OP: There's nothing wrong with criticism. It is the manner in which you do it that determines whether it is considered trolling. You delivered your opinions in a very belligerent way, hence you were called out for trolling.
As far as meaningful PvP, it is more of just icing on the cake for me. My incentative to PvP is because it is fun and challenging. I think we can dispute whether this game has meaningful PvP. Guild cities are instanced and "non-flaggable" because if a guild has a keep and a city, both PvP, what's to stop someone from destroying their city while said guild is defending their keep and vice versa. There are imposed limits to keep the game fair and balanced, while still retaining its enjoyability. PvP in the Borderlands is meaningful in the respect that there are resources to be harvested there. You lose your keep, you lose your stake in the land, thus reducing your production of goods like weapons, armor, and what -have -you. I don't know what more meaning you could have without detracting from the overall fun of the game.
As far as meaningful PvP, it is more of just icing on the cake for me. My incentative to PvP is because it is fun and challenging. I think we can dispute whether this game has meaningful PvP. Guild cities are instanced and "non-flaggable" because if a guild has a keep and a city, both PvP, what's to stop someone from destroying their city while said guild is defending their keep and vice versa. There are imposed limits to keep the game fair and balanced, while still retaining its enjoyability. PvP in the Borderlands is meaningful in the respect that there are resources to be harvested there. You lose your keep, you lose your stake in the land, thus reducing your production of goods like weapons, armor, and what -have -you. I don't know what more meaning you could have without detracting from the overall fun of the game.
Fun and challenging PvP in DIKU MMOPPG? HA! I thought that only what you need to win PvP in these games are higher level and class that is good against another players class. In a way, I think that it is good that games like these have meaningless PvP. That way you can't lose too much when result of fight has been already decided - before it even started.
"I know I said this was my last post, but you my friend are a idiotic moron." -Shadow4482
The system is set up differently than Shadowbane, they took everything crap about that game and all the issues people had and are trying to improve on it and do it a slightly different way.
What they took out is freedom, and the ability to shape the world.
But many people like meaningless pvp, just look at WOW, so I'm sure this game will do well.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by ghoul31
Originally posted by AmazingAvery
The system is set up differently than Shadowbane, they took everything crap about that game and all the issues people had and are trying to improve on it and do it a slightly different way.
What they took out is freedom, and the ability to shape the world.
But many people like meaningless pvp, just look at WOW, so I'm sure this game will do well.
Just curious what is your definition on PvP with meaning?
Just imagine the the Lord of the rings movie if it had these rules. The dark lord couldn't attack the humans cus he already had one keep. And he certainly couldn't attack a human city, because the cities were in another etherial place, where they couldn't be attacked.
If you can't loot a dude's stuff after you kill them the pvp meaningless period.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Based on the above terms point me to a successful mmorpg game incorporating those elements (please don't say Darkfall, and Shadowbane is dead). Post number 3 explains for my why its meaningfull. If people are getting at ffa and loot type of play then AoC will have FFA servers details of ruleset are unknown yet.
Ghoul lacks somewhat in the communication department but I understand what he means. The natural end of conflict is to pounch each other until you sette your conflict either through killing them, subdueing them or removing their resources. In WoW, WAR, AoC there is no motivation for conflict other than lets fight until some kind of event happens (time, flag reach base whatever). So you run, kill, die, teleport, run, kill, die, teleport. Every time hardly without any penalty. I have no numbers in how many times I did that in AV (WoW) and let me tell you, I was borderline insane in the end. The only answer FUNCOM have to combat zerging is to slow down the teleport. Make them pay for dying and I'll guarantee you that the zerging will stop.
DING, DING, DING we have a winner folks. The pvp is meaningless because nothing impotant comes from winning. It may be fun for awhile (see WoW) but after that its just a grind to get points for the gear.
Based on the above terms point me to a successful mmorpg game incorporating those elements (please don't say Darkfall, and Shadowbane is dead). Post number explains for my why its meaningfull. If people are getting at ffa and loot type of play then AoC will have FFA servers details of ruleset are unknown yet.
EvE-Online.
If your ship is destroyed, about 40% of the equipment and cargo in that ship are destroyed too. Rest of ship's equipment and cargo becomes lootable and any player in area may loot them. Just before your ship turns to another nova in sky, your character is launched in escape pod. If another player also manages to destroy your escape pod - then your character body is destroyed and your consciousness is moved to your clone. In process you will lose cybernetic implants that were attached to your character body - and if your clone wasn't up to date, you might also lose some skills. Losing fights might have huge economical consequences. Starter frigates are free for everyone, but biggest ships are multibillion investments and building them require co-operation of the hundreds players. Equipment and cybernetic implants price range are also ranging from free to multimillions. Clones are free for new players - but for older players with more skill points they are multimillion investment. Losing freighter with full of valuable cargo is always multibillion lost.
Most of ships, equipments and ammunition are manufactured by players. PvP is engine that keeps economy running - each lost ship is new chance for crafter to sell a new ship. Each fired missile is chance to sell a new missile. Manufacturing of better ships and equipments requires moon minerals that are mined and reprocessed by player build orbital platforms. Platforms are also used for storage, researching, manufacturing and other purposes. If players have enough orbital platforms in star system, they may build star base to system and system sovereignty is granted for players. Star bases allow cloning facilities (spawn points), trading possibilities with other players, unlimited storage capabilities, rentable research laboratories and factories. Sovereignty allows players to build capital ships and other bonuses. If players have multiple star system sovereignty nearby, they will get constellation sovereignty - with a new set of bonuses.
Players may also destroy other players’ orbital platforms. Typically this requires co-operation of the multiple players - and defending players only choice is to do same. This will lead large scale PvP battles that might have hundreds participating players. Organizing large scale battles and economy requirements for hundreds ships leads to player organizations that have hundreds or even thousands players (largest player organization currently have over 5000 thousands players).
I don't think that this kind PvP will be possible in AoC because of level system. In EvE it is possible that new character kills 4 year old veteran character. Veteran character might have more money to get better ship, but advantage for veteran character is maybe 20 - 35% at max. It is still suicidal to go against veteran character's battleship with new a character's frigate - but group of new characters whose ships have equipment for speciality roles will easily beat lonely veteran character. Veteran's major advantage is versatility - they are able to full fill different roles in the fleet. In level based systems - like WoW and AoC - veteran character would be practically god against new characters. Level 5 character just can't hurt level 60 character. This leads to all kind artificial limitations PvP zones with level ranges, PvP level ranges, etc.
EvE system has some clear disadvantages. Solo players have all ways disadvantage in PvP - well organized group of players, can all ways win PvP fight. Also because game world is all ways changing and content is mostly player controlled, there aren’t any great quest lines or raid dungeons - bad for players who need clearly set hard coded goals. Third problem, is that EvE's combat system doesn't require much involvement and is missing immersion - combat is clinical calculus where your lock to target and fire your weapons. Where are sexy helms woman and Scottish engineer? No where, because EvE does have minimal amount of developer created content - rest of content is created by players through PvP and economical warfare.
"I know I said this was my last post, but you my friend are a idiotic moron." -Shadow4482
Who cares - it's PvP. The fact that I am killing another player, whose movement and play styles are unpredicatable and dynamic make the whole PvP exciting and all.. as compared to the repeatitive killing of mobs.
As long as there's PvP, no matter what form or anything.. I'm all for it.. as long as it's not a mouse-click to move game... those sucks.
Ghoul lacks somewhat in the communication department but I understand what he means. The natural end of conflict is to pounch each other until you sette your conflict either through killing them, subdueing them or removing their resources. In WoW, WAR, AoC there is no motivation for conflict other than lets fight until some kind of event happens (time, flag reach base whatever). So you run, kill, die, teleport, run, kill, die, teleport. Every time hardly without any penalty. I have no numbers in how many times I did that in AV (WoW) and let me tell you, I was borderline insane in the end. The only answer FUNCOM have to combat zerging is to slow down the teleport. Make them pay for dying and I'll guarantee you that the zerging will stop.
DING, DING, DING we have a winner folks. The pvp is meaningless because nothing impotant comes from winning. It may be fun for awhile (see WoW) but after that its just a grind to get points for the gear.
Edit* Oh and avery..................Darkfall
Exactly, the reward is just keeping your stuff to make cool gear. I was hoping this game could really expand on what Shadowbane started but being able to only have one BK at a time is lame.
If one guild is really dominating all others then the rest need to learn to band together to stop the zerg guild. The only time people really have had problems with this is in Shadowbane when the opportunity times of attack were not restrictive enough and let in hordes of Asian players to zerg the NA and Euro players off the map.
I sometimes wonder if AoC is just a little bit better at hiding the carrot at the end of the stick compared to WoW.
Ghoul's a troll.... no reason to respond to his comments.... but you did a very good job Avery.....
I like how anyone who has the least bit of criticism about a game gets labeled a troll.
Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democraticjudgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritariancommand, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
Ghoul's a troll.... no reason to respond to his comments.... but you did a very good job Avery.....
I like how anyone who has the least bit of criticism about a game gets labeled a troll.
Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democraticjudgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritariancommand, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
The problem with how MMOs view PvP these days is there is no reaction to you dying. It's like a RPG Deathmatch.
What I mean is when you PvP in the majority of MMO games today you run out.. die... run back out... die again.. over and over until one side wins. There's no penalty for dying in a PvP environment, or at least not one harsh enough to stop the type of zerg that we will be seeing in Conan.
What I would like to see is EXP loss on death in PvP & the ability to lose your level if you lose enough EXP.
Maxed out EXP on your level 80? But you die 10 times in a Raid and you are back to 79.
This would make people think before engaging in PvP battles and would totally change the dynamic of PvP Raids in Conan.
This is the best way that I can see to make the PvP meaningful for everyone.
This may be far enough (or too far) for most people. But I would personally like to see it go a step further & apply a 5 minute "Resurrection Sickness" if you have to release after you die. This debuff would be negated if you get resurrected by another player.
What this Rez sickness would do would cause you to loose double the experience if you die while you still have the debuff.
This would slow down the pace of combat & you would actually have a series of battles with clear winners and losers instead of just a huge cluster f*ck of people constantly pouring into the combat area. It would give a chance for the victors of each battle a few moments to reorganize and prepare for the next battle.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I completely agree with the OP (and yes I did read the counter arguments)
PVP is jsut that...person v person. I don't care what the devs are programming the NPCs to do, they still aren't people. Making things more realistic (read: dangerous) makes players actually feel good about what they achieve. EVE Online is proof of this.
This is just another game with meaningless PVp Your cities are in instances, so they can't be attacked. You can attack keeps, but each guild can only have one keep. So what do you do after you get a keep? Nothing.
No empire building, no politics, ne real virtual worlds. I don't see why people want a game with no point to it.
It might be easier to understand.. if you could actually define what would make this "meaningful" and a "real virtual world".
Because it seems to imply from what you are saying that you want a full pvp world... in a level based game.
That just brings to mind all kinds of potential issues... not to mention the fact they want a large subscriber base (all for profit companies do) and the rabid hardcore pvp fan base is rather small.
I mean I played UO from the start and loved the pvp but.. there is no way I would think a game with no safe areas would float for long.
Which is why I said it might be nice if you could expand on what would make the world what you would want to see... so that there is less assumption from the reader end.
Such as... would there be certain areas of your "empire" that would be open to attack and other areas where you could level up.
Beyond population imbalances... high levels camping xp areas etc as a few potential problems.
The main reason the games upcoming are instancing cities.. is to avoid many potential problems that.. devs have seen since UO until the current day (pvp greifing probably be at the forefront in various forms).
That's why again.. I say if you could expand on what would make the game a real virtual world for you.. it would be easier to see if I agree with you in general or not (because right now I could totally agree or think you are looking to create a doomed to fail game.. I just don't have the details atm ;p)
This is just another game with meaningless PVp Your cities are in instances, so they can't be attacked. You can attack keeps, but each guild can only have one keep. So what do you do after you get a keep? Nothing.
No empire building, no politics, ne real virtual worlds. I don't see why people want a game with no point to it. The PVp battles may be fun, but you don't need a MMORPG to do that. You could just make a FPS for that.
I dunno I guess meaningful PvP would allow you to make some minor changes in the game world?
I mean I have played WoW PvP, its fast paced and fun, but its simply endless zerging and an instances whereby you kill other players instead of monsters. To each his/her own. After a while, theres a limit on how much I can take it, since the fight doesn't stop, not even momentarily.
I guess I'm too deeply affected by games like UO or DAoC. There is normally a lot of death penalty involved with UO, (pre trammel) and it tends to discourage players from going back to the same dungeon fearing that the pkers will still be there. So it added a little depth to the game, though some people may disagree and feel that it is too much effort for a video game. It did create an element of danger and surprise and excitement, and you won't ever want your character to die. In WoW, dying makes little difference...since the respawn just keeps coming and coming.
Although DAoC's death penalty was not heavy, it DOES put you out of action for a brief moment, allowing the victors a moment of reprieve. W/o the endless respawning players, it gives winning/losing some value, considering you can also conquer enemy keeps and reduce the amount of defenders on their relic keeps. Attaining enemy relics also grant a realm wide bonus to spell dmg and physical dmg dealt to pvp/pve targets. This gives some meaning to PvP and that you are simply not just earning personal honor points but also helping your faction if you do win. Giving players a little more incentive to participate in PvP to change the world in a minor way.
I'm not hoping AoC to be DAoC 2, as far as I'm concern Warhammer is probably going to end up being that.. Just hoping for PvP to have some meaning to it other than just killing mindlessly or pvping only as a mean to get better gear (WoW PvP system).
I mean it be nice to build something, plant your keep on some parts of the world, or being able to attack or defend a keep and get rewarded for doing so. I'm aware of the complexities/complication that can arise from such a game, and how it can be extremely hard to balance it, but if done right... it allows players to leave their mark on the world and gives the participating players a sense of ownership.
Ghoul's a troll.... no reason to respond to his comments.... but you did a very good job Avery.....
I like how anyone who has the least bit of criticism about a game gets labeled a troll.
Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democraticjudgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritariancommand, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
huh?
That would be the problem. Pay close atention to the first paragraph, read it slow...look up words if needed.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
This is just another game with meaningless PVp Your cities are in instances, so they can't be attacked. You can attack keeps, but each guild can only have one keep. So what do you do after you get a keep? Nothing.
No empire building, no politics, ne real virtual worlds. I don't see why people want a game with no point to it. The PVp battles may be fun, but you don't need a MMORPG to do that. You could just make a FPS for that.
Video games are meaningless.
exactly what I was trying to say... it's a video game and trying to pretend any of it "matters" is just stupid. It is a damn video game.
You won't see a 'meaningful' PvP game developed unless that company is willing to put out a 'niche' game. Sorry but the casuals and the carebears rule the market, a majority(surprisingly) of people will not play a MMO where it is possible to be PK'd and lose items that you spent hours working to get.
Players simply will not play a MMO in great number where it is possible to completely lose the land or your house that your 'player town' is on. While that would be fun and realistic it simply is not viable in the MMO market nowadays where the $$$$$$ drives developers visions.
Find a developer that is able to convince a major an investor, "Hey we're going to design a game that historically will not attract a huge number of players."
Comments
OP: There's nothing wrong with criticism. It is the manner in which you do it that determines whether it is considered trolling. You delivered your opinions in a very belligerent way, hence you were called out for trolling.
As far as meaningful PvP, it is more of just icing on the cake for me. My incentative to PvP is because it is fun and challenging. I think we can dispute whether this game has meaningful PvP. Guild cities are instanced and "non-flaggable" because if a guild has a keep and a city, both PvP, what's to stop someone from destroying their city while said guild is defending their keep and vice versa. There are imposed limits to keep the game fair and balanced, while still retaining its enjoyability. PvP in the Borderlands is meaningful in the respect that there are resources to be harvested there. You lose your keep, you lose your stake in the land, thus reducing your production of goods like weapons, armor, and what -have -you. I don't know what more meaning you could have without detracting from the overall fun of the game.
Well, that's all I have to say on the matter.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Metallica8589/videos?view=0
"I know I said this was my last post, but you my friend are a idiotic moron." -Shadow4482
But many people like meaningless pvp, just look at WOW, so I'm sure this game will do well.
But many people like meaningless pvp, just look at WOW, so I'm sure this game will do well.
Just curious what is your definition on PvP with meaning?
Just imagine the the Lord of the rings movie if it had these rules. The dark lord couldn't attack the humans cus he already had one keep. And he certainly couldn't attack a human city, because the cities were in another etherial place, where they couldn't be attacked.
If you can't loot a dude's stuff after you kill them the pvp meaningless period.
Based on the above terms point me to a successful mmorpg game incorporating those elements (please don't say Darkfall, and Shadowbane is dead). Post number 3 explains for my why its meaningfull. If people are getting at ffa and loot type of play then AoC will have FFA servers details of ruleset are unknown yet.
DING, DING, DING we have a winner folks. The pvp is meaningless because nothing impotant comes from winning. It may be fun for awhile (see WoW) but after that its just a grind to get points for the gear.
Edit* Oh and avery..................Darkfall
EvE-Online.
If your ship is destroyed, about 40% of the equipment and cargo in that ship are destroyed too. Rest of ship's equipment and cargo becomes lootable and any player in area may loot them. Just before your ship turns to another nova in sky, your character is launched in escape pod. If another player also manages to destroy your escape pod - then your character body is destroyed and your consciousness is moved to your clone. In process you will lose cybernetic implants that were attached to your character body - and if your clone wasn't up to date, you might also lose some skills. Losing fights might have huge economical consequences. Starter frigates are free for everyone, but biggest ships are multibillion investments and building them require co-operation of the hundreds players. Equipment and cybernetic implants price range are also ranging from free to multimillions. Clones are free for new players - but for older players with more skill points they are multimillion investment. Losing freighter with full of valuable cargo is always multibillion lost.
Most of ships, equipments and ammunition are manufactured by players. PvP is engine that keeps economy running - each lost ship is new chance for crafter to sell a new ship. Each fired missile is chance to sell a new missile. Manufacturing of better ships and equipments requires moon minerals that are mined and reprocessed by player build orbital platforms. Platforms are also used for storage, researching, manufacturing and other purposes. If players have enough orbital platforms in star system, they may build star base to system and system sovereignty is granted for players. Star bases allow cloning facilities (spawn points), trading possibilities with other players, unlimited storage capabilities, rentable research laboratories and factories. Sovereignty allows players to build capital ships and other bonuses. If players have multiple star system sovereignty nearby, they will get constellation sovereignty - with a new set of bonuses.
Players may also destroy other players’ orbital platforms. Typically this requires co-operation of the multiple players - and defending players only choice is to do same. This will lead large scale PvP battles that might have hundreds participating players. Organizing large scale battles and economy requirements for hundreds ships leads to player organizations that have hundreds or even thousands players (largest player organization currently have over 5000 thousands players).
I don't think that this kind PvP will be possible in AoC because of level system. In EvE it is possible that new character kills 4 year old veteran character. Veteran character might have more money to get better ship, but advantage for veteran character is maybe 20 - 35% at max. It is still suicidal to go against veteran character's battleship with new a character's frigate - but group of new characters whose ships have equipment for speciality roles will easily beat lonely veteran character. Veteran's major advantage is versatility - they are able to full fill different roles in the fleet. In level based systems - like WoW and AoC - veteran character would be practically god against new characters. Level 5 character just can't hurt level 60 character. This leads to all kind artificial limitations PvP zones with level ranges, PvP level ranges, etc.
EvE system has some clear disadvantages. Solo players have all ways disadvantage in PvP - well organized group of players, can all ways win PvP fight. Also because game world is all ways changing and content is mostly player controlled, there aren’t any great quest lines or raid dungeons - bad for players who need clearly set hard coded goals. Third problem, is that EvE's combat system doesn't require much involvement and is missing immersion - combat is clinical calculus where your lock to target and fire your weapons. Where are sexy helms woman and Scottish engineer? No where, because EvE does have minimal amount of developer created content - rest of content is created by players through PvP and economical warfare.
"I know I said this was my last post, but you my friend are a idiotic moron." -Shadow4482
Who cares - it's PvP. The fact that I am killing another player, whose movement and play styles are unpredicatable and dynamic make the whole PvP exciting and all.. as compared to the repeatitive killing of mobs.
As long as there's PvP, no matter what form or anything.. I'm all for it.. as long as it's not a mouse-click to move game... those sucks.
The same way the rest of you are defending quite eloquently something that is still changing and NONE of you have played yourselves.
FUNCOM - putting the FUN in disFUNctional !
DING, DING, DING we have a winner folks. The pvp is meaningless because nothing impotant comes from winning. It may be fun for awhile (see WoW) but after that its just a grind to get points for the gear.
Edit* Oh and avery..................Darkfall
Exactly, the reward is just keeping your stuff to make cool gear. I was hoping this game could really expand on what Shadowbane started but being able to only have one BK at a time is lame.If one guild is really dominating all others then the rest need to learn to band together to stop the zerg guild. The only time people really have had problems with this is in Shadowbane when the opportunity times of attack were not restrictive enough and let in hordes of Asian players to zerg the NA and Euro players off the map.
I sometimes wonder if AoC is just a little bit better at hiding the carrot at the end of the stick compared to WoW.
I like how anyone who has the least bit of criticism about a game gets labeled a troll.Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democratic judgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritarian command, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democratic judgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritarian command, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
huh?
The problem with how MMOs view PvP these days is there is no reaction to you dying. It's like a RPG Deathmatch.
What I mean is when you PvP in the majority of MMO games today you run out.. die... run back out... die again.. over and over until one side wins. There's no penalty for dying in a PvP environment, or at least not one harsh enough to stop the type of zerg that we will be seeing in Conan.
What I would like to see is EXP loss on death in PvP & the ability to lose your level if you lose enough EXP.
Maxed out EXP on your level 80? But you die 10 times in a Raid and you are back to 79.
This would make people think before engaging in PvP battles and would totally change the dynamic of PvP Raids in Conan.
This is the best way that I can see to make the PvP meaningful for everyone.
This may be far enough (or too far) for most people. But I would personally like to see it go a step further & apply a 5 minute "Resurrection Sickness" if you have to release after you die. This debuff would be negated if you get resurrected by another player.
What this Rez sickness would do would cause you to loose double the experience if you die while you still have the debuff.
This would slow down the pace of combat & you would actually have a series of battles with clear winners and losers instead of just a huge cluster f*ck of people constantly pouring into the combat area. It would give a chance for the victors of each battle a few moments to reorganize and prepare for the next battle.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
I completely agree with the OP (and yes I did read the counter arguments)
PVP is jsut that...person v person. I don't care what the devs are programming the NPCs to do, they still aren't people. Making things more realistic (read: dangerous) makes players actually feel good about what they achieve. EVE Online is proof of this.
Because it seems to imply from what you are saying that you want a full pvp world... in a level based game.
That just brings to mind all kinds of potential issues... not to mention the fact they want a large subscriber base (all for profit companies do) and the rabid hardcore pvp fan base is rather small.
I mean I played UO from the start and loved the pvp but.. there is no way I would think a game with no safe areas would float for long.
Which is why I said it might be nice if you could expand on what would make the world what you would want to see... so that there is less assumption from the reader end.
Such as... would there be certain areas of your "empire" that would be open to attack and other areas where you could level up.
Beyond population imbalances... high levels camping xp areas etc as a few potential problems.
The main reason the games upcoming are instancing cities.. is to avoid many potential problems that.. devs have seen since UO until the current day (pvp greifing probably be at the forefront in various forms).
That's why again.. I say if you could expand on what would make the game a real virtual world for you.. it would be easier to see if I agree with you in general or not (because right now I could totally agree or think you are looking to create a doomed to fail game.. I just don't have the details atm ;p)
The best part of it all is that it is a game...
Sounds like you are looking for some IRL PVP or something.
Go join the military.
Video games are meaningless.
I dunno I guess meaningful PvP would allow you to make some minor changes in the game world?
I mean I have played WoW PvP, its fast paced and fun, but its simply endless zerging and an instances whereby you kill other players instead of monsters. To each his/her own. After a while, theres a limit on how much I can take it, since the fight doesn't stop, not even momentarily.
I guess I'm too deeply affected by games like UO or DAoC. There is normally a lot of death penalty involved with UO, (pre trammel) and it tends to discourage players from going back to the same dungeon fearing that the pkers will still be there. So it added a little depth to the game, though some people may disagree and feel that it is too much effort for a video game. It did create an element of danger and surprise and excitement, and you won't ever want your character to die. In WoW, dying makes little difference...since the respawn just keeps coming and coming.
Although DAoC's death penalty was not heavy, it DOES put you out of action for a brief moment, allowing the victors a moment of reprieve. W/o the endless respawning players, it gives winning/losing some value, considering you can also conquer enemy keeps and reduce the amount of defenders on their relic keeps. Attaining enemy relics also grant a realm wide bonus to spell dmg and physical dmg dealt to pvp/pve targets. This gives some meaning to PvP and that you are simply not just earning personal honor points but also helping your faction if you do win. Giving players a little more incentive to participate in PvP to change the world in a minor way.
I'm not hoping AoC to be DAoC 2, as far as I'm concern Warhammer is probably going to end up being that.. Just hoping for PvP to have some meaning to it other than just killing mindlessly or pvping only as a mean to get better gear (WoW PvP system).
I mean it be nice to build something, plant your keep on some parts of the world, or being able to attack or defend a keep and get rewarded for doing so. I'm aware of the complexities/complication that can arise from such a game, and how it can be extremely hard to balance it, but if done right... it allows players to leave their mark on the world and gives the participating players a sense of ownership.
Hope that makes sense...
I like how anyone who has the least bit of criticism about a game gets labeled a troll.Criticism is not what you posted.
Criticism in general terms means democratic judgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritarian command, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate.
Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
huh?
That would be the problem.
Pay close atention to the first paragraph, read it slow...look up words if needed.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Video games are meaningless.
exactly what I was trying to say... it's a video game and trying to pretend any of it "matters" is just stupid. It is a damn video game.
You won't see a 'meaningful' PvP game developed unless that company is willing to put out a 'niche' game. Sorry but the casuals and the carebears rule the market, a majority(surprisingly) of people will not play a MMO where it is possible to be PK'd and lose items that you spent hours working to get.
Players simply will not play a MMO in great number where it is possible to completely lose the land or your house that your 'player town' is on. While that would be fun and realistic it simply is not viable in the MMO market nowadays where the $$$$$$ drives developers visions.
Find a developer that is able to convince a major an investor, "Hey we're going to design a game that historically will not attract a huge number of players."