Simples said:Lol, Kilsin predicted the future. He said pvp threads blow up. Can you send me next week's lottery numbers while your in such a Devine state? There are basically 2 types of people. Those that are pro pvp and those that are against pvp. You're not going to convince one to like the other. It's like trying to talk politics. This thread made me laugh. My 2 coppers worth. Arenas or instances that are pvp based like old school eq is fine with me or even a full pvp server. I just hope there is a pve only server because I normally role chars that suck at pvp, thus making pvp no fun for me.
Mod edit for Simples: changed killing to Kilsin :)
Sadly PvE and PvP have a long-running history of being at odds with each other in many MMORPgs that got it wrong and one side suffered because of the other asking for changes, so it understandable that people are defensive of their playstyle and gaming mindset but with Pantheon, no one has to worry, we are gamers too, half the team likes PvP and we all like PvE so we have been there and know just how painful it can be getting nerfed or having a content or class balance because someone else was upset with their unbalanced gameplay ;)
I wish I had those numbers, my friend, I would share them in a heartbeat! lol
We will definitely have PvE and PvP only servers, and most likely some RP servers, we may even have PvP and PvE on a special server, who knows, it will depend on how much interest is shown later on in development, but for now, take comfort in the fact that PvP and PvE will not affect each other at all.
I liked how Everquest had a few areas that had PvP enabled, like the arena near Lake Rathetear. It made for a fun way for guilds to get together and have some fun or to go mess around when you were bored and LFG. I think having arenas in Pantheon would be a fine way for the PvE server folks to get their PvP kicks if they wanted to.
edit: should have read the rest of the thread first ^_^
I like PVP, and am glad to hear they will have it, and its also great to hear that it won't be changed much from the PVE servers. Just flip that switch and see what happens, OP classes? its np, let it play out.
Canno said:You wouldn't be forced to, it wouldn't be every dungeon or every encounter - simply an option for different game play.
We seem to have a different view on what is forced pvp. If getting the better boss & loot (which to me sounds like a PvE fight) requires me to win PvP fights, then I'm forced to PvP to access that encounter unless the fight is boring and loot is unappealing...
I'm of the opinion that PvP and PvE are two spheres of games that shouldn't ever overlap.
The only exceptions to this should be very rare, tbh. I kind of don't like the idea of having a separate PvP flagged server. I would much prefer arena-style PvP that requires a varying number of players to queue for, and has its own independent gear progression.
If you make a separate server for PvP that is a mirrored copy of the PvE servers, you're basically guaranteeing that the PvP server balance-related changes will influence the PvE aspect somehow, even if the influence is limited to that server. This can have detrimental impacts to raid progression. Either PvP players having an advantage, or a disadvantage. EQ2 tried and failed miserably with this.
I'm going to be honest and say that the arena-style PvP is the best option and requires the least development forethought, both long and short term. It allows for independent balance, gear progression, unique PvP systems such as titles, a high degree of competitiveness, a wider degree of variety (Capture the Flag, Deathmatch, etc.), and has absolutely 100% zero impact on any aspect of the game outside of the arena.
Liav said:I'm of the opinion that PvP and PvE are two spheres of games that shouldn't ever overlap.
The only exceptions to this should be very rare, tbh. I kind of don't like the idea of having a separate PvP flagged server. I would much prefer arena-style PvP that requires a varying number of players to queue for, and has its own independent gear progression.
If you make a separate server for PvP that is a mirrored copy of the PvE servers, you're basically guaranteeing that the PvP server balance-related changes will influence the PvE aspect somehow, even if the influence is limited to that server. This can have detrimental impacts to raid progression. Either PvP players having an advantage, or a disadvantage. EQ2 tried and failed miserably with this.
I'm going to be honest and say that the arena-style PvP is the best option and requires the least development forethought, both long and short term. It allows for independent balance, gear progression, unique PvP systems such as titles, a high degree of competitiveness, a wider degree of variety (Capture the Flag, Deathmatch, etc.), and has absolutely 100% zero impact on any aspect of the game outside of the arena.
EQ2 tried and failed miserably at just about everything, so no disagreements there, however EQ1 was where the magic of PVE and PVP combining on a PVP server happened. If we're just talking about arena-style pvp, then don't even bother making pvp at all, as I won't be playing it.
To me the best form of PVP is PVP over PVE raid content, it's a bit like RL war, without permanant death. Strategically battle your forces vs someone elses in a fight over resources and territory, EQ did this the best in any game I have played yet, and the nice thing about it is it's very easy to replicate, just make your PVE game and turn on PVP.
Liav said:Rallyd said:EQ2 tried and failed miserably at just about everything, so no disagreements there, however EQ1 was where the magic of PVE and PVP combining on a PVP server happened.
To me the best form of PVP is PVP over PVE raid content, it's a bit like RL war, without permanant death. Strategically battle your forces vs someone elses in a fight over resources and territory, EQ did this the best in any game I have played yet, and the nice thing about it is it's very easy to replicate, just make your PVE game and turn on PVP.
EQ2 was a great game that was ruined by SOE/DBG, as always. Please don't write it off as awful in every aspect.
EQ PvP was horrible and died a swift death, however. Zek as a server didn't last very long at all, if memory serves.
Rallyd said:If we're just talking about arena-style pvp, then don't even bother making pvp at all, as I won't be playing it.Wow, you're such an arrogant prick.
"I don't like it, so it shouldn't be there at all."
Who made you king of Pantheon? Screw you, dude.
Actually, Zek didn't even exist until SOE/DBG installed instances into EQ in PoP/GoD and beyond, until then the pvp servers were actually very popular, with the introduction of instances all forms of PVP over PVE were removed, thus making PVP irrelevent, and thus the reason all PVP servers were consolidated into 1, and then sunsetted.
You are right however though that I shouldn't condemn something just because I don't like it, I would just prefer not to have my PVP servers tainted with battlegrounds and arena pvp systems with pvp only gear, this was the primary reason in which WoW pvp died for me, so I take offense.
Rallyd said:You are right however though that I shouldn't condemn something just because I don't like it, I would just prefer not to have my PVP servers tainted with battlegrounds and arena pvp systems with pvp only gear, this was the primary reason in which WoW pvp died for me, so I take offense.
Even so, you still haven't established how an instanced PvP system "taints" things. Seems like a problem of implementation, not the concept itself.
Liav said:Rallyd said:You are right however though that I shouldn't condemn something just because I don't like it, I would just prefer not to have my PVP servers tainted with battlegrounds and arena pvp systems with pvp only gear, this was the primary reason in which WoW pvp died for me, so I take offense.
Even so, you still haven't established how an instanced PvP system "taints" things. Seems like a problem of implementation, not the concept itself.
Instancing taints everything by nature. There is no need to establish that, as its been established 100s of times. Its like needing to establish if the sky is blue before painting a picture.
And no, PvP did quite well in EQ before the game as a whole changed and became less successful. Those changes that effected things like fast travel, instancing and the like were a serious blow to PvP in EQ. For many of the same reasons, PvP was pretty lame in EQ2.
Dullahan said:Instancing taints everything by nature. There is no need to establish that, as its been established 100s of times. Its like needing to establish if the sky is blue before painting a picture.
This is just ridiculous, hyperbolic extremism. You don't burn your house down because there's a fly on the wall.
You need to prove instancing "taints everything by nature". I guarantee the best you can do is "in my opinion, every game so far has done instancing poorly", which is nowhere close to the same thing.
Dullahan said:And no, PvP did quite well in EQ before the game as a whole changed and became less successful. Those changes that effected things like fast travel, instancing and the like were a serious blow to PvP in EQ. For many of the same reasons, PvP was pretty lame in EQ2.
An in my opinion, EQ is among the worst MMORPGs ever made for PvE, and EQ2 is among the best.
Hurr durr durr opinions as facts.
Just on this very forum we've broken down all the negative ramifications of instancing on a virtual world. Creating a disconnected, imaginary place that doesn't exist in the game world proper is contrary to everything that is a "virtual world." Just because you don't like it doesn't make it not true. When you leave reality and enter your own personal reality, it is no longer part of reality. Simply because you are willing to play "make-believe" and reconcile that false reality with actual reality, doesn't make it logical or appropriate.
And really, "hurr durr"? Lets try to keep this conversation above a grade school level. I did not pass off anything as fact other than the fact that PvP in EQ flourished even though the game was created and marketed predominantly for PvE and offered no promotion of their PvP servers. Many people, myself included, didn't even realize they existed until well after the game launched.
My opinions of EQ2 seem to be shared by many and corroborated by the fact that the PvP server shrunk to one that never had many people. Even the new TLP server died in a month. Theres an EQ emu PvP server with more active people and that is after half the people who ever played there quit due to GM intervention.
This thread was not only way off topic but it also ignored several warnings to remain on topic and to avoid personal attacks, so for this reason, it is now closed.
My earlier warning:
"The thread needs to stay on topic without inciting unrest or arguments over opinions, which are very common in PvP threads within a PvE centric game forum. So with that in mind, feel free to discuss this subject without going off topic or breaching any of the forum guidelines, as I am sure you can all guess what will happen if anything does head down that path of evil forum behaviour ;)"
Do not create a new thread on this topic as it will be deleted, we are too far away from even thinking about PvP and its implementation as we are focussed on creating our PvE game. Any future warnings that get ignored will result in further action as these forums are a place for everyone to help contribute to the development of Pantheon, not argue opinions and make personal attacks for not agreeing with each other.
I have deleted several off topic and personal attack posts as they contribute nothing to the discussion and only bring down the quality of our forums. Please think before posting in future as this type of attitude will not be tolerated on our website.