PvP - why do people avoid it, what types of PvP are out there, what do you like?

Rather than just posting my thoughts in other threads, I decided to sum it all up here.

Something that came up was PvP, and the negative emotions attached to it. Emotions like frustration, fear, anxiety, and why those emotions might stop people from enjoying, or even playing certain PvP games.

The game that really made me realize how much I dislike full loot PvP games, was Albion Online.
For me, the experience was full of fear and anxiety of going into PvP areas, because at any point I could get killed by someone stronger, or by a group of people. My problem with getting killed is the fact that I drop all my stuff. It's hours of wasted gameplay, just to lose it all. It just feels pointless, because I don't enjoy the experience at all. Dying in PvP is punishing. I do not want my time to be wasted, I want my character to keep progressing forward, rather than going back to almost 0.
Avoiding those areas isn't really an option, since all the best gatherables, loot, etc. is located there. You're simply not going to get anywhere by staying in non-pvp zones.

It's a similar thing with Rust. You start off the game doing some PvE content, like gathering stuff, looting, etc. Then you might build a base and store all that stuff you've found. But the problem is, you can and WILL get killed by other players. It's very, very rare that players wont just attack you on sight. Oh, and you can also lose your entire base.
While it can be sometimes enjoyable, for me the experience was filled mostly with fear and anxiety of bumping into someone that's clearly stronger than me. Player's just aren't friendly, and most likely they will kill you, even if you are just a low lvl scrub with basic weapons/armor.

Though with Rust, at least you have servers that reset after a few weeks or a month, in full loot MMORPGs, there's no such luxury. You are never going to start at the equal level to others, and you're always going to be behind (unless you play right from the moment the game goes live).

Overall, full loot PvP is really unenjoyable for me, and that's especially the case for MMORPGs. It brings out many negative emotions, and is just not an experience I'm looking for. I'm spending time focusing on looking over my shoulder constantly, rather than enjoying the game.
-Full Loot Hardcore PvP where dying to other players is punishing

Then we have open-world PvP games, that don't necessarily have full-loot system. They do usually have a flagging system, where you can flag up and kill people. I'm talking about games like Archeage, Lineage 2, and Ashes of Creation.

I was completely fine with the sort of system Archeage had. You could flag up on your own faction, though if you do it enough times, you would turn red, and you were no longer welcome in cities (the guards would attack you), and other players could kill you without any punishment. Turning red was really only something for those who wanted to be pirates.

I was also a fan of zones having a war-cycle, where they would go from peaceful to full out war. You had a choice whether you wanted to participate in PvP, by just avoiding PvP zones. There was also the added benefit of having 2 factions, so if you wanted to participate in some PvP, you could just go into those PvP zones and look for red players.
Dying was mostly an inconvenience, though it could be annoying. I know I'd much rather be annoyed, than experience fear and anxiety whenever I log into the game.

Now Ashes kinda falls between Archeage, and something more hardcore like L2 or even Albion. It's not full loot, but you do drop stuff on death. There are no factions, nor zones where PvP is disabled. You could be attacked by anyone really.
I'm not totally sure where I stand on it currently, but there's potential that with corruption working it's job, nodes and node citizenship being meaningful, guilds alliances being common, and other systems, the PvP experience could be great.

If corruption deters people from mindlessly PKing others, then good. You better have a good reason to attack and kill someone.
If node citizenship means you won't be attacked by players who also have the citizenship in the same node. or adjacent vassal nodes, then it's something I can work with.
If the game encourages you to get a node citizenship and where only the pirates and those who would like to roam from place to place wouldn't want to get a citizenship, then again, it's a great system.
It creates a certain gameplay element where you choose where you want to be in the world, and who do you want to ally with. It would also encourage you to defend the node against any sieges. Through a system of alliances, and being a citizen of a node, you essentially create a faction with the people around you. There could be many more factions around, and some of them will be friendly, a lot of them will be neutral/potentially hostile, and some of them will be hostile.

PvP will also have meaning, whether you're fighting against others for a farming spot, world boss, dungeon, it encourages group play and it rewards you if you come out on top. I do generally prefer the group PvP out in the open-world, add to that things like attacking/defending a node, castle sieges, etc. and it's just a great experience that isn't necessarily forced upon you.

This is the level of risk I'm willing to take, because it's going make the experience really good and interesting, while not being too hardcore, though I would like an option to just completely be left alone at certain times if I wish so (whether that's a certain area of the map being free from PvP during a certain period of time, or whatever else).
- Open World PvP that has meaning, where you fight/compete with others for certain things/rewards

Then we have games with opt-in open-world PvP, like WoW, where you could basically choose whether you want to participate in it or not (whether it's playing on a PvP server, which has zones where PvP is enabled, or whether it's the simple flagging system). To me, it's a boring system in a way. There's pretty much no reason to flag up or kill someone, other than ego. It doesn't really encourage group play, unless you group up to just terrorize solo players. Again, there's no meaning, and mostly no reward. Boring, and frustrating due to the lack of a deterrent (meaning you could just go and kill low lvl players if you want to inside PvP zones on a PvP server).
-Opt-in Open World PvP, without much meaning added to it.

And in the end we have mostly PvE games, with only PvP coming from battlegrounds, arenas, etc. WoW could be an example here as well. I'd also throw in GW2 (it does have GvG, or rather WvW, but it's garbage imo).
The most pointless PvP experience for me, it's just an afterthought, it's a lobby based PvP in a way, as it's not happening out in the open-world. This just tells me the game is primarily made for the PvE experience, with PvP not having any impact on the game world. Boring, but good for those who just want to have a more competitive setting.
-Strictly battleground/arena based PvP

So I'm really interested in what people think about these different types of PvP systems in MMORPGs, and which one you prefer and why. Also, for those who dislike PvP or certain types of PvP, why is that?

For those who dislike PvP,
-is it due to your ego/pride being hurt if you lose,
-due to distruption of gameplay it causes,
-due to you having no control over it (no consent)
-due to death being punishing
-due to it being unbalanced (getting attacked by players much stronger than you)
-or something else?

Anyways, here's a poll: https://strawpoll.com/Q0ZpR5lKAnM

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ayeveegaming1

iccer wrote: »

Rather than just posting my thoughts in other threads, I decided to sum it all up here.

Something that came up was PvP, and the negative emotions attached to it. Emotions like frustration, fear, anxiety, and why those emotions might stop people from enjoying, or even playing certain PvP games.

The game that really made me realize how much I dislike full loot PvP games, was Albion Online.
For me, the experience was full of fear and anxiety of going into PvP areas, because at any point I could get killed by someone stronger, or by a group of people. My problem with getting killed is the fact that I drop all my stuff. It's hours of wasted gameplay, just to lose it all. It just feels pointless, because I don't enjoy the experience at all. Dying in PvP is punishing. I do not want my time to be wasted, I want my character to keep progressing forward, rather than going back to almost 0.
Avoiding those areas isn't really an option, since all the best gatherables, loot, etc. is located there. You're simply not going to get anywhere by staying in non-pvp zones.

It's a similar thing with Rust. You start off the game doing some PvE content, like gathering stuff, looting, etc. Then you might build a base and store all that stuff you've found. But the problem is, you can and WILL get killed by other players. It's very, very rare that players wont just attack you on sight. Oh, and you can also lose your entire base.
While it can be sometimes enjoyable, for me the experience was filled mostly with fear and anxiety of bumping into someone that's clearly stronger than me. Player's just aren't friendly, and most likely they will kill you, even if you are just a low lvl scrub with basic weapons/armor.

Though with Rust, at least you have servers that reset after a few weeks or a month, in full loot MMORPGs, there's no such luxury. You are never going to start at the equal level to others, and you're always going to be behind (unless you play right from the moment the game goes live).

Overall, full loot PvP is really unenjoyable for me, and that's especially the case for MMORPGs. It brings out many negative emotions, and is just not an experience I'm looking for. I'm spending time focusing on looking over my shoulder constantly, rather than enjoying the game.
-Full Loot Hardcore PvP where dying to other players is punishing

Then we have open-world PvP games, that don't necessarily have full-loot system. They do usually have a flagging system, where you can flag up and kill people. I'm talking about games like Archeage, Lineage 2, and Ashes of Creation.

I was completely fine with the sort of system Archeage had. You could flag up on your own faction, though if you do it enough times, you would turn red, and you were no longer welcome in cities (the guards would attack you), and other players could kill you without any punishment. Turning red was really only something for those who wanted to be pirates.

I was also a fan of zones having a war-cycle, where they would go from peaceful to full out war. You had a choice whether you wanted to participate in PvP, by just avoiding PvP zones. There was also the added benefit of having 2 factions, so if you wanted to participate in some PvP, you could just go into those PvP zones and look for red players.
Dying was mostly an inconvenience, though it could be annoying. I know I'd much rather be annoyed, than experience fear and anxiety whenever I log into the game.

Now Ashes kinda falls between Archeage, and something more hardcore like L2 or even Albion. It's not full loot, but you do drop stuff on death. There are no factions, nor zones where PvP is disabled. You could be attacked by anyone really.
I'm not totally sure where I stand on it currently, but there's potential that with corruption working it's job, nodes and node citizenship being meaningful, guilds alliances being common, and other systems, the PvP experience could be great.

If corruption deters people from mindlessly PKing others, then good. You better have a good reason to attack and kill someone.
If node citizenship means you won't be attacked by players who also have the citizenship in the same node. or adjacent vassal nodes, then it's something I can work with.
If the game encourages you to get a node citizenship and where only the pirates and those who would like to roam from place to place wouldn't want to get a citizenship, then again, it's a great system.
It creates a certain gameplay element where you choose where you want to be in the world, and who do you want to ally with. It would also encourage you to defend the node against any sieges. Through a system of alliances, and being a citizen of a node, you essentially create a faction with the people around you. There could be many more factions around, and some of them will be friendly, a lot of them will be neutral/potentially hostile, and some of them will be hostile.

PvP will also have meaning, whether you're fighting against others for a farming spot, world boss, dungeon, it encourages group play and it rewards you if you come out on top. I do generally prefer the group PvP out in the open-world, add to that things like attacking/defending a node, castle sieges, etc. and it's just a great experience that isn't necessarily forced upon you.

This is the level of risk I'm willing to take, because it's going make the experience really good and interesting, while not being too hardcore, though I would like an option to just completely be left alone at certain times if I wish so (whether that's a certain area of the map being free from PvP during a certain period of time, or whatever else).
- Open World PvP that has meaning, where you fight/compete with others for certain things/rewards

Then we have games with opt-in open-world PvP, like WoW, where you could basically choose whether you want to participate in it or not (whether it's playing on a PvP server, which has zones where PvP is enabled, or whether it's the simple flagging system). To me, it's a boring system in a way. There's pretty much no reason to flag up or kill someone, other than ego. It doesn't really encourage group play, unless you group up to just terrorize solo players. Again, there's no meaning, and mostly no reward. Boring, and frustrating due to the lack of a deterrent (meaning you could just go and kill low lvl players if you want to inside PvP zones on a PvP server).
-Opt-in Open World PvP, without much meaning added to it.

And in the end we have mostly PvE games, with only PvP coming from battlegrounds, arenas, etc. WoW could be an example here as well. I'd also throw in GW2 (it does have GvG, or rather WvW, but it's garbage imo).
The most pointless PvP experience for me, it's just an afterthought, it's a lobby based PvP in a way, as it's not happening out in the open-world. This just tells me the game is primarily made for the PvE experience, with PvP not having any impact on the game world. Boring, but good for those who just want to have a more competitive setting.
-Strictly battleground/arena based PvP

So I'm really interested in what people think about these different types of PvP systems in MMORPGs, and which one you prefer and why. Also, for those who dislike PvP or certain types of PvP, why is that?

Anyways, here's a poll: https://strawpoll.com/Q0ZpR5lKAnM

I know this dates me but I like to talk about UO. In UO it started out as full loot pvp, and on the siege perilous shard it still is. But later on they still had full loot pvp but they applied the ability to insure your gear. So if you got killed they did not loot you but they get awarded insurance gold, the amount the armor your wearing would sell for at a vendor. So you keep your gear and lose gold. But it keeps you in the game. Just thought I would share that if you did not know it already.

George_Black

1) mmo features should not be called pvp or pve. That's stupid and lazy. They are terms for the simple minded folks that miss the forest in the midst of trees.

2) wow ff14 eso gw2 etc etc etc removed pvp from the world experience and isolated it. Just like modern music, they have a big following of people with bad taste for things.
If we have passion for a product, we create what we like to present to the word, we dont cater to delusional demands, nor the $$. Time to go back to the good stuff, like L2.
The above mentioned ppl can go elsewhere with their $$.

3) Some people have too much free time on their hands. They disquise their attampts at a social life, built on online likes, @s, quotes and stroking each others vanity, as feedback for the Devs.
You should skip their comments in order not to derail actual topics.
In time they will vanish and you can discuss things that have a realistic chance of being considered feedback, and presented to the devs.

4) I havent played an mmo for years. I looked around, I saw nothing good. I did not start asking the studios to introduce owpvp "because you are losing customers".
I looked at singleplayer games and I couldnt find anything with good sword swinging and 0 intrusive technology/scifi themes.
I did not buy the latest starwars games, went to the forums asking them to tone down the space stuff and give me more armors, helmets, castles and dragons.
I did not go to diablo 4 saying "can you not be a top down rpg? Be more like the witcher or Dragon Age?
I skipped. I didnt make an account at the forums, I didnt say "when I was reading the kick-starter I was led to believe that since this is the latest version, and due to the success of games like elden ring etc etc maybe you should not have a top down setting (you will lose customers blah bla blah).
Normal people dont do that kind of stuff.

5) Steven will engage in streams, but he may one day turn around and say we dont want you officially assosciated with the game. It's up to you how much you want to antagonize the studio descissions and blame them for not making a game for YOU.
The more you make such ppl feel important, the closer you bring them to the eventual hubris.

6) Understant where AoC is based on. It's not based in Albion, not based in wow, not based in rust or fortnite, it's not based in ff14 or farmville.
Players will interact freely with otherplayers in the open world.
The corruption system protects:
Leveling and progress
Questing and exploration
Crafting/gathering/economy
Sieges and wars
It's not a PvP system. It's a world protection system. Forget about PvE and PvP. Mmos are about players pretending to live in a fastasy world. You can fight, craft, control the world and other players will do the same. There will be CONFLICT OF INTERESTS.
It's not a gaming session. It's a constant moving world, and you will be left behind if it's not your priority.
Take a 3 month leave from work on launch date and enjoy. If you dont have at least this much control of your personal and professional life, sucks to suck and you are in no possition to make recomendations to a game dev company. Go play eso, where nothing you do matters, but you can always have a fulfiling session of winning a participation trophy. Yay, you won a BG. Nobody cares. Yay you killed that instanced boss in 5 minutes, you got a mount for the achievement. Nobody gives a f. You can log out peacefully and have fun whenever you can log back in.

7) Have the courage to honest with yourselves and face the reality. And have humility. If you can understand the consepts of the game and have a suggestion that SUCCESSFULLY doesnt contradict the design philosophy, share it.
If you need to learn more before you speak, control your tongue, control your self... Go watch past vids, learn about L2 AA and whatever other mmos Steven talks about. Do the work if you want respectful answers.

Ayeveegaming1

I voted!

iccer

Another thing I forgot to ask, because I ramble too much, is the following:
For those who dislike PvP, is it due to your ego/pride being hurt if you lose, due to distruption of gameplay it causes, due to you having no control over it (no consent), due to death being punishing, due to it being unbalanced (getting attacked by players much stronger than you), or something else?

Korela

Arena is the best endgame PvP content.
OW PvP is fine for midgame, but flawfull.
Opt-in OW PvP is pointless.
Full loot is a waste of time.

Depraved

Korela wrote: »

Arena is the best endgame PvP content.
OW PvP is fine for midgame, but flawfull.
Opt-in OW PvP is pointless.
Full loot is a waste of time.

no arena will ever come close to fighting 500 vs 500 at barakiel everyday for hours or defending baium/antharas/valakas. gtfo with your quick dopamine fix and your 3 1 shot classes together in a comp.

Korela

Depraved wrote: »

Korela wrote: »

Arena is the best endgame PvP content.
OW PvP is fine for midgame, but flawfull.
Opt-in OW PvP is pointless.
Full loot is a waste of time.

no arena will ever come close to fighting 500 vs 500 at barakiel everyday for hours or defending baium/antharas/valakas. gtfo with your quick dopamine fix and your 3 1 shot classes together in a comp.

Well, thanks for your "gtfo" part, but I am fine here. Idk why you are talking about 3 1 shots classes. I like full group vs full group, ~5-10 min fights.

I'm not against 500 v 500. Valakas' Lair is probably my second favorite L2 content after 9v9. Mostly because it is actually somewhat an arena (it is closing after Boss spawns). What I am against here is: 500 v 100 / non-closing zergable spaces like Barakiel with 4h+ fights (it is really unhealthy tbh) / non-server-prime-time (night-morning) spawns / negative amount of FPS.

And I am not like to deal with OW griefers. I am ok to contest the farm-spot through PvP. But it is boring to waste my time to deal with a random group of pepegas who tries to abuse corruption system by pulling tons of elite mobs on my group forcing us to PK. And I am at risk of dropping my gear just because those pepegas are not willing to contest the farm-spot through fair PvP.

Ayeveegaming1

I am not opposed to arena battles or battle royals at all. The only setback for me would be the lag feature that seems to follow large numbers at one time.

CROW3

MO2 beta was fine once you develop a strat to manage losing everything. I’d much rather explore that world where danger means something than WoW where it just doesn’t matter if I leap to my death since there’s no consequence.

PherPhur

Not a big sample size, but the polls seem to be pretty unanimous.

I think the only people that really hang out here are into AoC in most of it's core aspects(minus some fine details), flagging being one of those.

Try posting this on the subreddit.

Solvryn

I'll always prefer full loot over non full loot, but more importantly I'll always prefer good combat over full loot. So I'll go to an open world pvp game with no full loot with better combat over a full loot pvp game with shitty combat.

Dygz

1: I'm a Carebear. I typically spend the majority of my game sessions in Stealth, exploring the map as far as possible without getting one-shot by skulled mobs and avoiding combat. Even in TT D&D, I typically use CHA skills to avoid combat.

2: In the 40+ years I've played D&D, I think I've encountered PvP twice and I think the gap between those encounters was 20 years. I don't play RPGs to PvP. But... I do like to PvP sometimes.

3: When I worked at Activision in the late 1990s, seems like everyone there was playing UO, but all they talked about was the PvP. I had no interest in playing UO. When EQ launched, Spytle told me I should give it a try.
He gave me the "Play on the PvP-Optional server with us, we will protect you if you don't want to PvP spiel."
But, I was typically working European times, rather than US times, so we actually rarely played together.
Most of my play time, I soloed.
At that time, it was just super-cool to be able to run around in a 3D version of D&D with other players whenever I had free time. As opposed to trying to synch schedules to play D&D, like once a month.
Sure, upon death you might have to do a corpse run. You might have lost all your loot. You might have some xp debt. But, at least it wasn't permadeath, like D&D.

4: The first 8 years or so of EQ/EQ2 had a lot of crappy annoyances that we put up with because MMORPGs were so new. I was expecting to continue to have EQ as my main game and ignore WoW. But, WoW was just easier to navigate. Not near as many invisible walls. I didn't have to wait 30+ seconds to load into the next zone.
I would kinda bounce between EQ2 and WoW. But, I think it's in WoW that I began to realize I could easily tick off the goals for my play sessions.
And then the only time I felt like I lost control of the ability to tick off my goals each play session is when some asshat found me while I was picking flowers and waiting for my PvP flag to cooldown. I'd already have my fill of PvP. Moved away from whatever village I was defending and someone would stumble upon me and engage PvP. I'd ask them to leave me alone because I'm not in the mood for PvP. They'd give me the, "Why are flagged for PvP if you don't want to PvP?!" line. And then continue to attack. Which would mean, even if I won the encounter, the cooldown for the PvP flag had reset. So - now I'm stuck flagged for PvP again, when I'm not in the mood to PvP.
That happened enough times that I ended up rage-quitting to a PvE-Only server. That actually happened with several of my characters, so I finally realized I should just play on PvE-Only servers. Even though I like to PvP sometimes.
And...at that point...I considered PvPers to be assholes.

5: I consider PvP combat to be a Hardcore Challenge. Mobs tend to be way more predictable than gamers and they tend to have tethers. Mobs are easier to manage in combat than gamers. So, I consider combat with mobs and NPCs to be a relatively Casual Challenge compared to PvP combat.
And I am primarily a Casual Challenge player.

6: I don't mind PvP combat for short bursts of time, when I'm in the mood and I choose to jump into some "Siege" defense. But when I'm not in the mood, especially when I've already had my fill of Hardcore Challenge activity, I'm going to rage-quit the server if someone forces me into non-consensual PvP. Especially if I'm not able to do something punish them with Karma/Corruption.

7: The types of PvP I enjoy, in the rare moments I'm in the mood for PvP, is town/village defense or capture the flag. Objective-based PvP, where I ignore combat as much as possible and focus on completing as many objectives as I can, like capturing a bunch of flags.
NWO had instanced PvP. I participated in capture the flag and base defense PvP sometimes.
It was OK.

8: The game design for EQNext was phenomenal. Storybricks was brilliant. Constructing and defending our home cities seemed like a dream come true. Especially for eradicating the Endgame conundrum of being stuck with no new content for 2+ years after completing the new expansion within a few weeks.
Obviously, if I have built my city, I'm going to be very invested in defending it from environmental threats, mobs and even other players.
But...EQNext planned to only have one server type - no PvE-Only servers.
Especially those of us who typically play on PvE-Only servers to stay away from the assholes who play on PvP servers, wanted to know how the devs are going to make it so we can all play together comfortably.
The devs never shared there intended solution(s).
On the EQNext Forums, the PvPers would offer their suggested compromises and the PvEers would become offended, flame the PvPers and get temp banned from the forums.
The the PvEers would offer their suggested compromises and the PvPers would become offended, flame the PvEers and get temp banned from the forums.
But, the more time I spent in these discussions, the more I realized... I like some of these gamers. They aren't all griefers just trying to convince PvE to play with them so they can use them as easy fodder or gleefully grief them. I think I would like to play on the same servers with them - if we can figure out how to make sure I'm never forced into PvP when I'm not in the mood for PvP.
At that point, I no longer thought of PvPers as assholes.
EQNext became vaporware without us ever learning the intended panacea that would have us happily playing together on the same servers.

9: I played Bless Online on a server where PvP was possible. It might have been racial or regional or something? PvP encounters were very rare. I think there were no death penalties. No corpse looting.
I think the TTK was quite short. Corpse run was always short. And no corpse camping, so...
I would just let my assailant kill me, run back to grab my corpse, and then continue my play session.
That was a non-issue.

10: Ashes has some designs that are similar to EQNext. I consider Nodes to be a simplified version of StoryBricks.
As with EQNext, my initial concern is - how are you going to convince players who typically play on PvE-Only servers to play on the same servers as gamers who typically play on PvP servers.
This is really an issue of non-consensual PvP.
The answer given was that Corruption should deter non-consensual PvP enough that it only occurs fairly rarely. L2 players made assurances that Karma worked well in L2, so Corruption work well in Ashes.
Seems reasonable enough - let's test it.
But, that was when there were no permanent zones with auto-consent, FFA PvP.
I refuse to play MMORPGs that have permanent zones with auto-consent, FFA PvP.
I refuse to auto-consent. Which means Ashes is not a game that is made for me.
Which is OK. I just place it in the same category as EvE Online, ArcheAge and L2. Games I refuse to play.
Of course... I don't feel a need to play every MMORPG that is created.

iccer

ChipsAhoy007 wrote: »

Not a big sample size, but the polls seem to be pretty unanimous.

I think the only people that really hang out here are into AoC in most of it's core aspects(minus some fine details), flagging being one of those.

Try posting this on the subreddit.

It's pretty much what I expected, given that the game is based on Archeage and Lineage 2. It's also expected, because most people on these forums are in fact looking for a similar type of experience, and are aware that it's how the game will be designed.

@George_Black I'm really not sure how your comment is relevant to anything, or who it applies to. I do agree with some stuff though, definitely.

George_Black

Go make your own game Dygz. You got too much free time on your hands. Arent you tired of telling us about your needs and wants?
Do you believe anyone cares?

Boneshatter

I like pvp when I'm in the mood for it. Battlegrounds, arenas, town defense/offense, and all that type of stuff. That said, I'm typically pretty goal oriented when I log into an mmo. This night is for gathering, those two nights are for raiding, another night I told a friend I'd help them clear some old content for whatever reason, the following night I'll pvp, etc.

I tend to get really annoyed when something interrupts my play session or stops me from accomplishing that goal. This is why I dislike owpvp. In my experience (yours may differ) owpvp is almost always people that just have nothing better to do than to pester someone else. Corpse camping, killing low levels, killing quest givers, training mobs on top of people, and all that type of stuff. Getting deleted in a one-off is fine, but its rarely that simple.

What honestly gives me the most pause about Ashes is to spend several hours gathering only to get attacked by a group or a higher level where I stand no chance and losing a significant portion of what I've gathered. I know me and that is likely to be a rage quit moment. If I intend to pvp then fine- I'll stash my stuff and show up in that mindset. If I'm in gathering mode I would prefer to just be left alone and I certainly don't want to feel like half of the last 3 hours has been wasted because someone took my stuff.

I hope that answers your question, iccer. I like all forms of pvp except owpvp because I dislike having my time wasted and -in my experience- people looking to engage in owpvp are usually just looking to waste someone else's time.

Ayeveegaming1

I think it will be rare that you will be bothered. It might happen a couple times but not regularily. Corruption will deter 99% of the pk's. I hope this helps, would hate to see someone play a game they won't enjoy. OWPVP is part of the core game design so that is not going to change. What will change is the slider adjusting corruption.

George_Black

Boneshatter wrote: »

I like pvp when I'm in the mood for it. Battlegrounds, arenas, town defense/offense, and all that type of stuff. That said, I'm typically pretty goal oriented when I log into an mmo. This night is for gathering, those two nights are for raiding, another night I told a friend I'd help them clear some old content for whatever reason, the following night I'll pvp, etc.

I tend to get really annoyed when something interrupts my play session or stops me from accomplishing that goal. This is why I dislike owpvp. In my experience (yours may differ) owpvp is almost always people that just have nothing better to do than to pester someone else. Corpse camping, killing low levels, killing quest givers, training mobs on top of people, and all that type of stuff. Getting deleted in a one-off is fine, but its rarely that simple.

What honestly gives me the most pause about Ashes is to spend several hours gathering only to get attacked by a group or a higher level where I stand no chance and losing a significant portion of what I've gathered. I know me and that is likely to be a rage quit moment. If I intend to pvp then fine- I'll stash my stuff and show up in that mindset. If I'm in gathering mode I would prefer to just be left alone and I certainly don't want to feel like half of the last 3 hours has been wasted because someone took my stuff.

I hope that answers your question, iccer. I like all forms of pvp except owpvp because I dislike having my time wasted and -in my experience- people looking to engage in owpvp are usually just looking to waste someone else's time.

Why will you play AoC if you dislike owpvp?
What other mmos do you currently play?

Nerror

My preferred type is the large scale stuff where we fight over objectives. Going back to RvR in DAoC as a prime example. Warhammer, GW2 and ESO has similar PvP types. I am mainly here for the castle and node sieges. I am also excited for caravans and ship battles . My first MMO was Asheron's Call, where players dropped their 3 most expensive items upon death. It was ok, but definitely not a game where I sought out the PvP. I tried Darktide too, but unless you were in a group and protected that way, it was often some high level PK spawn-camping a lowbie for 30 minutes, until they logged out.

I am good with and enjoy open world PvP when the two sides are somewhat evenly matched. Where you feel like there's a least a chance, even if they seem stronger. But when it's just against a much higher level player, or a group of 8 ganking a solo player, there's no contest. No fun. Same goes in reverse. It's not fun to gank someone who stands zero chance of winning.

KingDDD

I think your issue is you look at losing stuff as painful, which creates anxiety and negativity. Find activities you find fun that you can make coin doing. Even if you lose the coin, you still had fun doing it. Also its always important to remember that none of these things matter. The gold you have in game, the gear you make, etc is just pixels. At the end of the day you aren't losing anything of value.

Using Albion as an example, I use to buy random maps off the AH for red or black zones. I had fun roaming around doing my thing. Sometimes the bad people un-consensually did things to me. Death is just a part of the game you factor it into your losses. In Albion, there was always some basic content I could do in an hour or so to get myself back to random map farming if I lost everything.

If you aren't having fun getting things in game that you will inevitably lose, the game is lacking in a content path for you. From my perspective this is one of the biggest flaws in all pvp centric full loot MMOs. The genre needs more training wheels for folks to see why these games are so fun.

Boneshatter

George_Black wrote: »

Why will you play AoC if you dislike owpvp?
What other mmos do you currently play?

I'm currently following AoC closely because it looks like a really good game that only needs a few tweaks to be perfect and its still early enough that anything could happen. Perhaps the corruption system will deter the time wasters.

I'm not currently playing an mmo.

Child Item