both cases (logging out in Ashes and moving to a different zone in Archeage), you are effectively giving up, stopping the activity you were wanting to do, and leaving your rival uncontested to do as they wish.

Archeage sieges allowed your guild to become your own faction, with control over a zone rather than just a town. This is actually more powerful than castle sieges in either L2 or Ashes (from what we know).

There is as much point to PvP in Archeage as there will be in Ashes. If you know what you are talking about and still believe there wasnt a point to PvP in Archeage, then you will have no point to PvP in Ashes.

Edit as per my next post; I should point out that if someone would want to follow you to a different zone just to carry on PvP'ing you, then that PvP has to be meaningless.

In order for PvP to be worth something, you have to be fighting for something. If I leave the area for any reason, the assumption should then be that you won what ever we were fighting over.

If you would want to follow me to continue that PvP, then that PvP literally cant be over anything at all - and thus is literally pointless.

I challenge you @George_Black to illustrate any type of worthwhile PvP where if one group wanted to leave the area, the other group would need to follow them in order to achieve the point of that not-pointless PvP.

I mean, you are the one that has claimed this to be the case.

akabear

Logging out can be as much as an avoidance of pvp as it can be for tactical menourver. Log off main fully buffed and ready to go

I had 3 accounts in L2. Main + 2 support, and several summoners. Used the balance of character alts on each account as scouts.. I could log on and off quite a few alts to scour the map for enemy clan or safe pve area, use the summoner to port in an instant .. worked a treat.. might do similar in this

Noaani

akabear wrote: »

Logging out can be as much as an avoidance of pvp as it can be for tactical menourver. Log off main fully buffed and ready to go

I had 3 accounts in L2. Main + 2 support, and several summoners. Used the balance of character alts on each account as scouts.. I could log on and off quite a few alts to scour the map for enemy clan or safe pve area, use the summoner to port in an instant .. worked a treat.. might do similar in this

I totally agree - my point was just to illustrate how silly the comment about moving to a different area to avoid PvP is.

I could have gone in to it even further though - in fact I think I will edit the above post with a continiation.

akabear

I have run solo a good 15-20min in pvp with a large group of enemy chasing after.. picking off the ones weaker ones that strayed to their front but mostly to annoy and tease while buying time for my own guild to group up, setup and lead them to an ambush.. (l2 buffs only lasted max 20min.. so small group pvp rounds without top up buffs rarely lasted longer) (large scale pvp a different issue)

Running too uncontested for long enough was a strategy to log off while still in pvp.. so wonder in AoC if one has to be static or just not engaged to log out.

Child Item