There is a few types of PvPers. FFA fans, team based FFA (cant kill people from your faction) Battleground/arena PvPers (like WoW) DAoC PvPers themepark PvP with objectives (but like to keep PvP and PvP in its own box) Each PvPers has their own idea on what makes PvP awesome or fail and none of them agree on whats better =-) I think the PvP and PvE groups both can get equally loud when they dont get what they like.
You're 100% right that we can all get loud when we don't get what we want.
Do you think maybe though with it being the Everquest IP there is a little more expectation on the PVE side of the community for this to be their type of game?
Maybe in a general sense they are in fact expecting it a little more "their way" than we (the more PvP loving people) are?
Maybe not, I just thought in this case it does seem the PVE people are overall a little more adamant that it is going to be their type of game. I know I don't expect it to be anything like what I want.
There is a few types of PvPers. FFA fans, team based FFA (cant kill people from your faction) Battleground/arena PvPers (like WoW) DAoC PvPers themepark PvP with objectives (but like to keep PvP and PvP in its own box) Each PvPers has their own idea on what makes PvP awesome or fail and none of them agree on whats better =-) I think the PvP and PvE groups both can get equally loud when they dont get what they like.
You're 100% right that we can all get loud when we don't get what we want.
Do you think maybe though with it being the Everquest IP there is a little more expectation on the PVE side of the community for this to be their type of game?
Maybe in a general sense they are in fact expecting it a little more "their way" than we (the more PvP loving people) are?
Maybe not, I just thought in this case it does seem the PVE people are overall a little more adamant that it is going to be their type of game. I know I don't expect it to be anything like what I want.
Could be, but again we see more PvP thread here they PvE lol. The hot topic on this forum has been PvP from the start and I think both sides are sure of what they are going to get on Friday Like you, I am ready to wait and get excited or walk away and never post on this forum again if its not a model I like. I did that with ESO, huge supporter of that game but now... well enough said Im not into game bashing over and over again. I express why I am not happy and walk away.
The problem with pvp in an mmo is it destroys the pve side. People start crying about balance so the devs nerf the hell out of things and so pve suffers for it. Its been that way in every mmo out there that wasn't specifically designed for pvp. You will never have a good balance in a game with pvp and pve. you will have your pve players suffering because pvpers cant think outside the box and make things work. they just start complaining until classes are nuked then pve players get screwed and have to either just live with it or make a whole new toon because theirs was borked for pvp. its a vicious never ending cycle that has happened to every mmo since wow.
my message to pvpers is if you cant kill someone then stop attacking them alone. dont run off and cry to the devs to get that guys character nerfed. balance isnt created by devs nerfing characters its created by players getting smarter about how they play their toon. If your squishy wizard cant take down that high resistance warrior then stop attacking him and start shooting the healer or rogue. if your warrior cant kill their archer because he roots you and blows you away with arrows then stop attacking him and start smashing their wizards. problem fixed balance restored.
The problem with pvp in an mmo is it destroys the pve side. People start crying about balance so the devs nerf the hell out of things and so pve suffers for it. Its been that way in every mmo out there that wasn't specifically designed for pvp. You will never have a good balance in a game with pvp and pve. you will have your pve players suffering because pvpers cant think outside the box and make things work. they just start complaining until classes are nuked then pve players get screwed and have to either just live with it or make a whole new toon because theirs was borked for pvp. its a vicious never ending cycle that has happened to every mmo since wow.
my message to pvpers is if you cant kill someone then stop attacking them alone. dont run off and cry to the devs to get that guys character nerfed. balance isnt created by devs nerfing characters its created by players getting smarter about how they play their toon. If your squishy wizard cant take down that high resistance warrior then stop attacking him and start shooting the healer or rogue. if your warrior cant kill their archer because he roots you and blows you away with arrows then stop attacking him and start smashing their wizards. problem fixed balance restored.
Could you maybe re-read your post and consider that your perspective is heavily biased towards your side of the coin?
So PvP people "cry about balance" and devs nerf things for them. This is true at times. Is this not also true for PVE people wanting changes made that affect PvP?
Then there is the fact that a bad developer making bad decisions that have poor impacts on their game is not a basis for a universal truth. As such, the history of any MMO, whether it is WOW or SWTOR is not any sort of proof that acceptable balance cannot be had in a game with pvp and pve.
My message to you is, try to examine the subject from my perspective as if you found my playstyle enjoyable. Not in an attempt to like PvP or become a PvPer, but to maybe see why I feel your viewpoint is too biased to be a fair assessment.
The problem with pvp in an mmo is it destroys the pve side. People start crying about balance so the devs nerf the hell out of things and so pve suffers for it. Its been that way in every mmo out there that wasn't specifically designed for pvp. You will never have a good balance in a game with pvp and pve. you will have your pve players suffering because pvpers cant think outside the box and make things work. they just start complaining until classes are nuked then pve players get screwed and have to either just live with it or make a whole new toon because theirs was borked for pvp. its a vicious never ending cycle that has happened to every mmo since wow.
my message to pvpers is if you cant kill someone then stop attacking them alone. dont run off and cry to the devs to get that guys character nerfed. balance isnt created by devs nerfing characters its created by players getting smarter about how they play their toon. If your squishy wizard cant take down that high resistance warrior then stop attacking him and start shooting the healer or rogue. if your warrior cant kill their archer because he roots you and blows you away with arrows then stop attacking him and start smashing their wizards. problem fixed balance restored.
Could you maybe re-read your post and consider that your perspective is heavily biased towards your side of the coin?
So PvP people "cry about balance" and devs nerf things for them. This is true at times. Is this not also true for PVE people wanting changes made that affect PvP?
Then there is the fact that a bad developer making bad decisions that have poor impacts on their game is not a basis for a universal truth. As such, the history of any MMO, whether it is WOW or SWTOR is not any sort of proof that acceptable balance cannot be had in a game with pvp and pve.
My message to you is, try to examine the subject from my perspective as if you found my playstyle enjoyable. Not in an attempt to like PvP or become a PvPer, but to maybe see why I feel your viewpoint is too biased to be a fair assessment.
He is right, PvPers do cry about class balance and it often ends in a nurf bat and PvEers often lose the class they love for the sake of PvP. What is wrong is this is not all PvPers but from a PvE fans point of view it looks just like that. I am interested to see what direction SoE takes EQN. Its one of only 3 paths, the hybrid MMO for PvP and PvE to try and get the most players. Or a Pure PvE game that will not balance classes based on PvP if it has any PvP at all. Or a pure PvP game, where all content is designed with PvP in mind. The later is one one I dont think SoE will go with but thats just my two cents =-)
Originally posted by NagelRitter Yeah, I love how every time someone suggests something he says it's dumb immediately if it doesn't fit his agenda.
"Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn." - Alfred, in The Dark Knight.
And this is made so much easier in video games where there are no real consequences for being the "psycho-killer bad guy".
http://www.twitch.tv/holophonist/c/1884956 <- there's a vod of me playing on a free uo shard with my little sister. If those are the actions of somebody who just wants to watch the world burn, then feel free to continue to slander me basically everytime we ever meet each other in a discussion.
And please... spare me the line about how you weren't technically talking about me. You've called me a griefer and a pker numerous times.
He is right, PvPers do cry about class balance and it often ends in a nurf bat and PvEers often lose the class they love for the sake of PvP. What is wrong is this is not all PvPers but from a PvE fans point of view it looks just like that.
We are both right about that. I said the same thing as he.
And I agree with you that it isn't all PVE or PvP people, but some.
Where I disagree is in whose fault the problems are. I don't blame PvP or PvE people.
When a game is a mess I blame ONLY the developer of the game. The players are going to complain regardless of anything the developer does. IF a developer is ruining their game because of a vocal PvP group or PvE group then it is the developers fault for ruining the game, not the players.
I see a developer's job as to create and maintain a good game, if they cannot compromise properly on systems and retain the integrity of their game then they need to not compromise those systems.
That is a matter of opinion I know, and it is the matter which I disagree with many who want to blame players, or more specifically entire groups of players, for bad game decisions.
The problem with pvp in an mmo is it destroys the pve side. People start crying about balance so the devs nerf the hell out of things and so pve suffers for it. Its been that way in every mmo out there that wasn't specifically designed for pvp. You will never have a good balance in a game with pvp and pve. you will have your pve players suffering because pvpers cant think outside the box and make things work. they just start complaining until classes are nuked then pve players get screwed and have to either just live with it or make a whole new toon because theirs was borked for pvp. its a vicious never ending cycle that has happened to every mmo since wow.
my message to pvpers is if you cant kill someone then stop attacking them alone. dont run off and cry to the devs to get that guys character nerfed. balance isnt created by devs nerfing characters its created by players getting smarter about how they play their toon. If your squishy wizard cant take down that high resistance warrior then stop attacking him and start shooting the healer or rogue. if your warrior cant kill their archer because he roots you and blows you away with arrows then stop attacking him and start smashing their wizards. problem fixed balance restored.
Could you maybe re-read your post and consider that your perspective is heavily biased towards your side of the coin?
So PvP people "cry about balance" and devs nerf things for them. This is true at times. Is this not also true for PVE people wanting changes made that affect PvP?
Then there is the fact that a bad developer making bad decisions that have poor impacts on their game is not a basis for a universal truth. As such, the history of any MMO, whether it is WOW or SWTOR is not any sort of proof that acceptable balance cannot be had in a game with pvp and pve.
My message to you is, try to examine the subject from my perspective as if you found my playstyle enjoyable. Not in an attempt to like PvP or become a PvPer, but to maybe see why I feel your viewpoint is too biased to be a fair assessment.
He is right, PvPers do cry about class balance and it often ends in a nurf bat and PvEers often lose the class they love for the sake of PvP. What is wrong is this is not all PvPers but from a PvE fans point of view it looks just like that. I am interested to see what direction SoE takes EQN. Its one of only 3 paths, the hybrid MMO for PvP and PvE to try and get the most players. Or a Pure PvE game that will not balance classes based on PvP if it has any PvP at all. Or a pure PvP game, where all content is designed with PvP in mind. The later is one one I dont think SoE will go with but thats just my two cents =-)
Can I point out that the only precedence that I can think of for this is in non-sandbox and non-ow pvp games. If I'm wrong, tell me. But it seems like we're using examples from games like WoW and trying to apply them to totally different kinds of games.
The ideal sandbox would probably have multiple professions and a lot of customization. There would be separate classes/builds/templates/whatever for pvp and for pve. They would rarely affect each other.
Can I point out that the only precedence that I can think of for this is in non-sandbox and non-ow pvp games. If I'm wrong, tell me. But it seems like we're using examples from games like WoW and trying to apply them to totally different kinds of games.
The ideal sandbox would probably have multiple professions and a lot of customization. There would be separate classes/builds/templates/whatever for pvp and for pve. They would rarely affect each other.
Thats a fair point.
So many people just assume every game is going to be WOW and start up an argument based on that. Maybe its all some people have played. I'm not sure.
It is easy to get sucked into an argument that holds this as a basis and lose sight of that fact.
Since I haven't really offered an opinion about EQN in particular: I'm guessing the game is NOT going to be a pure ow pvp game in any real sense of the term. I'm guess there will be some kind of flagging system (probably faction based?) or pvp zones or something like that. Considering ps2's anti-griefing mechanic, I'm sure EQN's is going to be something artificial like simply not being able to hurt your own faction members or people not in an opposing faction.
Basically I don't think it's going to have interesting, community-driven mechanics to curb griefing. That totally blows, but at the same time I won't be surprised. I never expected this or any other AAA game to "do it right."
I haven't read "all" the posts, but I've read a good 70-80% of them, and not too many people are mentioning full loot PvP; most people are talking about open world or FFA PvP. Just because you have open world PvP, meaning you can attack or be attacked anywhere in the game, doesn't mean you have to have full loot. I love PvP, but I'm still an advocate for backpack and not equipped items loot. After hours of playing any gear that you really want is safe because it would be on your equipped body.
Another side of that coin where FFA PvP doesn't have to be full loot would be that a full loot game doesn't necessarily have to mean Raid dungeons are open pvp areas.
I personally like the idea of open pvp areas, but as Mos points out -- one has to be honest that just because you hear a phrase describing a system that has been done before in a game, doesn't mean the next game has to implement that system in the exact same way.
Then there is the fact that one system, like full loot/item drop, can exist - and all the other systems interconnected with it can change and leave a game that plays nothing like every other full loot/item drop game you've played.
This is one compromise I would be willing to make; I hate instances but I would be ok with a few high end dungeons being instanced and off limits for PvP. The game still wouldn't be fun if they didn't have some type of territory control or guild vs guild, but that has nothing to do directly with instanced dungeons.
So if the game could deliver open world PvP, with asset destruction and guild vs guild city building/sieges, while still having 3-5 high end dungeons that were instanced and safe from PvP I would readily play a game like that. Full loot or back pack loot, or any other type of loot rights would fit into the above scenario; just as Rama said there are different sides to the coin.
you are kidding, right? thats compromise as saying "i want a steak, you want a pizza, ok, lets compromise: we will have steak but you can put a tommato sauce on yours"
I haven't read "all" the posts, but I've read a good 70-80% of them, and not too many people are mentioning full loot PvP; most people are talking about open world or FFA PvP. Just because you have open world PvP, meaning you can attack or be attacked anywhere in the game, doesn't mean you have to have full loot. I love PvP, but I'm still an advocate for backpack and not equipped items loot. After hours of playing any gear that you really want is safe because it would be on your equipped body.
Another side of that coin where FFA PvP doesn't have to be full loot would be that a full loot game doesn't necessarily have to mean Raid dungeons are open pvp areas.
I personally like the idea of open pvp areas, but as Mos points out -- one has to be honest that just because you hear a phrase describing a system that has been done before in a game, doesn't mean the next game has to implement that system in the exact same way.
Then there is the fact that one system, like full loot/item drop, can exist - and all the other systems interconnected with it can change and leave a game that plays nothing like every other full loot/item drop game you've played.
This is one compromise I would be willing to make; I hate instances but I would be ok with a few high end dungeons being instanced and off limits for PvP. The game still wouldn't be fun if they didn't have some type of territory control or guild vs guild, but that has nothing to do directly with instanced dungeons.
So if the game could deliver open world PvP, with asset destruction and guild vs guild city building/sieges, while still having 3-5 high end dungeons that were instanced and safe from PvP I would readily play a game like that. Full loot or back pack loot, or any other type of loot rights would fit into the above scenario; just as Rama said there are different sides to the coin.
you are kidding, right? thats compromise as saying "i want a steak, you want a pizza, ok, lets compromise: we will have steak but you can put a tommato sauce on yours"
I don't remember what you're for or against but what he suggested is like a perfect analog to the non-pvp's crowd's "compromise" of separate pvp and pve servers.
http://www.twitch.tv/holophonist/c/1884956 <- there's a vod of me playing on a free uo shard with my little sister. If those are the actions of somebody who just wants to watch the world burn, then feel free to continue to slander me basically everytime we ever meet each other in a discussion.
Not that the claim is substantial per se, but a VOD of someone playing with his sister will prove absolutely nothing whatsoever about their character. I've seen some family oriented grown men turn into complete utter garbage once they got some anonymity.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
http://www.twitch.tv/holophonist/c/1884956 <- there's a vod of me playing on a free uo shard with my little sister. If those are the actions of somebody who just wants to watch the world burn, then feel free to continue to slander me basically everytime we ever meet each other in a discussion.
Not that the claim is substantial per se, but a VOD of someone playing with his sister will prove absolutely nothing whatsoever about their character. I've seen some family oriented grown men turn into complete utter garbage once they got some anonymity.
I give you a VOD of me acting like the exact opposite of what some of you claim I am and you say it's not enough?
Maybe people just like OW pvp because it makes for more serious and satisfying gameplay. Maybe that's what it is. Maybe I'm not some demon spawn who has to feed on the blood of innocents.
I haven't read "all" the posts, but I've read a good 70-80% of them, and not too many people are mentioning full loot PvP; most people are talking about open world or FFA PvP. Just because you have open world PvP, meaning you can attack or be attacked anywhere in the game, doesn't mean you have to have full loot. I love PvP, but I'm still an advocate for backpack and not equipped items loot. After hours of playing any gear that you really want is safe because it would be on your equipped body.
Another side of that coin where FFA PvP doesn't have to be full loot would be that a full loot game doesn't necessarily have to mean Raid dungeons are open pvp areas.
I personally like the idea of open pvp areas, but as Mos points out -- one has to be honest that just because you hear a phrase describing a system that has been done before in a game, doesn't mean the next game has to implement that system in the exact same way.
Then there is the fact that one system, like full loot/item drop, can exist - and all the other systems interconnected with it can change and leave a game that plays nothing like every other full loot/item drop game you've played.
This is one compromise I would be willing to make; I hate instances but I would be ok with a few high end dungeons being instanced and off limits for PvP. The game still wouldn't be fun if they didn't have some type of territory control or guild vs guild, but that has nothing to do directly with instanced dungeons.
So if the game could deliver open world PvP, with asset destruction and guild vs guild city building/sieges, while still having 3-5 high end dungeons that were instanced and safe from PvP I would readily play a game like that. Full loot or back pack loot, or any other type of loot rights would fit into the above scenario; just as Rama said there are different sides to the coin.
you are kidding, right? thats compromise as saying "i want a steak, you want a pizza, ok, lets compromise: we will have steak but you can put a tommato sauce on yours"
I don't remember what you're for or against but what he suggested is like a perfect analog to the non-pvp's crowd's "compromise" of separate pvp and pve servers.
now you are kidding, right? having any form of ffa pvp w/o separate servers is analog to have pvp only in form of dual/arena w/o any balancing or not having pvp at all
I haven't read "all" the posts, but I've read a good 70-80% of them, and not too many people are mentioning full loot PvP; most people are talking about open world or FFA PvP. Just because you have open world PvP, meaning you can attack or be attacked anywhere in the game, doesn't mean you have to have full loot. I love PvP, but I'm still an advocate for backpack and not equipped items loot. After hours of playing any gear that you really want is safe because it would be on your equipped body.
Another side of that coin where FFA PvP doesn't have to be full loot would be that a full loot game doesn't necessarily have to mean Raid dungeons are open pvp areas.
I personally like the idea of open pvp areas, but as Mos points out -- one has to be honest that just because you hear a phrase describing a system that has been done before in a game, doesn't mean the next game has to implement that system in the exact same way.
Then there is the fact that one system, like full loot/item drop, can exist - and all the other systems interconnected with it can change and leave a game that plays nothing like every other full loot/item drop game you've played.
This is one compromise I would be willing to make; I hate instances but I would be ok with a few high end dungeons being instanced and off limits for PvP. The game still wouldn't be fun if they didn't have some type of territory control or guild vs guild, but that has nothing to do directly with instanced dungeons.
So if the game could deliver open world PvP, with asset destruction and guild vs guild city building/sieges, while still having 3-5 high end dungeons that were instanced and safe from PvP I would readily play a game like that. Full loot or back pack loot, or any other type of loot rights would fit into the above scenario; just as Rama said there are different sides to the coin.
you are kidding, right? thats compromise as saying "i want a steak, you want a pizza, ok, lets compromise: we will have steak but you can put a tommato sauce on yours"
I don't remember what you're for or against but what he suggested is like a perfect analog to the non-pvp's crowd's "compromise" of separate pvp and pve servers.
now you are kidding, right? having any form of ffa pvp w/o separate servers is analog to have pvp only in form of dual/arena w/o any balancing or not having pvp at all
And lastly for those that advocate some kind of loot system for pvp. If this is implemented in a game at all I would definitely not advocate full loot, that's just silly. Sure I get it, you want some spoils of war but we're playing a game and shouldn't be out to ruin the experience for someone entirely as community is really what drives a good MMO.
Welcome to the forums.
This was a good first post!
I'd just like to address one thing though in that many of us who advocate full loot systems do not do so because we want "spoils of war."
Some of us advocate them for many reasons of which that is not even one of them. I for example, would prefer a system that just deletes all of my items when I die over one that allows me to have permanent gear. So it isn't about getting other people's stuff.
I like full loot because I -DETEST- gear grinds, the sort of grind that exists in WOW, SWTOR, Rift, and almost every game i've ever played since Ultima Online.
I LOVE crafting and a robust player driven economy, two things that benefit most from a full loot system. I like character progression, but I prefer it to be endless. If there is a best in slot gear that I can get and own forever there is a definite end to my progression that doesn't exist if there is always a reason to amass more wealth to pad myself from the possibility of future loss.
And with that in mind I like risk/reward and actually having something on the line. The death penalty where i'm simply teleported to another place doesn't hold the same thrill for me. Nor does the loss of some experience that won't really impact my playing or the game as a whole in as meaningful a way.
I could go on, but my only point is for some of us it goes far beyond just wanting to gank people and take their stuff. It is an entire systematic effect on an entire game. And I feel not having full loot for the sake of people thinking it is too harsh comes with a high price. A price I personally do not enjoy paying, while I understand why many do.
And once again, when we start talking compromise on full loot pvp, we start compromising the integrity of the way the system can function with other games systems. None of this is to say any of this -requires- a full loot game. But my preference does not exist for any one single reason.
This is something many people fail to understand. In Full Loot pvp games, gear isn't really hard to get. It's more about customizing your character. There are only slightly varying qualities* of gear, but it's all fairly easy to get (you end up buying/finding multiple whole sets of gear for back ups). You don't have a gear treadmill + full loot pvp. it wouldn't make sense to run an epic quest for some uber awesome weapon, spend 2 or 3 months doing it, then drop it to some gang of losers as soon as you get killed for the first time.
Full loot pvp games have gear that focuses on customization (Plate for slower movement, more defense, or leather armor for more mobility and combat power, etc)
It's not about getting +5 str sword rare drop, then killing a raid mob for a +15 str sword, so that the next expansion you can kill the boss and get a +30 str sword.
That's not what full loot games are about.
Doesn't matter though. EQN isn't going to be that type of game anyway.
And lastly for those that advocate some kind of loot system for pvp. If this is implemented in a game at all I would definitely not advocate full loot, that's just silly. Sure I get it, you want some spoils of war but we're playing a game and shouldn't be out to ruin the experience for someone entirely as community is really what drives a good MMO.
Welcome to the forums.
This was a good first post!
I'd just like to address one thing though in that many of us who advocate full loot systems do not do so because we want "spoils of war."
Some of us advocate them for many reasons of which that is not even one of them. I for example, would prefer a system that just deletes all of my items when I die over one that allows me to have permanent gear. So it isn't about getting other people's stuff.
I like full loot because I -DETEST- gear grinds, the sort of grind that exists in WOW, SWTOR, Rift, and almost every game i've ever played since Ultima Online.
I LOVE crafting and a robust player driven economy, two things that benefit most from a full loot system. I like character progression, but I prefer it to be endless. If there is a best in slot gear that I can get and own forever there is a definite end to my progression that doesn't exist if there is always a reason to amass more wealth to pad myself from the possibility of future loss.
And with that in mind I like risk/reward and actually having something on the line. The death penalty where i'm simply teleported to another place doesn't hold the same thrill for me. Nor does the loss of some experience that won't really impact my playing or the game as a whole in as meaningful a way.
I could go on, but my only point is for some of us it goes far beyond just wanting to gank people and take their stuff. It is an entire systematic effect on an entire game. And I feel not having full loot for the sake of people thinking it is too harsh comes with a high price. A price I personally do not enjoy paying, while I understand why many do.
And once again, when we start talking compromise on full loot pvp, we start compromising the integrity of the way the system can function with other games systems. None of this is to say any of this -requires- a full loot game. But my preference does not exist for any one single reason.
This is something many people fail to understand. In Full Loot pvp games, gear isn't really hard to get. It's more about customizing your character. There are only slightly varying qualities* of gear, but it's all fairly easy to get (you end up buying/finding multiple whole sets of gear for back ups). You don't have a gear treadmill + full loot pvp. it wouldn't make sense to run an epic quest for some uber awesome weapon, spend 2 or 3 months doing it, then drop it to some gang of losers as soon as you get killed for the first time.
Full loot pvp games have gear that focuses on customization (Plate for slower movement, more defense, or leather armor for more mobility and combat power, etc)
It's not about getting +5 str sword rare drop, then killing a raid mob for a +15 str sword, so that the next expansion you can kill the boss and get a +30 str sword.
That's not what full loot games are about.
Doesn't matter though. EQN isn't going to be that type of game anyway.
Exactly. Gear in UO and DF was more along the lines of just another kind of supply, like bandages or potions. Though of the two games I mentioned, I prefer DF's approach (and even that could be way better than it is) of varying levels of gear. On free UO servers that replicate (with some changes) pre-trammel era everybody basically runs around in barbed leather. Almost nobody wears plate or chain, definitely not ringmail. It's a little boring having everybody running around in the exact same armor, even if you can dye it.
DF has several tiers of totally viable armor at varying costs. For instance the the 4th, 5th and 6th (of 7 total) tiers of armor are studded, spiked, and intricate armor. You could potentially wear any of these sets and do fine against just about anybody. However, if you're feeling frisky, you can go out in a set of intricate (which probably costs about 8 times as much as studded) for the little bit of added protection. It adds more choices in the risk/reward department.
I give you a VOD of me acting like the exact opposite of what some of you claim I am and you say it's not enough?
I never claimed anything. I never asked for anything. But that VOD proves absolutely nothing. So I guess I am saying you're wasting your time by providing something that is not evidence to prove something you cannot prove.
There are different kinds of people out there, they play games for different reasons, the statement from Picard was most probably not personally to you as much as to the whole group of people that you represent, and what he said is his conclusions from what kind of people play those games in a manner which you appear to defend. Your "I only kill noto-PK's" claim is, again, not provable, you're just put in the group that is not so noble.
It's sort of a reverse No True Scottsman. You are arguing for a side a bunch of us have encountered in incarnation X. You claim that you're different from incarnation X. We a) don't care, because then you aren't part of the problem; b) don't believe you, so your statement is worthless.
The whole deal with roleplaying pirates is an iffy one. I do wonder if a person being an in-game scammer or griefer reflects back on their actual personality? I don't know. It's not like people who play EVE are roleplaying, really... I do know that team rage in team games definitely does transfer over, though.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW Currently playing: GW2, EVE Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
I give you a VOD of me acting like the exact opposite of what some of you claim I am and you say it's not enough?
I never claimed anything. I never asked for anything. But that VOD proves absolutely nothing. So I guess I am saying you're wasting your time by providing something that is not evidence to prove something you cannot prove.
That's why I didn't quote you when linking it. Though I'm not sure if that's the case. I know several people have openly claimed that I'm probably a griefer or a pk or whatever else. But even so, I deliberately said "some of you." If you haven't, then fine.
And how exactly is it not evidence? It's a vod of me having a perfect opportunity to just kill somebody (we had him outnumbered), he was even being an asshole, and we only attacked him when he attacked me. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is. And more importantly, it's may more evidence than anything Jean-Luc or anybody else has offered to support their claim that I am what they claim I am.
There are different kinds of people out there, they play games for different reasons, the statement from Picard was most probably not personally to you as much as to the whole group of people that you represent, and what he said is his conclusions from what kind of people play those games in a manner which you appear to defend. Your "I only kill noto-PK's" claim is, again, not provable, you're just put in the group that is not so noble.
No, it was about me. He's done it several times in totally separate conversations. That was just the most recent and accessible. Your judgement is clearly just clouded because he's on your side of the argument about pvp vs nonpvp.
And I never said my "I only kill noto-PK's" was provable. There is something called the burden of proof, and it's typically good practice to assume that people are innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent because it happens to advance a narrative. It's a common theme in this debate that ow pvp advocates want it simply because they like killing lower level players and fighting unfairly.
It's sort of a reverse No True Scottsman. You are arguing for a side a bunch of us have encountered in incarnation X. You claim that you're different from incarnation X. We a) don't care, because then you aren't part of the problem; b) don't believe you, so your statement is worthless.
I'm not sure why you're viewing my defense of my own character as some kind of argument in favor of OW PVP. I have plenty of those arguments, thanks. Me defending myself is simply that, nothing more. I don't care if you think me vindicating myself solves the "problem."
If somebody lies about me, I'm going to correct them. How you can be against that I have absolutely no clue.
The whole deal with roleplaying pirates is an iffy one. I do wonder if a person being an in-game scammer or griefer reflects back on their actual personality? I don't know. It's not like people who play EVE are roleplaying, really... I do know that team rage in team games definitely does transfer over, though.
Not sure what this is about but if I had to guess if somebody is a prick in-game, they're probably at least MORE LIKELY to be a prick out of game. Doesn't mean they definitely are, but it's fair to assume that it makes it at least a bit more likely.
Here we are 600+ posts and it has yet again turned into another PvP vs PvE debate.
We'll see friday if EQN can create a world that can accomodate players from both camps..though they seem diametrically opposed here.
Will be interesting to see the system they use if they do integrate both playstyles on one server.
Most people acknowledge that they literally can't accommodate both camps. Things that I want are fundamentally different from things other people want.
That isn't to say I wouldn't try it. I've been gaming for the majority of my life, just because I think OW PVP games are the best kinds of MMO's (and will defend it to the death with logic and objectivity), doesn't mean I don't enjoy other types of games.
Here we are 600+ posts and it has yet again turned into another PvP vs PvE debate.
We'll see friday if EQN can create a world that can accomodate players from both camps..though they seem diametrically opposed here.
Will be interesting to see the system they use if they do integrate both playstyles on one server.
Most people acknowledge that they literally can't accommodate both camps. Things that I want are fundamentally different from things other people want.
That isn't to say I wouldn't try it. I've been gaming for the majority of my life, just because I think OW PVP games are the best kinds of MMO's (and will defend it to the death with logic and objectivity), doesn't mean I don't enjoy other types of games.
Then I guess one of the two sides will be disappointed. Or maybe a portion of each.
And lastly for those that advocate some kind of loot system for pvp. If this is implemented in a game at all I would definitely not advocate full loot, that's just silly. Sure I get it, you want some spoils of war but we're playing a game and shouldn't be out to ruin the experience for someone entirely as community is really what drives a good MMO.
Welcome to the forums.
This was a good first post!
I'd just like to address one thing though in that many of us who advocate full loot systems do not do so because we want "spoils of war."
Some of us advocate them for many reasons of which that is not even one of them. I for example, would prefer a system that just deletes all of my items when I die over one that allows me to have permanent gear. So it isn't about getting other people's stuff.
I like full loot because I -DETEST- gear grinds, the sort of grind that exists in WOW, SWTOR, Rift, and almost every game i've ever played since Ultima Online.
I LOVE crafting and a robust player driven economy, two things that benefit most from a full loot system. I like character progression, but I prefer it to be endless. If there is a best in slot gear that I can get and own forever there is a definite end to my progression that doesn't exist if there is always a reason to amass more wealth to pad myself from the possibility of future loss.
And with that in mind I like risk/reward and actually having something on the line. The death penalty where i'm simply teleported to another place doesn't hold the same thrill for me. Nor does the loss of some experience that won't really impact my playing or the game as a whole in as meaningful a way.
I could go on, but my only point is for some of us it goes far beyond just wanting to gank people and take their stuff. It is an entire systematic effect on an entire game. And I feel not having full loot for the sake of people thinking it is too harsh comes with a high price. A price I personally do not enjoy paying, while I understand why many do.
And once again, when we start talking compromise on full loot pvp, we start compromising the integrity of the way the system can function with other games systems. None of this is to say any of this -requires- a full loot game. But my preference does not exist for any one single reason.
This is something many people fail to understand. In Full Loot pvp games, gear isn't really hard to get. It's more about customizing your character. There are only slightly varying qualities* of gear, but it's all fairly easy to get (you end up buying/finding multiple whole sets of gear for back ups). You don't have a gear treadmill + full loot pvp. it wouldn't make sense to run an epic quest for some uber awesome weapon, spend 2 or 3 months doing it, then drop it to some gang of losers as soon as you get killed for the first time.
Full loot pvp games have gear that focuses on customization (Plate for slower movement, more defense, or leather armor for more mobility and combat power, etc)
It's not about getting +5 str sword rare drop, then killing a raid mob for a +15 str sword, so that the next expansion you can kill the boss and get a +30 str sword.
That's not what full loot games are about.
Doesn't matter though. EQN isn't going to be that type of game anyway.
Exactly. Gear in UO and DF was more along the lines of just another kind of supply, like bandages or potions. Though of the two games I mentioned, I prefer DF's approach (and even that could be way better than it is) of varying levels of gear. On free UO servers that replicate (with some changes) pre-trammel era everybody basically runs around in barbed leather. Almost nobody wears plate or chain, definitely not ringmail. It's a little boring having everybody running around in the exact same armor, even if you can dye it.
DF has several tiers of totally viable armor at varying costs. For instance the the 4th, 5th and 6th (of 7 total) tiers of armor are studded, spiked, and intricate armor. You could potentially wear any of these sets and do fine against just about anybody. However, if you're feeling frisky, you can go out in a set of intricate (which probably costs about 8 times as much as studded) for the little bit of added protection. It adds more choices in the risk/reward department.
I'm not disagreeing with you that a system where armor is less valuable can work, after discussing with Ramandjinn i already stated I can see the merit of this.
However, then the raiding reward model that we are so use to would have to change, ie loot only. Perhaps persistent, albeit small, buffs for completing high/end game content would be in order. Or perhaps just bragging rights "glowy" like effects around the character for pure aesthetics... just a couple of examples. None the less my examples were stirctly working from the EQ1 ---> EQN point of view as a compromise.
Anyway, yes pure gear grind at the supposed end game has been done too much and solutions would be nice, yours is definitely one which could work but again you must offer the PVE raiders something as a reward for their time, especially if you are going to force them to pvp, as they so often put it. One of the problems for them, as I see it, is that if through pvp you can trivialize the time and dedication they put forth, and it is admirable in it's own right, then they would rather have none of that type of play at all... and I understand, my time is precious to me as well.
And lastly for those that advocate some kind of loot system for pvp. If this is implemented in a game at all I would definitely not advocate full loot, that's just silly. Sure I get it, you want some spoils of war but we're playing a game and shouldn't be out to ruin the experience for someone entirely as community is really what drives a good MMO.
Welcome to the forums.
This was a good first post!
I'd just like to address one thing though in that many of us who advocate full loot systems do not do so because we want "spoils of war."
Some of us advocate them for many reasons of which that is not even one of them. I for example, would prefer a system that just deletes all of my items when I die over one that allows me to have permanent gear. So it isn't about getting other people's stuff.
I like full loot because I -DETEST- gear grinds, the sort of grind that exists in WOW, SWTOR, Rift, and almost every game i've ever played since Ultima Online.
I LOVE crafting and a robust player driven economy, two things that benefit most from a full loot system. I like character progression, but I prefer it to be endless. If there is a best in slot gear that I can get and own forever there is a definite end to my progression that doesn't exist if there is always a reason to amass more wealth to pad myself from the possibility of future loss.
And with that in mind I like risk/reward and actually having something on the line. The death penalty where i'm simply teleported to another place doesn't hold the same thrill for me. Nor does the loss of some experience that won't really impact my playing or the game as a whole in as meaningful a way.
I could go on, but my only point is for some of us it goes far beyond just wanting to gank people and take their stuff. It is an entire systematic effect on an entire game. And I feel not having full loot for the sake of people thinking it is too harsh comes with a high price. A price I personally do not enjoy paying, while I understand why many do.
And once again, when we start talking compromise on full loot pvp, we start compromising the integrity of the way the system can function with other games systems. None of this is to say any of this -requires- a full loot game. But my preference does not exist for any one single reason.
This is something many people fail to understand. In Full Loot pvp games, gear isn't really hard to get. It's more about customizing your character. There are only slightly varying qualities* of gear, but it's all fairly easy to get (you end up buying/finding multiple whole sets of gear for back ups). You don't have a gear treadmill + full loot pvp. it wouldn't make sense to run an epic quest for some uber awesome weapon, spend 2 or 3 months doing it, then drop it to some gang of losers as soon as you get killed for the first time.
Full loot pvp games have gear that focuses on customization (Plate for slower movement, more defense, or leather armor for more mobility and combat power, etc)
It's not about getting +5 str sword rare drop, then killing a raid mob for a +15 str sword, so that the next expansion you can kill the boss and get a +30 str sword.
That's not what full loot games are about.
Doesn't matter though. EQN isn't going to be that type of game anyway.
Exactly. Gear in UO and DF was more along the lines of just another kind of supply, like bandages or potions. Though of the two games I mentioned, I prefer DF's approach (and even that could be way better than it is) of varying levels of gear. On free UO servers that replicate (with some changes) pre-trammel era everybody basically runs around in barbed leather. Almost nobody wears plate or chain, definitely not ringmail. It's a little boring having everybody running around in the exact same armor, even if you can dye it.
DF has several tiers of totally viable armor at varying costs. For instance the the 4th, 5th and 6th (of 7 total) tiers of armor are studded, spiked, and intricate armor. You could potentially wear any of these sets and do fine against just about anybody. However, if you're feeling frisky, you can go out in a set of intricate (which probably costs about 8 times as much as studded) for the little bit of added protection. It adds more choices in the risk/reward department.
I'm not disagreeing with you that a system where armor is less valuable can work, after discussing with Ramandjinn i already stated I can see the merit of this.
However, then the raiding reward model that we are so use to would have to change, ie loot only. Perhaps persistent, albeit small, buffs for completing high/end game content would be in order. Or perhaps just bragging rights "glowy" like effects around the character for pure aesthetics... just a couple of examples. None the less my examples were stirctly working from the EQ1 ---> EQN point of view as a compromise.
Anyway, yes pure gear grind at the supposed end game has been done too much and solutions would be nice, yours is definitely one which could work but again you must offer the PVE raiders something as a reward for their time, especially if you are going to force them to pvp, as they so often put it.
Simple, gold and materials. In DFUW a large portion of my clan (about 30 members or so) took on the hardest mob in the game. In an ow pvp full loot game. Granted the loot tables in the game kind of SUCK at the moment so the reward wasn't worth it, but that can be tweaked easily. To make the best gear in the game you need to have materials that only drop from high-end mobs.
Comments
You're 100% right that we can all get loud when we don't get what we want.
Do you think maybe though with it being the Everquest IP there is a little more expectation on the PVE side of the community for this to be their type of game?
Maybe in a general sense they are in fact expecting it a little more "their way" than we (the more PvP loving people) are?
Maybe not, I just thought in this case it does seem the PVE people are overall a little more adamant that it is going to be their type of game. I know I don't expect it to be anything like what I want.
Could be, but again we see more PvP thread here they PvE lol. The hot topic on this forum has been PvP from the start and I think both sides are sure of what they are going to get on Friday
Like you, I am ready to wait and get excited or walk away and never post on this forum again if its not a model I like. I did that with ESO, huge supporter of that game but now... well enough said Im not into game bashing over and over again. I express why I am not happy and walk away.
The problem with pvp in an mmo is it destroys the pve side. People start crying about balance so the devs nerf the hell out of things and so pve suffers for it. Its been that way in every mmo out there that wasn't specifically designed for pvp. You will never have a good balance in a game with pvp and pve. you will have your pve players suffering because pvpers cant think outside the box and make things work. they just start complaining until classes are nuked then pve players get screwed and have to either just live with it or make a whole new toon because theirs was borked for pvp. its a vicious never ending cycle that has happened to every mmo since wow.
my message to pvpers is if you cant kill someone then stop attacking them alone. dont run off and cry to the devs to get that guys character nerfed. balance isnt created by devs nerfing characters its created by players getting smarter about how they play their toon. If your squishy wizard cant take down that high resistance warrior then stop attacking him and start shooting the healer or rogue. if your warrior cant kill their archer because he roots you and blows you away with arrows then stop attacking him and start smashing their wizards. problem fixed balance restored.
Could you maybe re-read your post and consider that your perspective is heavily biased towards your side of the coin?
So PvP people "cry about balance" and devs nerf things for them. This is true at times. Is this not also true for PVE people wanting changes made that affect PvP?
Then there is the fact that a bad developer making bad decisions that have poor impacts on their game is not a basis for a universal truth. As such, the history of any MMO, whether it is WOW or SWTOR is not any sort of proof that acceptable balance cannot be had in a game with pvp and pve.
My message to you is, try to examine the subject from my perspective as if you found my playstyle enjoyable. Not in an attempt to like PvP or become a PvPer, but to maybe see why I feel your viewpoint is too biased to be a fair assessment.
He is right, PvPers do cry about class balance and it often ends in a nurf bat and PvEers often lose the class they love for the sake of PvP. What is wrong is this is not all PvPers but from a PvE fans point of view it looks just like that. I am interested to see what direction SoE takes EQN. Its one of only 3 paths, the hybrid MMO for PvP and PvE to try and get the most players. Or a Pure PvE game that will not balance classes based on PvP if it has any PvP at all. Or a pure PvP game, where all content is designed with PvP in mind. The later is one one I dont think SoE will go with but thats just my two cents =-)
http://www.twitch.tv/holophonist/c/1884956 <- there's a vod of me playing on a free uo shard with my little sister. If those are the actions of somebody who just wants to watch the world burn, then feel free to continue to slander me basically everytime we ever meet each other in a discussion.
And please... spare me the line about how you weren't technically talking about me. You've called me a griefer and a pker numerous times.
We are both right about that. I said the same thing as he.
And I agree with you that it isn't all PVE or PvP people, but some.
Where I disagree is in whose fault the problems are. I don't blame PvP or PvE people.
When a game is a mess I blame ONLY the developer of the game. The players are going to complain regardless of anything the developer does. IF a developer is ruining their game because of a vocal PvP group or PvE group then it is the developers fault for ruining the game, not the players.
I see a developer's job as to create and maintain a good game, if they cannot compromise properly on systems and retain the integrity of their game then they need to not compromise those systems.
That is a matter of opinion I know, and it is the matter which I disagree with many who want to blame players, or more specifically entire groups of players, for bad game decisions.
Can I point out that the only precedence that I can think of for this is in non-sandbox and non-ow pvp games. If I'm wrong, tell me. But it seems like we're using examples from games like WoW and trying to apply them to totally different kinds of games.
The ideal sandbox would probably have multiple professions and a lot of customization. There would be separate classes/builds/templates/whatever for pvp and for pve. They would rarely affect each other.
Thats a fair point.
So many people just assume every game is going to be WOW and start up an argument based on that. Maybe its all some people have played. I'm not sure.
It is easy to get sucked into an argument that holds this as a basis and lose sight of that fact.
Since I haven't really offered an opinion about EQN in particular: I'm guessing the game is NOT going to be a pure ow pvp game in any real sense of the term. I'm guess there will be some kind of flagging system (probably faction based?) or pvp zones or something like that. Considering ps2's anti-griefing mechanic, I'm sure EQN's is going to be something artificial like simply not being able to hurt your own faction members or people not in an opposing faction.
Basically I don't think it's going to have interesting, community-driven mechanics to curb griefing. That totally blows, but at the same time I won't be surprised. I never expected this or any other AAA game to "do it right."
you are kidding, right? thats compromise as saying "i want a steak, you want a pizza, ok, lets compromise: we will have steak but you can put a tommato sauce on yours"
I don't remember what you're for or against but what he suggested is like a perfect analog to the non-pvp's crowd's "compromise" of separate pvp and pve servers.
Not that the claim is substantial per se, but a VOD of someone playing with his sister will prove absolutely nothing whatsoever about their character. I've seen some family oriented grown men turn into complete utter garbage once they got some anonymity.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
I give you a VOD of me acting like the exact opposite of what some of you claim I am and you say it's not enough?
Maybe people just like OW pvp because it makes for more serious and satisfying gameplay. Maybe that's what it is. Maybe I'm not some demon spawn who has to feed on the blood of innocents.
now you are kidding, right? having any form of ffa pvp w/o separate servers is analog to have pvp only in form of dual/arena w/o any balancing or not having pvp at all
Yeah, that too.
This is something many people fail to understand. In Full Loot pvp games, gear isn't really hard to get. It's more about customizing your character. There are only slightly varying qualities* of gear, but it's all fairly easy to get (you end up buying/finding multiple whole sets of gear for back ups). You don't have a gear treadmill + full loot pvp. it wouldn't make sense to run an epic quest for some uber awesome weapon, spend 2 or 3 months doing it, then drop it to some gang of losers as soon as you get killed for the first time.
Full loot pvp games have gear that focuses on customization (Plate for slower movement, more defense, or leather armor for more mobility and combat power, etc)
It's not about getting +5 str sword rare drop, then killing a raid mob for a +15 str sword, so that the next expansion you can kill the boss and get a +30 str sword.
That's not what full loot games are about.
Doesn't matter though. EQN isn't going to be that type of game anyway.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Exactly. Gear in UO and DF was more along the lines of just another kind of supply, like bandages or potions. Though of the two games I mentioned, I prefer DF's approach (and even that could be way better than it is) of varying levels of gear. On free UO servers that replicate (with some changes) pre-trammel era everybody basically runs around in barbed leather. Almost nobody wears plate or chain, definitely not ringmail. It's a little boring having everybody running around in the exact same armor, even if you can dye it.
DF has several tiers of totally viable armor at varying costs. For instance the the 4th, 5th and 6th (of 7 total) tiers of armor are studded, spiked, and intricate armor. You could potentially wear any of these sets and do fine against just about anybody. However, if you're feeling frisky, you can go out in a set of intricate (which probably costs about 8 times as much as studded) for the little bit of added protection. It adds more choices in the risk/reward department.
I never claimed anything. I never asked for anything. But that VOD proves absolutely nothing. So I guess I am saying you're wasting your time by providing something that is not evidence to prove something you cannot prove.
There are different kinds of people out there, they play games for different reasons, the statement from Picard was most probably not personally to you as much as to the whole group of people that you represent, and what he said is his conclusions from what kind of people play those games in a manner which you appear to defend. Your "I only kill noto-PK's" claim is, again, not provable, you're just put in the group that is not so noble.
It's sort of a reverse No True Scottsman. You are arguing for a side a bunch of us have encountered in incarnation X. You claim that you're different from incarnation X. We a) don't care, because then you aren't part of the problem; b) don't believe you, so your statement is worthless.
The whole deal with roleplaying pirates is an iffy one. I do wonder if a person being an in-game scammer or griefer reflects back on their actual personality? I don't know. It's not like people who play EVE are roleplaying, really... I do know that team rage in team games definitely does transfer over, though.
Favorite MMO: Vanilla WoW
Currently playing: GW2, EVE
Excited for: Wildstar, maybe?
Here we are 600+ posts and it has yet again turned into another PvP vs PvE debate.
We'll see friday if EQN can create a world that can accomodate players from both camps..though they seem diametrically opposed here.
Will be interesting to see the system they use if they do integrate both playstyles on one server.
That's why I didn't quote you when linking it. Though I'm not sure if that's the case. I know several people have openly claimed that I'm probably a griefer or a pk or whatever else. But even so, I deliberately said "some of you." If you haven't, then fine.
And how exactly is it not evidence? It's a vod of me having a perfect opportunity to just kill somebody (we had him outnumbered), he was even being an asshole, and we only attacked him when he attacked me. If that's not evidence, I don't know what is. And more importantly, it's may more evidence than anything Jean-Luc or anybody else has offered to support their claim that I am what they claim I am.
No, it was about me. He's done it several times in totally separate conversations. That was just the most recent and accessible. Your judgement is clearly just clouded because he's on your side of the argument about pvp vs nonpvp.
And I never said my "I only kill noto-PK's" was provable. There is something called the burden of proof, and it's typically good practice to assume that people are innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent because it happens to advance a narrative. It's a common theme in this debate that ow pvp advocates want it simply because they like killing lower level players and fighting unfairly.
I'm not sure why you're viewing my defense of my own character as some kind of argument in favor of OW PVP. I have plenty of those arguments, thanks. Me defending myself is simply that, nothing more. I don't care if you think me vindicating myself solves the "problem."
If somebody lies about me, I'm going to correct them. How you can be against that I have absolutely no clue.
Not sure what this is about but if I had to guess if somebody is a prick in-game, they're probably at least MORE LIKELY to be a prick out of game. Doesn't mean they definitely are, but it's fair to assume that it makes it at least a bit more likely.
Most people acknowledge that they literally can't accommodate both camps. Things that I want are fundamentally different from things other people want.
That isn't to say I wouldn't try it. I've been gaming for the majority of my life, just because I think OW PVP games are the best kinds of MMO's (and will defend it to the death with logic and objectivity), doesn't mean I don't enjoy other types of games.
Then I guess one of the two sides will be disappointed. Or maybe a portion of each.
I'm not disagreeing with you that a system where armor is less valuable can work, after discussing with Ramandjinn i already stated I can see the merit of this.
However, then the raiding reward model that we are so use to would have to change, ie loot only. Perhaps persistent, albeit small, buffs for completing high/end game content would be in order. Or perhaps just bragging rights "glowy" like effects around the character for pure aesthetics... just a couple of examples. None the less my examples were stirctly working from the EQ1 ---> EQN point of view as a compromise.
Anyway, yes pure gear grind at the supposed end game has been done too much and solutions would be nice, yours is definitely one which could work but again you must offer the PVE raiders something as a reward for their time, especially if you are going to force them to pvp, as they so often put it. One of the problems for them, as I see it, is that if through pvp you can trivialize the time and dedication they put forth, and it is admirable in it's own right, then they would rather have none of that type of play at all... and I understand, my time is precious to me as well.
Simple, gold and materials. In DFUW a large portion of my clan (about 30 members or so) took on the hardest mob in the game. In an ow pvp full loot game. Granted the loot tables in the game kind of SUCK at the moment so the reward wasn't worth it, but that can be tweaked easily. To make the best gear in the game you need to have materials that only drop from high-end mobs.