Honestly, if you have to even ask this question....... Then you just wont get it, no matter how well its explained here. You really need to play a game with real risk to understand how ow pvp enhances the experience and makes the world truly come alive.
What I am going to say will ruffle some feathers but whatever.
In competitive structured PvP, bad players won't have fun. Because their skill at the game is lower then their opponents, they will lose every time (if the game is actually somewhat balanced). Its one of the main reason that, despite WoW having a huge playerbase, many of the players stay away from Arena. PvE is much easier and forgiving.
In open world PvP, where its common to have zerg vs zerg, numbers, and not skill more times then not will determine the outcome of battles. Sure, you can have amazingly skilled players or players that have great tactics in open world pvp that pull off amazing feats despite being at an advantage, but again, more often then not the bigger zerg numbers will win out. And because the size is so important, bad players can join in and have a role to play.
Let me start by saying that I do pvp, when it is organized or structured. In numerous games I have logged in and pvp'd til I logged off. Structured pvp, at least for me, can be fun and your working towards and a common goal that could result in unique gear, buffs for you faction, titles and achievements. What is perplexing is the need for open ffa pvp. I mean what's the point?
I play games to escape reality, immerse myself in a fantasy world where RL problems can be forgotten, if even just for a moment. Why does the pvp crowd insist on having OWPVP in games. As far as I have seen what is the reward? In structured pvp at least your working towards the titles, gear, achievements whatever whereas in OWPVP what is the ultimate goal? As I have seen there isn't any ultimate goal... unless you count the ability to grief other players a goal.
In all the games I have ever played I have VERY RARELY seen OWPVP be beneficial. Its always some high level player exacting punishment on a low level player or under skilled player. Its seems to me that OWPVP is just a measuring stick for epeens.
Why cant we have a ffa OWPVP server and a structured pvp PVE server, like most games do it? This way you hardcore pvp'rs can gank each other til your heats content while never forcing your gameplay on us who care not to OWPVP. Please tell me what you proponents of OWPVP really need with ffa PVP on every server? Cant you guys just get on your own server and duke it out? I am asking because I really do not see why you feel the need to include us players who prefer spvp and pve content in your gameplay style. help me understand. Take care and Happy Hunting.
Its not just about PvP ,its a RPG crowd who just wants their worlds served with full rules.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Originally posted by Mandible Honestly, if you have to even ask this question....... Then you just wont get it, no matter how well its explained here. You really need to play a game with real risk to understand how ow pvp enhances the experience and makes the world truly come alive.
And you don't seem to understand that ow pvp is not fun for some.
I played UO beta ... yuck ... ow pvp degrades my experiences and it was not fun.
What I am going to say will ruffle some feathers but whatever.
In competitive structured PvP, bad players won't have fun. Because their skill at the game is lower then their opponents, they will lose every time (if the game is actually somewhat balanced). Its one of the main reason that, despite WoW having a huge playerbase, many of the players stay away from Arena. PvE is much easier and forgiving.
In open world PvP, where its common to have zerg vs zerg, numbers, and not skill more times then not will determine the outcome of battles. Sure, you can have amazingly skilled players or players that have great tactics in open world pvp that pull off amazing feats despite being at an advantage, but again, more often then not the bigger zerg numbers will win out. And because the size is so important, bad players can join in and have a role to play.
I don't know if the so called bad players would agree with you. Or everyone playing pvp games for that matter.
In competive structured Pvp games you do have usually some matchmaking criteria.. and some of those are actually good, so you bad player will play against other bad player and will have his fair share of fun(or wins) as the pro player, too. Just the level they are competing is completely different.
Whereas in a open world scenario those bad players have to run with the zerg, and really do just win when they highly outnumber their opponent, and not even then all the time.. and i really don't know if that is so much fun. You do have almost zero influence, and your win is dependent on numbers and luck.. i am really not sure if that will generate long term fun.
The good players on the other side may lose to larger zergs once in a while, although you can retreat in some games, but will win equall zergs, and even will win sometimes against bigger zergs. And i can guarantee you that it is a lot of fun if you kill a zerg two or three time as large as yours.. you have to be, and you are highly focused, and your team plays very organized and well.. and that is really fun.
With other words.. i do think that open world pvp prefers the better player a little more, when it comes down to fun. But i do agree.. if you have a competive structured pvp game without any matchmaking it will not be fun beside for a small number of selected few.. the top of the iceberg.
But in all honestly.. all competive structured pvp games should have a good matchmaking.. because basicly everyone profits from that.. because as pro it is not fun to steamroll others, when they have not even the slightest chance.. it is wasting time.
Originally posted by ApraxisBut in all honestly.. all competive structured pvp games should have a good matchmaking.. because basicly everyone profits from that.. because as pro it is not fun to steamroll others, when they have not even the slightest chance.. it is wasting time.
Heres 1 system which works perfectly in that game.
Level range
You cannot fight any other player you meet, your opponent needs to be in your level range. Pvp range is a bit wider then teaming range. General formula for calculating your pvp range is:
minimum level you can PvP with = your level * 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 80, but cant pvp with lvl 79)
maximum level you can PvP with = your level / 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 125, but cant pvp with lvl 126)
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Originally posted by ApraxisBut in all honestly.. all competive structured pvp games should have a good matchmaking.. because basicly everyone profits from that.. because as pro it is not fun to steamroll others, when they have not even the slightest chance.. it is wasting time.
Heres 1 system which works perfectly in that game.
Level range
You cannot fight any other player you meet, your opponent needs to be in your level range. Pvp range is a bit wider then teaming range. General formula for calculating your pvp range is:
minimum level you can PvP with = your level * 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 80, but cant pvp with lvl 79)
maximum level you can PvP with = your level / 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 125, but cant pvp with lvl 126)
Level don't work. Level != skill. The same is true for gear score.. as much as i know Wildstar is introducing a real on player skill based matchmaking. In RTS the starcraft matchmaking works very well.. as some others in other games
I don't PvP much. I am mostly PvE oriented. But, my guess is that open world PvP offers one element that structured PvP cannot which is the element of unknown, the thrill of unexpected and unplanned.
Originally posted by ApraxisBut in all honestly.. all competive structured pvp games should have a good matchmaking.. because basicly everyone profits from that.. because as pro it is not fun to steamroll others, when they have not even the slightest chance.. it is wasting time.
Heres 1 system which works perfectly in that game.
Level range
You cannot fight any other player you meet, your opponent needs to be in your level range. Pvp range is a bit wider then teaming range. General formula for calculating your pvp range is:
minimum level you can PvP with = your level * 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 80, but cant pvp with lvl 79)
maximum level you can PvP with = your level / 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 125, but cant pvp with lvl 126)
Level don't work. Level != skill. The same is true for gear score.. as much as i know Wildstar is introducing a real on player skill based matchmaking. In RTS the starcraft matchmaking works very well.. as some others in other games
No idea about those games but in this game it is a pure skill to know what level PvP character and what class you are going to even build.
Lets say for example that theres some uber lvl165 healer lets call her Neharo who have cured baldness for years of her friends and spread diseases on her enemies,what should i do,well i would roll ~205 PvP twink,would like to roll class which is perfect against her at lvl 205 ,i would need to check what gear i can get at lvl 205 for my class/race,perks, etc.
And what makes it even more interesting is that 220(which is max level) can attack my 205 then.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Let me start by saying that I do pvp, when it is organized or structured. In numerous games I have logged in and pvp'd til I logged off. Structured pvp, at least for me, can be fun and your working towards and a common goal that could result in unique gear, buffs for you faction, titles and achievements. What is perplexing is the need for open ffa pvp. I mean what's the point?
I play games to escape reality, immerse myself in a fantasy world where RL problems can be forgotten, if even just for a moment. Why does the pvp crowd insist on having OWPVP in games. As far as I have seen what is the reward? In structured pvp at least your working towards the titles, gear, achievements whatever whereas in OWPVP what is the ultimate goal? As I have seen there isn't any ultimate goal... unless you count the ability to grief other players a goal.
In all the games I have ever played I have VERY RARELY seen OWPVP be beneficial. Its always some high level player exacting punishment on a low level player or under skilled player. Its seems to me that OWPVP is just a measuring stick for epeens.
Why cant we have a ffa OWPVP server and a structured pvp PVE server, like most games do it? This way you hardcore pvp'rs can gank each other til your heats content while never forcing your gameplay on us who care not to OWPVP. Please tell me what you proponents of OWPVP really need with ffa PVP on every server? Cant you guys just get on your own server and duke it out? I am asking because I really do not see why you feel the need to include us players who prefer spvp and pve content in your gameplay style. help me understand. Take care and Happy Hunting.
all problems listed here have nothing to do with pvp being a bad decision, but bad design decisions leading to bad pvp environments. PVP isn't the problem, Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
Let me start by saying that I do pvp, when it is organized or structured. In numerous games I have logged in and pvp'd til I logged off. Structured pvp, at least for me, can be fun and your working towards and a common goal that could result in unique gear, buffs for you faction, titles and achievements. What is perplexing is the need for open ffa pvp. I mean what's the point?
I play games to escape reality, immerse myself in a fantasy world where RL problems can be forgotten, if even just for a moment. Why does the pvp crowd insist on having OWPVP in games. As far as I have seen what is the reward? In structured pvp at least your working towards the titles, gear, achievements whatever whereas in OWPVP what is the ultimate goal? As I have seen there isn't any ultimate goal... unless you count the ability to grief other players a goal.
In all the games I have ever played I have VERY RARELY seen OWPVP be beneficial. Its always some high level player exacting punishment on a low level player or under skilled player. Its seems to me that OWPVP is just a measuring stick for epeens.
Why cant we have a ffa OWPVP server and a structured pvp PVE server, like most games do it? This way you hardcore pvp'rs can gank each other til your heats content while never forcing your gameplay on us who care not to OWPVP. Please tell me what you proponents of OWPVP really need with ffa PVP on every server? Cant you guys just get on your own server and duke it out? I am asking because I really do not see why you feel the need to include us players who prefer spvp and pve content in your gameplay style. help me understand. Take care and Happy Hunting.
The trick is knowing who we're talking about.
These aren't serious PVPers. They're casuals. Players who want OWPVP are not interested in a game where the skiled player wins, but in a game where they can unskillfully accumulate as many advantages as possible. This includes the big stuff like population advantages (zerging) and progression advantages (gear/level), but they will also push to get additional advantages: like fighting players who just want to PVE, and are less likely to fight back.
Thankfully (and understandably) most players seem to dislike this style of PVP and have no interest in something being victims. So the more hardcore PVP games out there (non-MMORPGs) end up doing far better, and the more casual PVP games (MMORPGs) end up creating rules to ensure PVP is optional.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
Yeah .... if that entertains more players, and make more money, is there anything wrong with doing that?
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those "carebear" zergs 3 vs 20.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those carebear zergs 3 vs 20.
Those 3 guys could be the carebears and the 20 could be brave, it just depends on the game. I have played plenty of mmorpgs where 3 guys could easily kill 20 players. For one, if its gear and level based, there could be a huge disparity in power. One of those 3 guys could even have more health than all 20 of the zerg combined. One 30 second mez and half those 20 players could be dead. Hell I have seen it happen time and again in DAoC especially after ToA.
When a PvP mmorpg exists where two level 30s can kill a level 60, by all means count me in. Sadly that level 60 usually has over 20k health compared to the 2k health of the level 30s....
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those carebear zergs 3 vs 20.
Those 3 guys could be the carebears and the 20 could be brave, it just depends on the game. I have played plenty of mmorpgs where 3 guys could easily kill 20 players. For one, if its gear and level based, there could be a huge disparity in power. One of those 3 guys could even have more health than all 20 of the zerg combined. One 30 second mez and half those 20 players could be dead. Hell I have seen it happen time and again in DAoC especially after ToA.
When a PvP mmorpg exists where two level 30s can kill a level 60, by all means count me in. Sadly that level 60 usually has over 20k health compared to the 2k health of the level 30s....
Lemme introduce to you couple of examples of "skill" based gaming
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those carebear zergs 3 vs 20.
Those 3 guys could be the carebears and the 20 could be brave, it just depends on the game. I have played plenty of mmorpgs where 3 guys could easily kill 20 players. For one, if its gear and level based, there could be a huge disparity in power. One of those 3 guys could even have more health than all 20 of the zerg combined. One 30 second mez and half those 20 players could be dead. Hell I have seen it happen time and again in DAoC especially after ToA.
When a PvP mmorpg exists where two level 30s can kill a level 60, by all means count me in. Sadly that level 60 usually has over 20k health compared to the 2k health of the level 30s....
Lemme introduce to you couple of examples of "skill" based gaming
WoW is the most carebear game in existence, especially for pvp. Remember World of Roguecraft? The guy runs around with no armor and a 1-2 damage dagger and rapes people. Sounds awful carebear that in a game that is 100% about gear, your the only class that can easily drop people with no gear.
I remember vanilla WoW, which was actually decent for world pvp. 20 v 20 fights at south shore were a blast. Then after BC, that ended that. 20 v 20 fights would end up with 1 max level guy with retarded gear coming in and ruining it. I remember playing a hunter back in vanilla. Hunter traps affected you no matter the level as well as most of your abilities. That of course changed because people moaned " i am level 60, a level 30 shouldnt be able to hit me", yea, thats carebear shit.
WoW is also notorious for being macro friendly. When someone can run around pressing 1 button and dominate people, I find it hard to label that "skilled".
Now Counter Strike is a completely different genre, but even CS can be awful carebear. If I dominate you I get better weapons making it even easier to dominate you. So the people that lack skill will also lack the equipment needed to compete...
Give me a game where tactics are as valuable as skill and gear. Where the underdog has a chance and isnt simply a guaranteed kill.
Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those carebear zergs 3 vs 20.
Those 3 guys could be the carebears and the 20 could be brave, it just depends on the game. I have played plenty of mmorpgs where 3 guys could easily kill 20 players. For one, if its gear and level based, there could be a huge disparity in power. One of those 3 guys could even have more health than all 20 of the zerg combined. One 30 second mez and half those 20 players could be dead. Hell I have seen it happen time and again in DAoC especially after ToA.
When a PvP mmorpg exists where two level 30s can kill a level 60, by all means count me in. Sadly that level 60 usually has over 20k health compared to the 2k health of the level 30s....
Lemme introduce to you couple of examples of "skill" based gaming
WoW is the most carebear game in existence, especially for pvp. Remember World of Roguecraft? The guy runs around with no armor and a 1-2 damage dagger and rapes people. Sounds awful carebear that in a game that is 100% about gear, your the only class that can easily drop people with no gear.
I remember vanilla WoW, which was actually decent for world pvp. 20 v 20 fights at south shore were a blast. Then after BC, that ended that. 20 v 20 fights would end up with 1 max level guy with retarded gear coming in and ruining it. I remember playing a hunter back in vanilla. Hunter traps affected you no matter the level as well as most of your abilities. That of course changed because people moaned " i am level 60, a level 30 shouldnt be able to hit me", yea, thats carebear shit.
WoW is also notorious for being macro friendly. When someone can run around pressing 1 button and dominate people, I find it hard to label that "skilled".
Now Counter Strike is a completely different genre, but even CS can be awful carebear. If I dominate you I get better weapons making it even easier to dominate you. So the people that lack skill will also lack the equipment needed to compete...
Give me a game where tactics are as valuable as skill and gear. Where the underdog has a chance and isnt simply a guaranteed kill.
Vov,first you say thats its "carebear" to wear uber gear and now that its "carebear" to play with no armor.
And i was at vanilla and our battles were more like 50 vs 50 or more.
Its is a tactic to wear right gear in right situation.
+ in some heavy weight games you need to work hard to get them,without friends you wont be able to do that,with right amount of money ,perhaps, choose your "tactic" wisely.
++ I was not going to write anything about "skill" if you cant see how Clazzi tries to stay on right distance for example then you just cant see it or those incredible things that Pubmasters do,its just crazy "skill"
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Vov,first you say thats its "carebear" to wear uber gear and now that its "carebear" to play with no armor.
And i was at vanilla and our battles were more like 50 vs 50 or more.
Its is a tactic to wear right gear in right situation.
+ in some heavy weight games you need to work hard to get them,without friends you wont be able to do that,with right amount of money ,perhaps, choose your "tactic" wisely.
In a game where uber gear is a damn near requirement, to have one class that doesnt have to follow that rule is a bit odd wouldnt you say. Also wearing gear isnt a tactic in MMORPGs today. If lighter armor gave you more movement speed, then gear choices open up, but this doesnt happen. Gear is dumbed down in most games to the point where you have 1 set to work for.
PvEing to get gear so you can PvP, I wouldnt call that working hard. This is why I dont enjoy gear based games, it just leads to bad players in good gear losing fights to evenly matched opponents, so they leave and go find less geared players to fight.
Vov,first you say thats its "carebear" to wear uber gear and now that its "carebear" to play with no armor.
And i was at vanilla and our battles were more like 50 vs 50 or more.
Its is a tactic to wear right gear in right situation.
+ in some heavy weight games you need to work hard to get them,without friends you wont be able to do that,with right amount of money ,perhaps, choose your "tactic" wisely.
In a game where uber gear is a damn near requirement, to have one class that doesnt have to follow that rule is a bit odd wouldnt you say. Also wearing gear isnt a tactic in MMORPGs today. If lighter armor gave you more movement speed, then gear choices open up, but this doesnt happen. Gear is dumbed down in most games to the point where you have 1 set to work for.
PvEing to get gear so you can PvP, I wouldnt call that working hard. This is why I dont enjoy gear based games, it just leads to bad players in good gear losing fights to evenly matched opponents, so they leave and go find less geared players to fight.
Sure its not in "todays" games but the problem is that "todays" games plays like that 1 level rogue pretty much.
Everybody spamming just couple buttons , there is even less "tactics" now ,i agree completely but why it is like that today ?
well my answer is that devs tries to make it so that everybody could get their chance to feel like Clazzi.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014. **On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Vov,first you say thats its "carebear" to wear uber gear and now that its "carebear" to play with no armor.
And i was at vanilla and our battles were more like 50 vs 50 or more.
Its is a tactic to wear right gear in right situation.
+ in some heavy weight games you need to work hard to get them,without friends you wont be able to do that,with right amount of money ,perhaps, choose your "tactic" wisely.
In a game where uber gear is a damn near requirement, to have one class that doesnt have to follow that rule is a bit odd wouldnt you say. Also wearing gear isnt a tactic in MMORPGs today. If lighter armor gave you more movement speed, then gear choices open up, but this doesnt happen. Gear is dumbed down in most games to the point where you have 1 set to work for.
PvEing to get gear so you can PvP, I wouldnt call that working hard. This is why I dont enjoy gear based games, it just leads to bad players in good gear losing fights to evenly matched opponents, so they leave and go find less geared players to fight.
Sure its not in "todays" games but the problem is that "todays" games plays like that 1 level rogue pretty much.
Everybody spamming just couple buttons , there is even less "tactics" now ,i agree completely but why it is like that today ?
well my answer is that devs tries to make it so that everybody could get their chance to feel like Clazzi.
The less abilities they give us, the easier it is to balance. Also notice how we get little choice in how our character develops. I would be happy having 10 slots for abilities with me getting to choose what goes there, including passives. You could create a character with 4 abilities, 2 buffs, 1 heal, 3 passives or you could go with 10 abilities. I like having that kind of choice. I would love to be able to decrease the effective damage of an ability to give it either more range, lower cooldown, tack on a spreadheal, or whatever. MMORPG's are becoming less and less about choice and more about strict linear design.
Guildwars 2 was such a damn letdown. I prefer GW1 character design philosophy by far. GW1 let you choose your abilities which let you develop your own tactics and style of fighting.
Originally posted by Phynn bcbully i can see where it could deter some griefing but aside from that what is the benefit of having a game where all servers are OWPVP? Cant we let the pvp'rs have their own place to knock each other around and leave us that don't care for it alone?
That totally depends on the type of open world pvp and the game itself.
If the game is completely build around PVP then OWPVP makes sense. I think it's fact that the majority of players don't want the things they worked hard (game-wise) to be destroyed just because other people can. Then there is a large niche comminuty that say's otherwise. The love the thrill of PvP and if this can be achieved in a sandbox type of game the more fun it could be for them. You see a open world pvp player has a different mindset then a pve player. A pvp players wants to defeat that other player, destroy his house if possible. The pvp player that get's attacked knows what he is in for. His house get's destroyed he better take masure's to counter that. He doesn't want to be killed in a full loot game so again he takes masure's to make sure he's not carrying to much of worth or if he is then again makes sure he might be surrounded by friends or guildies.
The thing is you only need to understand that gamers can play with a different mindset then yours.
Same for me, I have a different mindset when entering a MMO or MMORPG, a FPS, A RTS you name it.......If I would enter each game with the same mindset I would set myself up for a terrible boring game experiance.
Comments
What I am going to say will ruffle some feathers but whatever.
In competitive structured PvP, bad players won't have fun. Because their skill at the game is lower then their opponents, they will lose every time (if the game is actually somewhat balanced). Its one of the main reason that, despite WoW having a huge playerbase, many of the players stay away from Arena. PvE is much easier and forgiving.
In open world PvP, where its common to have zerg vs zerg, numbers, and not skill more times then not will determine the outcome of battles. Sure, you can have amazingly skilled players or players that have great tactics in open world pvp that pull off amazing feats despite being at an advantage, but again, more often then not the bigger zerg numbers will win out. And because the size is so important, bad players can join in and have a role to play.
Its not just about PvP ,its a RPG crowd who just wants their worlds served with full rules.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
And you don't seem to understand that ow pvp is not fun for some.
I played UO beta ... yuck ... ow pvp degrades my experiences and it was not fun.
I don't know if the so called bad players would agree with you. Or everyone playing pvp games for that matter.
In competive structured Pvp games you do have usually some matchmaking criteria.. and some of those are actually good, so you bad player will play against other bad player and will have his fair share of fun(or wins) as the pro player, too. Just the level they are competing is completely different.
Whereas in a open world scenario those bad players have to run with the zerg, and really do just win when they highly outnumber their opponent, and not even then all the time.. and i really don't know if that is so much fun. You do have almost zero influence, and your win is dependent on numbers and luck.. i am really not sure if that will generate long term fun.
The good players on the other side may lose to larger zergs once in a while, although you can retreat in some games, but will win equall zergs, and even will win sometimes against bigger zergs. And i can guarantee you that it is a lot of fun if you kill a zerg two or three time as large as yours.. you have to be, and you are highly focused, and your team plays very organized and well.. and that is really fun.
With other words.. i do think that open world pvp prefers the better player a little more, when it comes down to fun. But i do agree.. if you have a competive structured pvp game without any matchmaking it will not be fun beside for a small number of selected few.. the top of the iceberg.
But in all honestly.. all competive structured pvp games should have a good matchmaking.. because basicly everyone profits from that.. because as pro it is not fun to steamroll others, when they have not even the slightest chance.. it is wasting time.
Level range
You cannot fight any other player you meet, your opponent needs to be in your level range. Pvp range is a bit wider then teaming range. General formula for calculating your pvp range is:
minimum level you can PvP with = your level * 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 80, but cant pvp with lvl 79)
maximum level you can PvP with = your level / 0.8 (ie. level 100 can pvp with lvl 125, but cant pvp with lvl 126)
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Level don't work. Level != skill. The same is true for gear score.. as much as i know Wildstar is introducing a real on player skill based matchmaking. In RTS the starcraft matchmaking works very well.. as some others in other games
No idea about those games but in this game it is a pure skill to know what level PvP character and what class you are going to even build.
Lets say for example that theres some uber lvl165 healer lets call her Neharo who have cured baldness for years of her friends and spread diseases on her enemies,what should i do,well i would roll ~205 PvP twink,would like to roll class which is perfect against her at lvl 205 ,i would need to check what gear i can get at lvl 205 for my class/race,perks, etc.
And what makes it even more interesting is that 220(which is max level) can attack my 205 then.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
all problems listed here have nothing to do with pvp being a bad decision, but bad design decisions leading to bad pvp environments. PVP isn't the problem, Devs who don't want to embrace it, make a worthwhile OWPVP system with checks and balances is the real issue, not the players.
The people that are trying to make the world worse never take a day off , why should I. Light up the darkness Bob Marley
The trick is knowing who we're talking about.
These aren't serious PVPers. They're casuals. Players who want OWPVP are not interested in a game where the skiled player wins, but in a game where they can unskillfully accumulate as many advantages as possible. This includes the big stuff like population advantages (zerging) and progression advantages (gear/level), but they will also push to get additional advantages: like fighting players who just want to PVE, and are less likely to fight back.
Thankfully (and understandably) most players seem to dislike this style of PVP and have no interest in something being victims. So the more hardcore PVP games out there (non-MMORPGs) end up doing far better, and the more casual PVP games (MMORPGs) end up creating rules to ensure PVP is optional.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Of course they don't. Why spend resources on something with little perceived demand?
It is not like owpvp has not been tried before. All the devs took a look, and said,"let's do something else".
lol yeah, I think you mean most AAA dev teams are trying to release more pvp in future games and break away from the carebear ill hold your hand will you pick gum drops from trees mmorpgs. emoters killed the mmorpg genre. And gave us the ftp era...
Yeah .... if that entertains more players, and make more money, is there anything wrong with doing that?
The problem is that most PvP is about as carebear as you get. When gear is the most important factor when determining the outcome of a fight, you see an awful lot of carebear mentality going on. This giant guild over here, when you join you instantly get the best gear, now it takes 2-3 people with inferior gear to kill you.
The problem with the phrase care bear is that it leads people to believe that only one side gets all the hand holding, that usually being the PvErs. This actually depends on the game. Dont act like certain corps in eve didnt moan and subsequently get gifted massive amounts of isk.
PvPers always act like they are the most skilled people on the planet and that purple gear that lets them wade through 20 lowbies with no threat of death, yea thats skill there...
And what about those guys who fights like a brave and beats those "carebear" zergs 3 vs 20.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Those 3 guys could be the carebears and the 20 could be brave, it just depends on the game. I have played plenty of mmorpgs where 3 guys could easily kill 20 players. For one, if its gear and level based, there could be a huge disparity in power. One of those 3 guys could even have more health than all 20 of the zerg combined. One 30 second mez and half those 20 players could be dead. Hell I have seen it happen time and again in DAoC especially after ToA.
When a PvP mmorpg exists where two level 30s can kill a level 60, by all means count me in. Sadly that level 60 usually has over 20k health compared to the 2k health of the level 30s....
Lemme introduce to you couple of examples of "skill" based gaming
WoW : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8iSRYlfr70
CS : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqkYmVWdxVE
You say those are "carebears" ?
lemme find you good example of this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lRQd_AGWc8
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
WoW is the most carebear game in existence, especially for pvp. Remember World of Roguecraft? The guy runs around with no armor and a 1-2 damage dagger and rapes people. Sounds awful carebear that in a game that is 100% about gear, your the only class that can easily drop people with no gear.
I remember vanilla WoW, which was actually decent for world pvp. 20 v 20 fights at south shore were a blast. Then after BC, that ended that. 20 v 20 fights would end up with 1 max level guy with retarded gear coming in and ruining it. I remember playing a hunter back in vanilla. Hunter traps affected you no matter the level as well as most of your abilities. That of course changed because people moaned " i am level 60, a level 30 shouldnt be able to hit me", yea, thats carebear shit.
WoW is also notorious for being macro friendly. When someone can run around pressing 1 button and dominate people, I find it hard to label that "skilled".
Now Counter Strike is a completely different genre, but even CS can be awful carebear. If I dominate you I get better weapons making it even easier to dominate you. So the people that lack skill will also lack the equipment needed to compete...
Give me a game where tactics are as valuable as skill and gear. Where the underdog has a chance and isnt simply a guaranteed kill.
Vov,first you say thats its "carebear" to wear uber gear and now that its "carebear" to play with no armor.
And i was at vanilla and our battles were more like 50 vs 50 or more.
Its is a tactic to wear right gear in right situation.
+ in some heavy weight games you need to work hard to get them,without friends you wont be able to do that,with right amount of money ,perhaps, choose your "tactic" wisely.
++ I was not going to write anything about "skill" if you cant see how Clazzi tries to stay on right distance for example then you just cant see it or those incredible things that Pubmasters do,its just crazy "skill"
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
In a game where uber gear is a damn near requirement, to have one class that doesnt have to follow that rule is a bit odd wouldnt you say. Also wearing gear isnt a tactic in MMORPGs today. If lighter armor gave you more movement speed, then gear choices open up, but this doesnt happen. Gear is dumbed down in most games to the point where you have 1 set to work for.
PvEing to get gear so you can PvP, I wouldnt call that working hard. This is why I dont enjoy gear based games, it just leads to bad players in good gear losing fights to evenly matched opponents, so they leave and go find less geared players to fight.
Sure its not in "todays" games but the problem is that "todays" games plays like that 1 level rogue pretty much.
Everybody spamming just couple buttons , there is even less "tactics" now ,i agree completely but why it is like that today ?
well my answer is that devs tries to make it so that everybody could get their chance to feel like Clazzi.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
The less abilities they give us, the easier it is to balance. Also notice how we get little choice in how our character develops. I would be happy having 10 slots for abilities with me getting to choose what goes there, including passives. You could create a character with 4 abilities, 2 buffs, 1 heal, 3 passives or you could go with 10 abilities. I like having that kind of choice. I would love to be able to decrease the effective damage of an ability to give it either more range, lower cooldown, tack on a spreadheal, or whatever. MMORPG's are becoming less and less about choice and more about strict linear design.
Guildwars 2 was such a damn letdown. I prefer GW1 character design philosophy by far. GW1 let you choose your abilities which let you develop your own tactics and style of fighting.
That totally depends on the type of open world pvp and the game itself.
If the game is completely build around PVP then OWPVP makes sense. I think it's fact that the majority of players don't want the things they worked hard (game-wise) to be destroyed just because other people can. Then there is a large niche comminuty that say's otherwise. The love the thrill of PvP and if this can be achieved in a sandbox type of game the more fun it could be for them. You see a open world pvp player has a different mindset then a pve player. A pvp players wants to defeat that other player, destroy his house if possible. The pvp player that get's attacked knows what he is in for. His house get's destroyed he better take masure's to counter that. He doesn't want to be killed in a full loot game so again he takes masure's to make sure he's not carrying to much of worth or if he is then again makes sure he might be surrounded by friends or guildies.
The thing is you only need to understand that gamers can play with a different mindset then yours.
Same for me, I have a different mindset when entering a MMO or MMORPG, a FPS, A RTS you name it.......If I would enter each game with the same mindset I would set myself up for a terrible boring game experiance.