PvX tilted towards PvE High Risk vs High Reward

It's simple rly..
All Im saying is that PvP felt pointless in AA. If Savannah was a pvp zone you'd just go to perinoor. Nobody would pvp there. As long as there are gimmicks "this zone is now pvp and this isnt" people will either go to the peaceful zone and continue with almost 0 incidents, or they will go to the PvP zone to see if there is anybody left to punch up with.

That wasnt the case with L2. In L2 there werent such gimmicks. No matter where you went PvP could happen. And if you wanted to Lv up or farm mats you had to win if somebody attacked or took your mobs. There were no designated PvP areas for the next 40mins or whatever the case was in AA, so that people can let off some steam.

Oh the thing I forgot about AA. Faction pvp....
I disliked it in eso, I didnt care for wow because of it. It's system driven pvp, not player experience. "That guy is from the other side, the only interaction is to kill, you have no agency in this."

akabear wrote: »

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.

Yeah, but that is just PvP for the sake of PvP.

It isnt meaningful in any way. It is a situation that can and will be present in any open world PvP game.

George_Black wrote: »

It's simple rly..
All Im saying is that PvP felt pointless in AA. If Savannah was a pvp zone you'd just go to perinoor. Nobody would pvp there. As long as there are gimmicks "this zone is now pvp and this isnt" people will either go to the peaceful zone and continue with almost 0 incidents, or they will go to the PvP zone to see if there is anybody left to punch up with.

The only reason you would go to one zone instead of another is if you didnt have any plan as to what you were doing. Sure, if you were just wandering around aimlessly, you may stick to an area without PvP - but you wouldn't have anything to do.

This is why it is literally the same deal as logging out of any other game.

Take this back to L2, if you have no specific reason to be in an area, what point is there to PvP in that area? Sure, PvP may happen, but that PvP would then be the definition of pointless, because you have no reason to be in that area and so have no specific reason - or point - to fighting to stay there.

The simple fast that in Archeage you COULD just walk away from PvP meant that pointless PvP happened less often, as when PvP happened it was because both sides had something they wanted to actually fight over.

If you dont like the way Archeage allowed players safe zones where they didnt need to PvP, that's fine - you are allowed to not like that, may people that played the game for years didnt like it. However, it doesnt mean there was no point to PvP in Archeage - it literally meant pointless PvP was able to just be avoided.

Any PvP that had some sort of point to it still took place - people weren't running off to safe areas when there was something of note on the line.

Perhaps by PvP feeling pointless you actually meant that you didnt like the fact that you couldn't engage in pointless PvP in some parts of Archeage... as a statement that actually makes sense.

mcstackerson

Noaani wrote: »

Perhaps by PvP feeling pointless you actually meant that you didnt like the fact that you couldn't engage in pointless PvP in some parts of Archeage... as a statement that actually makes sense.

Or it's because peace zones allowed players to do anything in safety. Activities that could have given pvp meaning, like trade packs, were usually done during peace time, when you couldn't pvp. Not saying there weren't other issues with trade packs that led to things being this way but it still made pvp feel pointless on the mainland.

mcstackerson wrote: »

Or it's because peace zones allowed players to do anything in safety.

Except you couldn't actually do much there. If you were staying in a peace zone, you were farming land you owned there. If you didn't own land there, you weren't doing anything productive. This is why I likened it to logging off - it is functionally the same thing.

This will be the same in Ashes though - you are free from PvP on your land. This means that in practice, any activity you were doing in a safe zone in Archeage, you are also effectively in a safe zone in Ashes.

In fact, since the most valuable farming in Archeage happened on four main zones in Auroria, and since those zones never had peace time, and also didn't have the "you can't ever be attacked on your own land" change applied to them, farming land in Archeage was significantly more risky than it will be in Ashes.

The 14 main peace zones had two functions - leveling up and farming. Farming was a protected activity anywhere in the game (except Auroria), which left leveling up.

As such, anyone complaining about peace zones in Archeage is literally complaining about not being able to gank players lower than level 30. That really is what the complaint amounts to - other than ignorance.

mcstackerson

Noaani wrote: »

mcstackerson wrote: »

Or it's because peace zones allowed players to do anything in safety.

Except you couldn't actually do much there. If you were staying in a peace zone, you were farming land you owned there. If you didn't own land there, you weren't doing anything productive. This is why I likened it to logging off - it is functionally the same thing.

This will be the same in Ashes though - you are free from PvP on your land. This means that in practice, any activity you were doing in a safe zone in Archeage, you are also effectively in a safe zone in Ashes.

In fact, since the most valuable farming in Archeage happened on four main zones in Auroria, and since those zones never had peace time, and also didn't have the "you can't ever be attacked on your own land" change applied to them, farming land in Archeage was significantly more risky than it will be in Ashes.

The 14 main peace zones had two functions - leveling up and farming. Farming was a protected activity anywhere in the game (except Auroria), which left leveling up.

As such, anyone complaining about peace zones in Archeage is literally complaining about not being able to gank players lower than level 30. That really is what the complaint amounts to - other than ignorance.

I'm not sure when you played but i assume george played at NA/EU launch when Auroria wasn't much of a thing and running trade packs on mainland was at least perceived as a major way for people to make money. Since peace time was an option, everyone ran their packs during it so any chance of fights breaking out over the packs wasn't possible. There also wasn't much else to fight over besides hasla farming spots.

You aren't really disagreeing with them, they are saying pvp had no purpose on the mainland and you are saying it doesn't belong.

Aerlana

NiKr wrote: »

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.

There is big difference about taking "old good time" games back to 2020's and make a copy of them.
The feel i have about promised made is the first thing : there was good thing, but never really good updates on any of those game with all improvment there were in technology... Allowing to do more. And also take good ideas from elsewhere.

But, he also promised strong PvE... which means some area far more dedicated to PvE than PvP.
But more than that, here i don't even speak about some raid bosses which are relatively protected from PvP (for example... due to the way being already a 30 minutes of hard trash mobs to get to him for example) but area where the standart are major threat that you need to deal as a party. Which... was a common thing in old time, including wow. And in such area, even in PvP server on wow, it was quite low conflict. For a simple reason : those are even more risky to do PvP in those area, respawn, and "random" reaction of other playre could pull more ennemies, and while them needing a party to have a quite safe fight, if you have a PvPvE situation, the monsters often end being the true winners of such situation : some are dead but all players are dead also...
Also, due to the danger of those area, less players will go there than other classic farm spot.
You can do PvP for looting the bodies, the fun of pvp... or another reason, Such area is clearly not the favored one to get what you hope from PvP. less people go there => less chance to find some PvP to do. also they will be as party you need to gather also 8man (while for more open world PvP being 2-3 is enough). And the risk are much higher (due to monster being a major threat while you fight players) for not really more reward.

A simple way to have a "PvE tilted area" is simply by doing area where monsters are a real danger. This also allow the pvp to still be a thing even there, just... not the most enticing area for open world PvP...

Ludullu

Aerlana wrote: »

also they will be as party you need to gather also 8man (while for more open world PvP being 2-3 is enough). And the risk are much higher (due to monster being a major threat while you fight players) for not really more reward.

A simple way to have a "PvE tilted area" is simply by doing area where monsters are a real danger. This also allow the pvp to still be a thing even there, just... not the most enticing area for open world PvP...

I personally hope that the majority of content requires a full party. At least mob-related content. Have a few solo locations, but outside of those - all party-based.

And I know how it is to fight mobs that can kill you quickly while there's a constant threat of pvp. L2's mobs weren't complex, but they could still kill you in a few hits if you weren't careful. And pvp under those mobs was the main fun of the game. Avoiding their attacks while trying to redirect them onto your player enemies required positioning skills and quick thinking. I expect a similar situation in Ashes too, just maybe with better mobs.

mcstackerson wrote: »

I'm not sure when you played but i assume george played at NA/EU launch when Auroria wasn't much of a thing and running trade packs on mainland was at least perceived as a major way for people to make money. Since peace time was an option, everyone ran their packs during it so any chance of fights breaking out over the packs wasn't possible. There also wasn't much else to fight over besides hasla farming spots.

You aren't really disagreeing with them, they are saying pvp had no purpose on the mainland and you are saying it doesn't belong.

You know what, this may well be true.

However, here's the thing with that...

We are talking a literal 2 month period here. As a two month period, literally every player in the game was saying "wait till Auroria launches in a few months for the good PvP to start".

Players were saying this because Trion said they were going to wait 2 or 3 months before they launch Auroria, so that more players were better suited for the land rush it would create. This wasn't something you had to be on the forums to hear about, or be "in the know" with the developers, it was literally shouted out every few minutes on every chat channel on every server. You had to be blind to miss it.

If someone is going to permanently judge a game while knowing this piece of information, and yet not waiting until after Auroria launches, then that person is simply not fit to play an MMORPG.

An MMORPG is never finished. You literally never judge it by any one period of time, let alone the first few months when a known patch is on hold for a known reason.

If George is in fact talking about that two month period after launch but before Auroria, then George is simply not fit to play MMORPG's.

You are desperate for a victory noaani. Drop it. It's ridiculous.
L2 pvp was not based on zones, factions or any such things as in AA.
Two different games. How on earth did you made the two similar in your mind and placed me at fault for not liking AA but liking L2. Yes I found AA pvp optional in many occasions, and on others forced not due to conflict of interests, but due to faction gameplay. I dont like faction gameplay. Perhaps I shouldnt say pointless, I should say boring and limiting.

Just remember that all this started by you repeating that I said I want AoC to be like L2 aa bdo tera. Not even sure how this is relevant to this topic, but I guess it kept you happy for a few days. Either let the thread die or go to the topic.

Here Ill give you a small win, which you need as if it's oxygen. AA pvp wasnt pointless. It was designed that way. I found it shallow and that is why I would never say "I want AoC to be like AA".

George_Black wrote: »

Perhaps I shouldnt say pointless, I should say boring and limiting.

Yeah, perhaps you should have.

I didnt say you had to like Archeage, I said you characterizing PvP in Archeage as pointless when it isnt in other games is just outright incorrect.

Further, your reasoning in regards to peace zones or peace times is showing an inclination to want to attack players while leveling up, as that is the only reason someone had to be in a peace zone other than farming land (which is a protected activity).

Taking these two statements together, what you are saying is that either you do not understand Archeage, you think the only non-pointless PvP in an MMO is against leveling characters - or you completely mis-spoke.

As for PvP bring limiting, I actually disagree.

If we make the assumption that a PvP player understands there is no reason or value to want to attack players in a peace zone, these PvP players will simply be away from those zones.

From there, every player in the game is a valid PvP target, just as in L2 and Ashes.

A key difference is that in Archeage, the corruption/karma equivalent system only applies if you attack half of the servers population- there is no penalty for attacking the other half. This in itself makes PvP less limiting than in Ashes or L2.

From there, if you find that crime system too limiting still, you can do what I do - flip to become a pirate. I spent over a year as the only pirate on my server (getting hero for free was great). This meant that everyone else on the server was a consequence free PvP target for me.

So yeah, from my perspective, PvP in Archeage is somewhat less limiting than it is in L2, unless you want to attack low level players.

Ye whatever man. Nobody else is interested.

George_Black wrote: »

Ye whatever man. Nobody else is interested.

I don't care if no one else is interested.

You were factually incorrect, and you know perfectly well that I will not leave that uncontested on these forums.

Pick your words better next time.

Oh shiet

Why would people escape to the Underworld to flee from the Corruption when it's an even more dangerous place?
If anything the overworld should be hell and the underworld safe.

Dygz

Underrealm???

Same thing

Noaani wrote: »

George_Black wrote: »

Ye whatever man. Nobody else is interested.

I don't care if no one else is interested.

You were factually incorrect, and you know perfectly well that I will not leave that uncontested on these forums.

Pick your words better next time.

Small man.

Azherae wrote: »

And now, for a personal addition to this.

One of the largest problems with this, I think outright huge problems, is that higher PvE skill automatically puts many players in a situation where they are automatically disadvantaged in PvP against a player with less of it.

Let's use Alpha-1 as a simple example. Crabs on a beach, level 13-15.

High skill PvE player goes there at level 8 and starts racking up the exp.

Lower skill PvE player or one who doesn't have as good a build doesn't go there until level 11 or 12.

These two players could have literally the same build, gear, and PvP skill, and the LESS skilled PvE player would win their fight.

I'm not saying that it shouldn't be like this, I'm simply adding it to the conceptual pile of reasons why PvE-focused players who build up those skills don't necessarily enjoy games like Ashes. Note it again. The player with the higher SKILL at one thing can have EQUAL skill to the other in PvP but because of their wish to push their PvE skill, they are disadvantaged in a PvP conflict anyway.

When exactly is someone good at PvP and bad at PvE lol. Mobs have 1 pattern 90% and a little extra 10% of the time.
This is what happens when the best context for what you're saying is in your head lmao.

NiKr wrote: »

This is why I hope Intrepid somehow manages to design mobs in such a way that fighting them wouldn't be too different from fighting humans. At the end of the day it's just some movement around and CCs/attacks.

And when PvE players realize that they can fight back against players the same way they would fight back against an agro mob who attacked them first. Obviously this doesn't include the gatherer part of the pve player spectrum, but those are protected by the corruption system (to a point) and would probably usually be on the lower adventure lvl side of progression so it's not like any pvper would be ready to just kill them.

Yes fighting intelligently good. Or give them cool Monster Hunter 3 mechanics.
Mobs are the most lazily coded things in the world.

Make movement have inertia so there's no "press key start teleporting 100 pixels a tick"; same with mobs. I shouldn't have to say it!

Dizz wrote: »

So PvX is a game type not really easy to have fun for hardcore PvP/PvE players which means players only want to do PvP or PvE and don't want the other part, to those kind of players you need to really understand that before you give your opinions.

PvPers don't like boring repetitive predictable theme park content. PvEee-ers think they are cool and competent in a real magical realm.

I don't like PvP because everyone gets salty, the combat is basic, the PvErs never leave safety and simply teleport to instanced dungeons and crap, nothing is even gained from killing players, player density can be so low I can't find people or so high I can't avoid groups of them. . . . unless I go rogue or something lol. . . . no one wants to group to do world PvP and I have to grind to level 60 to possibly find those kinds of people, everyone wants to TELEPORT TO THE BATTLEFIELD and just 'capture the flag' or some shit like idiots. Everyone is geared because they do dungeons and twink the fuck out from looking at the wiki and I only have like 3 useful buttons to push anyway, with very little room for individual skill to influence things.
So basically PvP is shit because no one designs games to have satisfying PvP; or combat in general.

Now, PvE: Dumb, repetitive, basic, laziest AI and combat. No one wants to group. Everyone is several levels away and going completely solo following some ultra efficient route since the game is so damn static and they're on their 10th alt. . . and everyone is just anti-social or a complete sperg/tist.
The world is static. Nothing changes the world it's all just placeholders/props. Almost nothing requires a group and a good [geared and best class/sub-class] healer/tank can basically solo every dungeon because DPS is a convenience. They massacre tens and hundreds with no risk. And one's only usefulness is whether they can kill/ clear the theme-park so what's the point. There is no failstate to the game and it doesn't react to your failures or successes; so you aren't a server pop fighting the enemy NPCs or localized faction you're moving from one amusement park stand to the other.

Every 'dungeon' or raid is simple with simple mechanics. . . and anything of slight and I mean SLIGHT COMPLEXITY is about 200 hours away. 200 hours. You can't design the rest of the game to be good? ffs

Speaking from an objective point of view; as an objective critic; there is an incredible amount of room for improvement and MMOs reek of some kind of laziness and morose apathy. As if fun doesn't matter lol

Azherae wrote: »

That's a whole design document, though. The point is that your suggestion is the opposite. Make the Environment more like Players. This is generally used BY players in different ways. In fact, PvE games often have stuff like this because Players then just use the Environment against each other and never need to have direct conflict between two characters. And in those games, they can and do often use it for griefing too.

What game

Dygz wrote: »

Um. AI cannot yet play the same way Humans play.
And, I would not play a game where AI fights the same way Humans fight.

Monster Hunter 3 mobs would be cool. Lack of intelligent AI boils down to lazy programming; they can still have their own abilities, debuffs, positioning, movement, et cetera that's unique.
And most people would play a game where there is humanoid AI to fight. If they behaved more like humans rather than game characters wave dashing on the screen [smash melee term; it means 0 intertia movement] and have players moving like normal humans, with enemies of various mobility and patterns such as big and heavy, flying, jumping, lightweight and dodgy --> you might like it better.

Having everything fight and behave the same would be bad design; but right now MMO combat is lazy and uninteresting and always has been .