PvP arena in cities (like a colosseum)

Azherae wrote: »

Oh no, we're at 'Ludullu isn't a PvPer'.

It only goes downhill from here.

Nah, they do have a point. I'm not a pvper. I'm a PvXer. From the game that had PvX rather than AA's faction-based bs (though yes, iirc it also had PKing of your own people).

I did enjoy arenas for their pure pvpness, because it let my guilds train newbies in pvp w/o losing a shitton of xp. And I also loved the ranked 1v1 arena in L2.

But none of that has anything to do with the sheer shittiness and laziness of lawless zones that will 100% ruin the game for an even bigger majority of people than what other systems in the game will.

Also, this

We're literally 10 steps closer to being a purely pvp game. Proper risk and investment for the stronger party, so that they can't just bully everyone on the server? Fuuuuck thaaaaat. We're giving those fuckers THE BIGGEST SNOWBALL POSSIBLE!

Here's live footage of a zerg megaguild rolling over everyone in one of them lawless zones with a boss that has BiS mats for crafting

Surely nothing bad will happen to the game after this design is implemented

Ludullu wrote: »

Nah, they do have a point. I'm not a pvper.

But none of that has anything to do with the sheer shittiness and laziness of lawless zones that will 100% ruin the game for an even bigger majority of people than what other systems in the game will.

We're literally 10 steps closer to being a purely pvp game. Proper risk and investment for the stronger party, so that they can't just bully everyone on the server? Fuuuuck thaaaaat. We're giving those fuckers THE BIGGEST SNOWBALL POSSIBLE!

Here's live footage of a zerg megaguild rolling over everyone in one of them lawless zones with a boss that has BiS mats for crafting

Surely nothing bad will happen to the game after this design is implemented

couldnt disagree more, i think you are the one doing a storm in a cup; i mean by what i have seen from alpha, people at the start were afraid it would be a massive gank box and yet not at all, there is hardly any major pvp happening whatsoever (hence why game looks already so dead), the 'big' streamer that had a huge megaguild/Community nowhere to be seen... now if they would do lawless zones on a rotation instead of static zones, then you wouldnt needed to be afraid of not getting that precious loot, just saying

Kallysha wrote: »

now if they would do lawless zones on a rotation instead of static zones, then you wouldnt needed to be afraid of not getting that precious loot, just saying

From Steven's words, the lawlessness brings the bigger rewards. Cause he believes that having a literal ffa zone on murder will somehow increase risk for the strongest players in the realm.

And I'm doing a storm in a cup, because I'm worried about the consequences of these kinds of actions. We all knew that Steven was already way more lenient towards pvpers, but now he's getting deeper and deeper into an echo chamber full of those pvpers who're yelling at him about their preferred design, rather than something that would create a pvx game and not a pvp one.

I gave this example before, but I know from personal experience what happens when a game that's supposed to have the pvp systems that were promised for Ashes suddenly gets a lawless zone. None of those other systems get interacted with, while the only ones interacting with the lawless stuff are the strongest/biggest players on the server. This then inevitably leads to complete drain of the playerbase, because those big players become even bigger, due to getting literal BiS loot from a pvp zone that they dominate, while everyone else on the server can't do shit.

Afaik TL players have been complaining about zergs dominating pvp zones since release of the game. @Azherae , correct me if I'm wrong in remembering that. And TL has those exact "rotating lawless zones".

Imo Steven is killing any meaningful, complex and deep pvp in Ashes by going down the lawless zone route. Remember this tweet when only the big guilds remain on the server, while everyone else has either left or is simply passively playing a tiny part of the game (this is usually a super minority of people).

You know that even if I explain it in full, the most likely answer will just be 'nuh uh! Ashes is special and will be different!'

But yes, I have a growing pile of examples of outcomes and even the measures NCSoft/Amazon were forced to take. The important thing though is, none of those measures actually reduced the amount of PvP except the Bosses one (and that was an almost binary change that caused a lot of people like me to lose access to the type of PvX Ashes claims it will go for).

But my post was about the fact that once we get to the point where you are hearing that from people consistently, the separation is near-complete.

Ludullu wrote: »

Kallysha wrote: »

now if they would do lawless zones on a rotation instead of static zones, then you wouldnt needed to be afraid of not getting that precious loot, just saying

From Steven's words, the lawlessness brings the bigger rewards. Cause he believes that having a literal ffa zone on murder will somehow increase risk for the strongest players in the realm.

And I'm doing a storm in a cup, because I'm worried about the consequences of these kinds of actions. We all knew that Steven was already way more lenient towards pvpers, but now he's getting deeper and deeper into an echo chamber full of those pvpers who're yelling at him about their preferred design, rather than something that would create a pvx game and not a pvp one.

I gave this example before, but I know from personal experience what happens when a game that's supposed to have the pvp systems that were promised for Ashes suddenly gets a lawless zone. None of those other systems get interacted with, while the only ones interacting with the lawless stuff are the strongest/biggest players on the server. This then inevitably leads to complete drain of the playerbase, because those big players become even bigger, due to getting literal BiS loot from a pvp zone that they dominate, while everyone else on the server can't do shit.

Afaik TL players have been complaining about zergs dominating pvp zones since release of the game. @Azherae , correct me if I'm wrong in remembering that. And TL has those exact "rotating lawless zones".

Imo Steven is killing any meaningful, complex and deep pvp in Ashes by going down the lawless zone route. Remember this tweet when only the big guilds remain on the server, while everyone else has either left or is simply passively playing a tiny part of the game (this is usually a super minority of people).

i've tried tl too people who want to avoid pvp can easily do it, because time gated or instanced.
And here i feel he is actually leaning more toward the pvers, since pvp is pretty much none existent so far.
As you are not an actual pvper you cant understand what us pvpers want which is simply consistent pvp.

Azherae wrote: »

But my post was about the fact that once we get to the point where you are hearing that from people consistently, the separation is near-complete.

what separation care to explain? is it between a pver and pvper? well its as clear as water when mixed with oil you cant compare both when one lacks the mental competitive capacity the other has

Kallysha wrote: »

what separation care to explain? is it between a pver and pvper? well its as clear as water when mixed with oil you cant compare both when one lacks the mental competitive capacity the other has

I think you explained it pretty clearly, yeah.

Kallysha wrote: »

i've tried tl too people who want to avoid pvp can easily do it, because time gated or instanced.
And here i feel he is actually leaning more toward the pvers, since pvp is pretty much none existent so far.
As you are not an actual pvper you cant understand what us pvpers want which is simply consistent pvp.

I want constant pvp too. My "pve" grind in L2 consisted of maybe 30% mob hitting and 70% defending the spot from contesters. But those 70% were always comprised of corruption-based encounters and guild wars, not lawless zones.

I want as much pvp in Ashes as I did in L2, but I do not want it in the form of the dumbest, laziest, most simplistic system possible. I want risk for both the victim and the attacker. I want people to plan around content rather than just come to a spot, genocide everyone there and never leave. I want pvp to be truly meaningful.

Lawless zones are not that. They simply enable gankers to have 0 risk, while they kill the weakest players in the location, and they enable zergs to reign free w/o literally a single drop of risk involved in the process.

I want Ashes to be filled with PvXers. People who'll do ALL content in the game, which means pve, pvp and artisanry. I don't want just pvpers who'll gank the weaklings and then leave the game once those victims are gone due to the abuse. I don't want just pvers with their safe little instances, getting all the reward for none the risk (just as the pvpers will get with these lawless zones). And I don't want just the gatherers, because I know that majority of them won't survive in the game and will complain about being killed a few too many times, which will only shed negative light on the game.

But with time it's become more and more obvious that Steven is more than fine having zerg control everything and everyone, while no one can even put up a fight. And I'll keep voicing my disdain for these kinds of changes up until Betas start, just for my own sake of knowing that I did all that I could to try and create a middle ground in this design.

P.S. cause this is almost always relevant in these discussions: CHANGE THE GOD DAMN PVP EVENT DEATH PENALTIES BACK TO JUST GEAR DECAY, STEVEEEEEEEEN! Entice people to pvp more by losing less!

Ludullu wrote: »

Kallysha wrote: »

i've tried tl too people who want to avoid pvp can easily do it, because time gated or instanced.
And here i feel he is actually leaning more toward the pvers, since pvp is pretty much none existent so far.
As you are not an actual pvper you cant understand what us pvpers want which is simply consistent pvp.

I want constant pvp too. My "pve" grind in L2 consisted of maybe 30% mob hitting and 70% defending the spot from contesters. But those 70% were always comprised of corruption-based encounters and guild wars, not lawless zones.

I want as much pvp in Ashes as I did in L2, but I do not want it in the form of the dumbest, laziest, most simplistic system possible. I want risk for both the victim and the attacker. I want people to plan around content rather than just come to a spot, genocide everyone there and never leave. I want pvp to be truly meaningful.

Lawless zones are not that. They simply enable gankers to have 0 risk, while they kill the weakest players in the location, and they enable zergs to reign free w/o literally a single drop of risk involved in the process.

I want Ashes to be filled with PvXers. People who'll do ALL content in the game, which means pve, pvp and artisanry. I don't want just pvpers who'll gank the weaklings and then leave the game once those victims are gone due to the abuse. I don't want just pvers with their safe little instances, getting all the reward for none the risk (just as the pvpers will get with these lawless zones). And I don't want just the gatherers, because I know that majority of them won't survive in the game and will complain about being killed a few too many times, which will only shed negative light on the game.

But with time it's become more and more obvious that Steven is more than fine having zerg control everything and everyone, while no one can even put up a fight. And I'll keep voicing my disdain for these kinds of changes up until Betas start, just for my own sake of knowing that I did all that I could to try and create a middle ground in this design.

P.S. cause this is almost always relevant in these discussions: CHANGE THE GOD DAMN PVP EVENT DEATH PENALTIES BACK TO JUST GEAR DECAY, STEVEEEEEEEEN! Entice people to pvp more by losing less!

lawless zones are great for roamers/gankers or whoever organizes and wants to do a zvz/bvb, worry not there will eventually be other gankers after those same, this just for the sheer splendor of pvping with other pvpers (pvers venturing themselves there are just collateral damage) 'want risk for both the victim and the attacker.' yeah the victim already did took the risk of venturing himself in there which led him to get attacked/ambushed, and well the attacker also has the risk of getting himself killed, goes for both ways)
*A land of milk and honey plus ponies* yeah pvpers will only stick around if there is pvp happening, regarding pve content we only do pretty much what we are forced to do...
'I don't want just pvers with their safe little instances, getting all the reward for none the risk...' well there is corruption tho hence why pvpers want the lawless zones so they can pvp with each other without corruption on the horizon, wich is a system made pretty much as a safe "instance" for you pvers, so the irony
'zerg control everything and everyone' yet to see that happening...so far havent seen such
I do agree with the P.S. tho

Kallysha wrote: »

lawless zones are great for roamers/gankers or whoever organizes and wants to do a zvz/bvb, worry not there will eventually be other gankers after those same, this just for the sheer splendor of pvping with other pvpers (pvers venturing themselves there are just collateral damage) 'want risk for both the victim and the attacker.' yeah the victim already did took the risk of venturing himself in there which led him to get attacked/ambushed, and well the attacker also has the risk of getting himself killed, goes for both ways)

I want proper balancing for corruption, not what we have right now. And by proper balancing I mean that the PKer who has a 0 PK counter can kill 2-3 times, which would be cleansable on mobs within roughly the same amount that the victim would need to return to the same place (this design would also require a much better placement of ember springs).

This way the victim has to gamble whether they really want to lose more of their stuff (and time) by dying to someone who might be on their first kill and that kill will go completely unpunished, or the victim should just fight back and not only lose less but also have a chance of winning the fight. This was also Steven's initial plan, which is exactly why flagged people are meant to lose less stuff on death.

But none of that works in the context of a lawless zone, because the victim always knows that their attacker will go unpunished, because the kill is always free. All while the attacker has barely any risk, for not only their loot on potential death is lessened, but they're also sure in their pvp abilities, which simply means that they're way more likely to win a fight of their choosing.

This is pretty much the same issue that caravans have. The attackers suffer no real penalty, they have pretty much 0 risk, yet they not only reap the reward of spoiling someone else's gameplay, but they also get the loot from it.

This then ties into my P.S. of wanting only gear decay for sanctioned pvp, because this way more people would be willing to/intersted in participating in it. Intrepid immediately experienced the issue with the current system of wars when "pvpers" would simply wardec people in nodes, immediately gank them and loot their bodies, right by the storage vendor.

And that issue then led to several overcorrections in design, that in themselves took weeks to implement (with several bad implementations). None of this would've happened if we only had decay as a penalty (AS WAS PREVIOUSLY PLANNED, STEVEEEEEEEN!).

In other words, gankers would still exist just fine, but they'd simply have a higher risk floor, which helps the game to have more than just ganker-pvpers as its audience.

This then also requires corrupted players to only be visible on the BH map, rather than on everyone's. Which requires BHs to even exist (and right now I'm fairly sure that system will be gone too). And the cat/mouse chase between BHs and PKers would be its own good source of proper high stakes pvp for the gankers.

And I'd fully support (and have suggested several times) a system where the PKer would only drop items if they were killed by a BH, so that the cat/mouse chase happens purely between those types of players, rather than "a whole village with pitchforks are hunting a local monster" type of deal.

All of this would result in an overall pvx setup of

pver is farming mobs/gatherables
a ganker kills them
BH sees the PKer on their map and starts running after them
the PKer now has a timer and has to kill as many mobs as they can in hopes of cleansing corruption
once the PKer has 4+ PKs under their belt, that timer gets exponentially longer
PK count reduction methods should be balanced around node-related activities, to help nodes grow better

I've also suggested a system that would return the victim's mats to them if the PKer got caught by the BH, but that's a whole separate thing.

To me, all of that stuff above is much more fun and interesting than "duuuhhhh, I can murder whoever I want in this zone w/o a single shred of punishment. And I also most likely play a Rogue, so I can escape anyone who tries to chase me too, so I have even less risk".

Kallysha wrote: »

*A land of milk and honey plus ponies* yeah pvpers will only stick around if there is pvp happening, regarding pve content we only do pretty much what we are forced to do...

Which is exactly why I said I want PvXers in a PvX game. I played a PvX game for 12 years and it had more open world pvp than majority (if not all) other mmos I've heard about. And that game had this exact corruption system (but with better balancing) and relied on wars rather than on lawless zones.

Kallysha wrote: »

well there is corruption tho hence why pvpers want the lawless zones so they can pvp with each other without corruption on the horizon, wich is a system made pretty much as a safe "instance" for you pvers, so the irony

Addressed this above.

Also, when I suggested those "pvpers" go to the tropic islands that are still lawless (afaik) - they said "it's not about thaaat! We want to gank people over mobs rather than just pvp". And the same was said in the context of arenas as well. I'm sure there's gonna be some people that do just want to properly fight each other, but I'm not sure if they're the majority, in this particular context.

Kallysha wrote: »

'zerg control everything and everyone' yet to see that happening...so far havent seen such

Do we even have zergs in Alpha right now? I think Pirates were the biggest ones, but Lyneth' culture wasn't really about that iirc.

And in P1 Vyra was all about deathballs running around ganking each other. Though, what a surprise, they didn't even need lawless zones for that.

Which mostly goes back to my point of "pvpers", who're asking for lawless zones, not being real pvpers and instead just being gankers who wanna murder people w/o punishment.

First 6 years of this game's development it was presented as "murderhoboing is not a thing in this game". And yet here we are... And yeah, I know, "everything is subject to change". Which is exactly why I'll keep telling Intrepid that this is a shitty-ass subject to have changed.

Birqa

going back to the arena topic:
i like the idea that military nodes have arenas but maybe all node stage3 and above should have one arena.
my idea would be that military nodes have three arenas. one where only 2 can enter to duel, the second with lets say 6 for 3v3s or 2v4s testing stuff and the biggest one being for 16 players at a time for 8v8s 6v12s etc.

that doesnt mean that i dont want dueling/grp dueling in general in the game.

the arenas are immersive. can be good for tournaments etc.

afaik there will be some instanced arena content at some point (wiki). i liked the idea to be able to specate matches there. for the open world arenas you could do it similar to bdos open world arenas. have seats at the side and when u sit u can go into spectator mode and move your camera freely. also you can lower the performance needed for spectating people as long as they are in that mode they dont need other stuff to be preloaded.
the 3v3 arenas in bdo also have nice design btw.

have a nice day everyone

Ludullu wrote: »

« to
A lot of systems which are yet to be implemented (or more like even proper implemented);
Nobody is forced into lawless zones you only go there and take the risk if you want, you know some people just want to log and have pvp at will without having to wait for the war or siege to happen.

'This is pretty much the same issue that caravans have.' i dont think the intent of caravans was ever made to be a walk in the park for those who were escorting it, the whole point was to have the risk of pvp happening over it

'And that issue then led to several overcorrections in design, that in themselves took weeks to implement' hence its an open alpha

[*] pver is farming mobs/gatherables
[*] a ganker kills them
Again you making this about you pvers, which is not exactly the case, as a ganker myself (im a versatile pvper tho...not all i did was ganking btw (since i was once top all time castle defender)) by far pvers were NOT at all my predilect target, but actually some of the best pvpers around, now those were the ones i liked to go after (pvers simply dont provide the challenge we are looking for or whatsoever to us, i do of say you pvers could stop acting so entitled)

'I played a PvX game for 12 years and it had more open world pvp than majority (if not all) other mmos I've heard about.' Sort of same, for more than 10 years (around 12 i do say as well), gw2 wvw veteran, did also some pve or was forced to...but ye wvw was what kept me hooked and on playing for all those years, if the game had no decent pvp to offer i wouldnt have played it for more than a year; although wvw is a separate instance of pve, i do say its most certainly one of the best if not the best mass pvp environment in any mmo thus far (plus i recall quite well a couple of occasions where pvers/newcomers would get in there and start crying about it when absolutely nobody forced them to go there or even stay)

'...but I'm not sure if they're the majority,...' those others are a minority i assure you

'"murderhoboing is not a thing in this game"' and its not, but when you go of your own will to a pvp zone i dont know what you are expecting... its just like when you dwell yourself into a war battlefield and be thinking you wont get a bomb thrown at you

Kallysha wrote: »

and its not, but when you go of your own will to a pvp zone i dont know what you are expecting... its just like when you dwell yourself into a war battlefield and be thinking you wont get a bomb thrown at you

The problem here is that these zones become the most valuable, because Steven thinks that somehow the pvpers who go there have a higher risk to their gameplay, even though, as you yourself say, they don't even care about the pve which is supposed to be the higher reward in this context.

This is why I want systems that make the entire world have way more pvp, instead of just a few zones only made for pvpers.

As for waiting for wars and shit, I've given Intrepid my feedback on that as well. Wars are meant to be 24/7, as long as you don't finish the goal during primetime, which means that a guild that declares a war right at the end of official primetime should have, like, 18h of ffa pvp against their enemies.

This is simply yet another example of them simplifying a ton of systems, instead of working on them. And yes, "it's an alpha, so not everything is in", except for some peculiar reason we're getting way more pvp-related changes rather than pve-related ones, which, to me, simply screams that Steven only cares about appeasing the pvpers that are in his ears constantly.

And this appeasement will just spiral us into a pvp mmo, instead of a pvx one. I personally don't want that to happen, which is why I'm still here giving feedback and reminding Intrepid that pvpers aren't the only ones that wanna play this game on release.

Also, it's real funny that you say pvers are entitled, while pvpers start crying like babies the second a few lawless zones got removed

I've seen waaaay more complaining from pvpers about "waaah, there's no way for me to kill people w/o penalties" than complaints from pvers about shitty pve. Mostly because pvers said that at the start, saw that things wouldn't change all that fast and left to do better things while they wait, exactly because they're not entitled to keep crying to Steven to add THEIR content first.

Oh and to just emphasize the irony of it all.

PvErs come into A2
See that PvE is nowhere near done
They say "this is not done, so I'll come back to test it when there's more to test"
They leave to other games

PvPers come into A2
They get a handout in the form of land lawless zones, which are presented as "a way to test player behavior in the open seas w/o having seas" (except gameplay on land and at sea are completely different, so this was already a bad approach)
PvPers see that all the other PvP systems are not finished
PvPers exploit unfinished mechanics to bully people (mostly leashing and CCs against greens)
PvPers use unfinished war design to abuse absence of city guards around storage
Intrepid have to address this
PvPers abuse bad guard AI around ember springs and node to keep killing people w/o proper punishment
Intrepid have to address this
PvPers overabuse wardecs and war rewards
Intrepid have to address this
More lawless zones get added to distract PvPers from abusing the little amount of non-pvpers left in the game
PvPers start complaining that caravans can be exploited by crashing the game, so a 1-2 group of attackers can't kill it in time
Intrepid have to address this
Ships get added waaay ahead of schedule do add more pvp
Lawless zones get removed cause the game is growing
PvPers complain that their ffa PvP is now gone
Intrepid have to address this
*We are currently here

Now do tell me, which one of those examples seems to talk about entitled people and which one talks about people who know that this is a work and progress and don't complain about every little detail that doesn't go their way?

Also, which one of those groups have created way more needless work for Intrepid through their complaining? Half of the pvp list shouldn't even have been in the current version of the game ffs.

Ludullu wrote: »

The problem here is that these zones become the most valuable, because Steven thinks that somehow the pvpers who go there have a higher risk to their gameplay, even though, as you yourself say, they don't even care about the pve which is supposed to be the higher reward in this context.

This is why I want systems that make the entire world have way more pvp, instead of just a few zones only made for pvpers.

... except for some peculiar reason we're getting way more pvp-related changes rather than pve-related ones, which, to me, simply screams that Steven only cares about appeasing the pvpers that are in his ears constantly.

Also, it's real funny that you say pvers are entitled, while pvpers start crying like babies the second a few lawless zones got removed I've seen waaaay more complaining from pvpers about "waaah, there's no way for me to kill people w/o penalties" than complaints from pvers about shitty pve. Mostly because pvers said that at the start, saw that things wouldn't change all that fast and left to do better things while they wait, exactly because they're not entitled to keep crying to Steven to add THEIR content first.

If there is more "valuable" rewards in there i assume that is indeed intended to whom likes that type of content then, and they (pvpers) get exactly what they want which is pvp at will...(i feel because you are unhappy, the others must as well not have fun because you say so).
You said well few zones dont know why it bothers you so much, while pretty much the rest of the world is pve based.
Yes i can say that by already backup experience, oh and the only pvp system (so far existing, because even caravans people avoid to do go figure why...) getting removed oh yes that one. And i've seem the same amount if not more usually is always more of pvers on a constant complaining about everything and anything, even when the matter isnt really related to them (cough pvp).

Ludullu wrote: »

PvPers come into A2

They get a handout in the form of land lawless zones, which are presented as "a way to test player behavior in the open seas w/o having seas" (except gameplay on land and at sea are completely different, so this was already a bad approach)

PvPers see that all the other PvP systems are not finished

PvPers exploit unfinished mechanics to bully people (mostly leashing and CCs against greens)

PvPers use unfinished war design to abuse absence of city guards around storage

Intrepid have to address this

PvPers abuse bad guard AI around ember springs and node to keep killing people w/o proper punishment

Intrepid have to address this

PvPers overabuse wardecs and war rewards

Intrepid have to address this

More lawless zones get added to distract PvPers from abusing the little amount of non-pvpers left in the game

PvPers start complaining that caravans can be exploited by crashing the game, so a 1-2 group of attackers can't kill it in time

Intrepid have to address this

Ships get added waaay ahead of schedule do add more pvp

Lawless zones get removed cause the game is growing

PvPers complain that their ffa PvP is now gone

Intrepid have to address this

*We are currently here

Also, which one of those groups have created way more needless work for Intrepid through their complaining? Half of the pvp list shouldn't even have been in the current version of the game ffs.

Needless work!? interesting choice of words... and yet you say 'yes it is an alpha' but im not quite sure you really know or understand what that means after all. Also its crucial for Intrepid to keep pvpers interested/around, without them game will be dead on arrival have no doubts (most mmos stopped caring/ (neglected) about the pvp aspects of the game or the pvpers long ago, hence why the dire state of most of them nowadays).

Ok since this line is my fault, I'mma try to pull it back.

Open world arenas in player gathering hubs always do at least a little bit of good, to add immersion until the PvP 'meta' establishes itself or whatever. And then, after that, it helps provide drama for those who enjoy chat-PvP and trash-talking (whether or not any actual fights happen).

Since Ashes is designed as a GvG when it comes to balance, an Arena is an even better idea because it can assure some controlled starting conditions, can help downscale the performance requirements for players automatically (for those who don't have the beefiest machines or the best ping), and the walls of the Arena can be a big help in offering the Developers ways to tweak the netcode for even better experiences.

Being able to watch and organize matches and tournaments is always great, and a lot of dynamic experiences could come out of it all, without compromising much (sure, there will be people who will complain that they couldn't get a match because some other group was using it, but there's no real need to change too much for that).

It would also allow for the option to have pre-saved Arena loadouts for characters, which has all sorts of benefits.

I'd be all for adding arenas, but here's Steven's response to me literally asking for them

Ludullu wrote: »

I'd be all for adding arenas, but here's Steven's response to me literally asking for them

Oh wow, thanks, that is literally as clear as it gets.

So yeah, Steven just shifted to 'standard' Korean PvP MMO style.

(Note, I am not complaining about this from the 'is this.... gameplay?' standpoint or whether or not it can be good, I'm not complaining at all, I just already have a game for this stuff so it's surprising to me).

I guess Nebula Island respawns are probably easier than Turquoise Sea respawns, but it will depend on implementation.

Ludullu wrote: »

I'd be all for adding arenas, but here's Steven's response to me literally asking for them...

so conclusion you dont even know/understand the concept of an arena... also please enlighten me since you like to repeat yourself about wanting risk/penalties for pvpers (attention when you just admitted you aint even one (so clearly YOU must know better what the pvpers want)), where is the risk for the pvers when going around chopping trees/picking flowers? or when they sit in a station crafting stuff, where is it? Where is the risk in that?? As i see it what you want is pvpers to get punished for doing what they enjoy to do and thats it.

Plus the comparison between tl and aoc is kinda ridiculous.

Kallysha wrote: »

Ludullu wrote: »

I'd be all for adding arenas, but here's Steven's response to me literally asking for them...

so conclusion you dont even know/understand the concept of an arena... also please enlighten me since you like to repeat yourself about wanting risk/penalties for pvpers (attention when you just admitted you aint even one (so clearly YOU must know better what the pvpers want)), where is the risk for the pvers when going around chopping trees/picking flowers? or when they sit in a station crafting stuff, where is it? Where is the risk in that?? As i see it what you want is pvpers to get punished for doing what they enjoy to do and thats it.

Plus the comparison between tl and aoc is kinda ridiculous.

Just to be clear, you know that people can just kill you while you're chopping trees, right?