Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

[POLL] PvP you're most looking forward to: "Structured" or WvW

2

Comments

  • waynejr2waynejr2 Member EpicPosts: 7,771
    Originally posted by Satarious

    I'm personally looking forward to WvW the most.  I never get why people get all hot and bothered over the instanced style of pvp  in an MMO when you can get that experience with pretty much any single player type game.

    So poeple who don't like what you like must be idiots? 

    http://www.youhaventlived.com/qblog/2010/QBlog190810A.html  

    Epic Music:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1

    https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1

    Kyleran:  "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."

    John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."

    FreddyNoNose:  "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."

    LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"




  • wormedwormed Member UncommonPosts: 472

    I'm still not sold on GW2. The WvWvW is enticing but it's still not persistent. Please, don't reply saying it is, blah blah blah... it isn't. It's an instance that begins and ends.

    But we'll see. Tera's been a slight disappointment. Maybe the BG's will keep me entertained... for a bit.

  • p_c_sousap_c_sousa Member Posts: 620
    Originally posted by wormed

    I'm still not sold on GW2. The WvWvW is enticing but it's still not persistent. Please, don't reply saying it is, blah blah blah... it isn't. It's an instance that begins and ends.

    But we'll see. Tera's been a slight disappointment. Maybe the BG's will keep me entertained... for a bit.

    if it was persistent i will never play WvW...

    what was the fun combat between 3 servers where 1 server could easy dominated others forever??? 

     

    sPvP is much more for a competitive style. most of players dont want that, if you arent  a skilled players and you find a team with skilled players you will dont have any chance. 

    sPvP is the "hardcore" part of the game, is all about skilled players, tactical gameplay and team work. 

  • MexorillaMexorilla Member Posts: 313

    sPvP.  WvW is too zergy for me.

  • wormedwormed Member UncommonPosts: 472
    Originally posted by p_c_sousa
    Originally posted by wormed

    I'm still not sold on GW2. The WvWvW is enticing but it's still not persistent. Please, don't reply saying it is, blah blah blah... it isn't. It's an instance that begins and ends.

    But we'll see. Tera's been a slight disappointment. Maybe the BG's will keep me entertained... for a bit.

    if it was persistent i will never play WvW...

    what was the fun combat between 3 servers where 1 server could easy dominated others forever??? 

    That's the point? The other 2 servers should band together to take out the stronger 1. 

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Member UncommonPosts: 2,155
    Originally posted by p_c_sousa
    Originally posted by wormed

    I'm still not sold on GW2. The WvWvW is enticing but it's still not persistent. Please, don't reply saying it is, blah blah blah... it isn't. It's an instance that begins and ends.

    But we'll see. Tera's been a slight disappointment. Maybe the BG's will keep me entertained... for a bit.

    if it was persistent i will never play WvW...

    what was the fun combat between 3 servers where 1 server could easy dominated others forever??? 

     

    sPvP is much more for a competitive style. most of players dont want that, if you arent  a skilled players and you find a team with skilled players you will dont have any chance. 

    sPvP is the "hardcore" part of the game, is all about skilled players, tactical gameplay and team work. 

     

    It only happens if 1 server has a significantely large population than the other 2 together. From experience in 3 faction games, that happens very rarely.

  • GeobardiGeobardi Member Posts: 68

    People who think that WvW is "doorwars" or too zergy don't take into consideration one thing, SIEGE WEAPONS. My party of 4 guildmates destroyed, and i mean totally obliterated a group of more than 30 people with an arrow cart, 2 cannons and a catapult. And doors are destroyed in less than 2 minutes if you use a pair of rams. Think outside the box and learn something about the game you are talking, please...

  • NethriilNethriil Member Posts: 178
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.
  • The_KorriganThe_Korrigan Member RarePosts: 3,460
    Originally posted by Nethriil
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.

    Facing different servers all the time is a good thing in my opinion. It avoids the usual pitfall of faction PvP where the strongest faction, usually the one with the most players, almost totally owns pvp and the other factions are just screwed.

    If the system that selects which servers should be pitted against each other is well done, this should ensure everybody has some fun in the game, and not only the losers who had the luck to roll on some specific server.

    Respect, walk, what did you say?
    Respect, walk
    Are you talkin' to me? Are you talkin' to me?
    - PANTERA at HELLFEST 2023
    Yes, they are back !

  • Master10KMaster10K Member Posts: 3,065

    For now it has to be Structured PvP, because at least there I can experience +30fps, during combat situations. Whereas in WvW, dropping to 5fps is a common occurance and will remain as such, unless the programmers can work their magic during the optimization phase of the game's development.

    image

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Member UncommonPosts: 2,155
    Originally posted by The_Korrigan
    Originally posted by Nethriil
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.

    Facing different servers all the time is a good thing in my opinion. It avoids the usual pitfall of faction PvP where the strongest faction, usually the one with the most players, almost totally owns pvp and the other factions are just screwed.

    If the system that selects which servers should be pitted against each other is well done, this should ensure everybody has some fun in the game, and not only the losers who had the luck to roll on some specific server.

    3 faction PvP is very often enough to avoid the "1 faction owns the other 2 factions combined", I thought? Would be good to hear from DAoC players, on how many of their servers 1 faction dominated the rest combined.

  • Bad.dogBad.dog Member UncommonPosts: 1,131
    Originally posted by Nethriil
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.

    Isn't it going to be set up that eventually the top server's will be facing each other on a regular rotation ? So infact you'll end up facing equally skilled oponents more often ..It's seems to me this set up gives you the purpose of becomming the best server game wide not just being a big fish in a small pond .Unless I missed the entire point of the two week rotations your post seems to have missed the entire point of WvWvW

  • SatariousSatarious Member UncommonPosts: 1,073
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour
    Originally posted by The_Korrigan
    Originally posted by Nethriil
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.

    Facing different servers all the time is a good thing in my opinion. It avoids the usual pitfall of faction PvP where the strongest faction, usually the one with the most players, almost totally owns pvp and the other factions are just screwed.

    If the system that selects which servers should be pitted against each other is well done, this should ensure everybody has some fun in the game, and not only the losers who had the luck to roll on some specific server.

    3 faction PvP is very often enough to avoid the "1 faction owns the other 2 factions combined", I thought? Would be good to hear from DAoC players, on how many of their servers 1 faction dominated the rest combined.

    I can't speak for other servers during the heigt of daoc's popularity, but my server seemed pretty well balanced in pvp.  I remember situations where our keep was being sieged by a force with more than twice our numbers only to be saved when the third realm came in from nowhere and attacked the larger force from behind.  Those situations were fun.

    Having said that, I'm very much looking forward to seeing how this new approach of swapping servers out every two weeks works.    I predict after a time, things will settle down and the top servers will consistently play the same 2 other top servers, while the bottom same 3 servers will consistently be pit against each other.  I agree that you'll lose that certain sense of persistence since the ownership of the keeps will be reset every two weeks, but the positive tradeoff is that you'll have much more competitive and even matches since the best will bubble to the top and the worst will sink to the bottom.

  • TwoThreeFourTwoThreeFour Member UncommonPosts: 2,155
    Originally posted by Baddogbill
    Originally posted by Nethriil
    I fear that the competition element will not be there. You ll be facing different players all the time which will hinder a real rival feeling which you do Get in faction vs faction vs faction. There is also a purpose when you win in fvfvf.

    Isn't it going to be set up that eventually the top server's will be facing each other on a regular rotation ? So infact you'll end up facing equally skilled oponents more often ..It's seems to me this set up gives you the purpose of becomming the best server game wide not just being a big fish in a small pond .Unless I missed the entire point of the two week rotations your post seems to have missed the entire point of WvWvW

     

    The entire point of World vs World is to create enjoyable faction PvP. Having more than 2 factions is implemented to avoid major population imbalance which would not be fun; this is why we have 3 sides. Then the "server vs server" is just subsystem but not the main point. 

  • seridanseridan Member UncommonPosts: 1,202
    Originally posted by TwoThreeFour

     

    The entire point of World vs World is to create enjoyable faction PvP. Having more than 2 factions is implemented to avoid major population imbalance which would not be fun; this is why we have 3 sides. Then the "server vs server" is just subsystem but not the main point. 

    The "serverless" environment is the main point of the whole game though. Oh and the main point of WvWvW, why players will play it, other than fun of course, are the bonuses associated with it. Those bonuses work on a per server basis.

    I'll take a more enjoyable, more fun, more challenging environment over persistence any day.

    Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums

  • tokinitokini Member UncommonPosts: 372
    Originally posted by observer
    Originally posted by Rohn

    The WvW in GW2 is instanced PvP, just with larger instances and multiple objectives.  It's certainly not open world, and it lacks true persistence, being essentially a two week long rotisserie league deathmatch with servers that resets at the end.

    Of the two, I prefer the way that The Secret World is doing it - the set factions battling in large areas that don't reset based on some contrived server ladder system.

    One can argue that it is open world pvp, but limited to one contested zone.  It's the same thing in WoW and other MMO's.  Only certain zones are contested and some are neutral.  In GW2's case though, it's limited to one zone.  It really depends on how one  wants to define open world pvp.  Should all zones be open to pvp or limited?  

    its not open world pvp, it is essentially a large scale ccross server battleground. it may be great fun all told, but lets not pretend its something it isnt.  true open world pvp, as in WoW since you mentioned it, means attacking anywhere. attack the starter zone. attack the capitol city, etc.,  one zone thats roped off from the rest of the world is not 'open world' pvp.

  • QuenchsterQuenchster Member Posts: 450

    Structured PvP is interesting, especially with certain things like trebuchets and mini buff bosses, but I found WvW more fun for now. I'll have to see what other maps this game will have for structured PvP before I can say that it will be what I'm looking most forward to for PvP.

  • seridanseridan Member UncommonPosts: 1,202
    Originally posted by tokini

    its not open world pvp, it is essentially a large scale ccross server battleground. it may be great fun all told, but lets not pretend its something it isnt.  true open world pvp, as in WoW since you mentioned it, means attacking anywhere. attack the starter zone. attack the capitol city, etc.,  one zone thats roped off from the rest of the world is not 'open world' pvp.

    First of all, fortunately the game doesn't allow you to attack starter zones or any other cities for that matter. It would be against the lore and the whole "we fight together" theme of the game. And it would attract all the griefers/gankers etc people hate. Remember that "If you hate MMOs, you should try Guild Wars 2"? Well it's because it doesn't have that kind of PVP (Among many others)

    Secondly no matter how you twist the word it IS OPEN PVP. There are no restrictions in WvWvW on who to kill and when. So it seems pretty OPEN... I don't know what strange meaning to the word OPEN you have but it is clear that WvWvW is OPEN PVP.

    Block the trolls, don't answer them, so we can remove the garbage from these forums

  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Member Posts: 489

    Both.

    I'm hoping structured has some depth to the combat and is compeditive. The WvW system they have looks chaotic and a bit loose, but that sounds like a lot of fun too.

    a yo ho ho

  • FredomSekerZFredomSekerZ Member Posts: 1,156
    Originally posted by seridan
    Originally posted by tokini

    its not open world pvp, it is essentially a large scale ccross server battleground. it may be great fun all told, but lets not pretend its something it isnt.  true open world pvp, as in WoW since you mentioned it, means attacking anywhere. attack the starter zone. attack the capitol city, etc.,  one zone thats roped off from the rest of the world is not 'open world' pvp.

    First of all, fortunately the game doesn't allow you to attack starter zones or any other cities for that matter. It would be against the lore and the whole "we fight together" theme of the game. And it would attract all the griefers/gankers etc people hate. Remember that "If you hate MMOs, you should try Guild Wars 2"? Well it's because it doesn't have that kind of PVP (Among many others)

    Secondly no matter how you twist the word it IS OPEN PVP. There are no restrictions in WvWvW on who to kill and when. So it seems pretty OPEN... I don't know what strange meaning to the word OPEN you have but it is clear that WvWvW is OPEN PVP.

    First, you can only kill players of other servers, second, like i already asked, by your defenition, BG's are open world pvp too, right?

    Not sure if serious or troll.

  • StrangeEyesStrangeEyes Member Posts: 119

    Not the least interested in Structured PvP.

    Im realy looking forward to World versus World versus World prolly will spent alot time in there.

    CPU:Intel Core i7-3770K 4GHz
    GPU:ASUS HD 7970 DirectCU II TOP
    MB:ASUS P8Z77-V DELUXE
    Case:Cooler Master HAF X
    RAM:Corsair 16GB 1600
    PSU:Corsair gold 850
    HD:SSD OCZ 256 GB vertex4

  • NethriilNethriil Member Posts: 178
    How do you get everyone from 1 world into an instanced wvwvw? Will there not be a need for many instanced wvwvw? Can you have thousand of players at the same spot without lag?
  • SatariousSatarious Member UncommonPosts: 1,073

    To me, the definition of Open World PvP is simple:  Large scale warfare.  It's what puts the MMO in mmorpg.  You definitely don't get that in those dinky little "structured" scenario matches.

    BTW, anybody know if Anet specified a specific cap of people that can enter WvW per realm?

  • 3-4thElf3-4thElf Member Posts: 489
    Originally posted by Satarious

    To me, the definition of Open World PvP is simple:  Large scale warfare.  You definitely don't get that in those dinky little "structured" scenario matches.

    BTW, anybody know if Anet specified a specific cap that can enter WvW per realm?

    For WvW you can be any level.

    a yo ho ho

  • SatariousSatarious Member UncommonPosts: 1,073
    Originally posted by 3-4thElf
    Originally posted by Satarious

    To me, the definition of Open World PvP is simple:  Large scale warfare.  You definitely don't get that in those dinky little "structured" scenario matches.

    BTW, anybody know if Anet specified a specific cap that can enter WvW per realm?

    For WvW you can be any level.

    I meant cap is in the total number of people that can enter from each realm.

Sign In or Register to comment.