New PvP Snippet from gaminggroove.com
By
Adron,
Posted on: 2004-10-13 11:12 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
That sound like the interview I read months ago and can't find any more, could you give us the link so I can read the whole thing please?
Thanking you in advance 
The key for me is that PvE and PvP balance be kept seperate. The inability to do so ruined DAoC for me.
I would suggest that there is NO PvE of any kind in the PvP environment since balancing the two is what causes no end of problems for players and devs. Perhaps Cryptic has a way around this but I'd be far happier with no intersection between the two.
Enter a consentual PvP zone, whatever tweaks that are required to balance for PvP replace or supplement the PvE powersets - exit the PvP zone, and the PvE rules go back into effect.
[ QUOTE ]
That sound like the interview I read months ago and can't find any more, could you give us the link so I can read the whole thing please?
Thanking you in advance
[/ QUOTE ]
well, this one is oct 11, so I think it's newer, it also mentions the epic archetype being introduced in the next publish- which I KNOW would make waves, so I doubt it's a repost.
http://www.gaminggroove.com/article.php?id=21
Thanks for the link, good read. It is much newer than the one I read before and I belive slightly different in its direction. Which is good that mean the Dev's are fluid with their Idea's and willing to adjust.
I'm still hopeing at the first release of PvP they will have it very restrictive hammer out the bugs and then open it up a little more. Repeat, Repeat , Repeat. I'm afraid of the jini getting out of the bottle an not being able to put it back in.
Besides balance issue's always mean a nerf for someone and nobody likes a nerf.....
[ QUOTE ]
I'm still hopeing at the first release of PvP they will have it very restrictive hammer out the bugs and then open it up a little more. Repeat, Repeat , Repeat. I'm afraid of the jini getting out of the bottle an not being able to put it back in.
Besides balance issue's always mean a nerf for someone and nobody likes a nerf.....
[/ QUOTE ]
That's how I see it. The fact that the devs are conscious of the "stigma" associated with PvP and the expression that they'd prefer to change this suggests they're going to take careful, incremental steps, and not rush blindly into something too big
First of all, great OP! I like getting info straight from the source. Although its still vague its a good read.
Second, the DEVs would love to see all the ATs and their variations represented when the arenas are coded into the test server. That is a given.
The fact that they are tweaking certain powers on ATs tells me that they are giving this as much consideration as they can.
That very same reason concerns me a bit. The fact that there are ATs that are too powerful to be let loose on the PvP arenas. (I suspected this) So they are tweaking them.
I have an idea which ones they might be but it should prove interesting.
Since it mentions design is underway for PvP, so it's recent, because that's what I've been doing.
Am I going to tell you what we're planning? At this stage? Are you mad?!
[ QUOTE ]
Am I going to tell you what we're planning? At this stage? Are you mad?!
[/ QUOTE ]
Sir, I think it is safe to say that we are INSANE with curiosity!!
PVP will either make tankers useless or one of the most important things to have. It all comes down to if Taunt forces a PC to not be able to target anyone but the tanker or not.
I get the feeling the CoV was a cool idea, but the people who actually have to make it say on a daily basis "How in the CRAP are we going to do this?" and "What was he thinking making those promises?" PVP.... *good* PVP is tough to do. CoH wasn't designed with that in mind.
It will be interesting to see how it's done. But I don't have high hopes for my main character, a tanker, to contribute much. My gut tells me that City of Blasters will become even more solidified as City of Blasters.
Cynical? Maybe. I think the devs for this game are the best devs for any game. I just have a hard time seeing how my tanker will be of any use, as any moron with half a brain will say "Ignore the tanker, focus on the blasters!"
What I want to know is, why don't we (the CoH game community as a whole) get this kind of info first? It comes from a gaming site. Why isn't it posted on the Main City of Heroes page?? Are we second rate citizens? We pay our monthly fee and have to get our news about upcoming features from 3rd party sites. 
[ QUOTE ]
Since it mentions design is underway for PvP, so it's recent, because that's what I've been doing.
Am I going to tell you what we're planning? At this stage? Are you mad?!
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, sir, you are a villain, so it's your duty to spew out your evil plans at the point in the story where most viewers have accurately guessed 40% of it, guessed 50% incorrectly, and are hotly debating 10% of it.
Right now, we're still hotly debating 60% of it and have no clue for 40%, so I think you have some time.
BUT, you have to leave us enough times to break free from our certain-death device and thwart the villain's evil plans. You'll slip away, cursing us for our interference...
I believe this period is called the "beta test."
---
Oh, and since this is in the comic book genre, you can announce plenty of random, misleading hints only to write them off as false memories from brainwashing, create a storyline suggesting it was all alien mind control, or simply deny there's any lapse of continuity and pretend the earlier stuff never happened.
They've been doing that for years...
[ QUOTE ]
What I want to know is, why don't we (the CoH game community as a whole) get this kind of info first? It comes from a gaming site. Why isn't it posted on the Main City of Heroes page?? Are we second rate citizens? We pay our monthly fee and have to get our news about upcoming features from 3rd party sites.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's called "public relations" and while I agree that they could have announced that a new interview was available on X site (they may have, I might have missed it) it's very possible that the game site itself didn't notify CoH that the article had, in fact, been published.
Welp, for once in my life I am actually looking forward to PVP. I've never been a fan, but if anyone can do it right. It's the CoH/CoV design crew.
Now that I've just heaped a BOATLOAD of extra pressure and responsibility on you. As long as the game is fun, who cares.
When CoV comes out I want to sit back in my chair, with my knock off vanilla coke product and let out a load muhahahaha!
Then spend 15 hours straight playing till my boyfriend threatens to move out if I dont come fix something for him to eat. After all, nothing is more terrifing then a female supervillain. Except maybe Jack in that cape. LOL
And Lord Recluse, do tell. How did it feel to punch Statesmen in the jaw?
'If Champions Online is what "CoH was supposed to be", I'm glad that I have what I have rather than "what it was supposed to be".' - The Alt oholic
"I solo'd Hamidon...but I also totally cheated." - Back Alley Brawler
"It is still early. Someone is going to get stabbed tonight I can feel it." - Ishmael (said in Jello Shooters chat)
[ QUOTE ]
When CoV comes out I want to sit back in my chair, with my knock off vanilla coke product and let out a load muhahahaha!
[/ QUOTE ]
You actually *drink* Vanilla Coke ?
No wonder you're looking forward to being a Villain
};-)>
[ QUOTE ]
It all comes down to if Taunt forces a PC to not be able to target anyone but the tanker or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing enrages players more than taking away their control of their character. The bodyguard ability in DAOC is sort of like this, in that you can't hurt the character being guarded until the bodyguard is dead, but it only works on one other player at a time, and requires the person being guarded to be immobile. Even so, a lot of people complain about it. Giving tanks the ability to essentially bodyguard their entire team would be *way* over the top. I mean, while your team was only able to target the tank, unless you have a tank doing the same, his team will pound you into goo in the meantime. I do see your point that a tank is rather useless as it stands for pvp, in he sense of being an agro magent, other players will simply ignore him until last. I agree, it seems rather obvious that CoH was not designed with any PvP in mind, so the balancing is going to be a nightmare of nerf bat swings.
[ QUOTE ]
PVP will either make tankers useless or one of the most important things to have. It all comes down to if Taunt forces a PC to not be able to target anyone but the tanker or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
I definately hope it doesn't cause come down to a choice like that. Personally I would like to see a taunt cause an accuracy debuff to the effected targets against all other targets except the taunter (coding I am sure would be impossible but hey I can dream).
As for seperate PvP & PvE rules just create another set of enemy definitions. Minion, Lt, Boss, AV, Object, & Player and adjust skills as necessary for the Player set only.
[ QUOTE ]
Cynical? Maybe. I think the devs for this game are the best devs for any game. I just have a hard time seeing how my tanker will be of any use, as any moron with half a brain will say "Ignore the tanker, focus on the blasters!"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I will tell ya as a vet of 1.8 yrs of shadowbane ill tell ya, Hell yeah they will focus on killing the blasters first for 2 reasons, 1 its a high damage target, 2 they are a soft target (meaning they can kill em easy.
Honestly what i see being the biggest pain in the [censored] for PvP is all of the different Z axis issues. There would almost need to be a bubble of war or some sort of street instance that comes up so you don't have the crazy running around of fighting. Pretty much I see claw and spines/* taking the place of tankers in groups as they are the only ones with range. The only skill that will level the playing field for any non range AT will be AS since itll bring them to the ground, even then you gotta get in range. If they allow you to tp foe on PCs that will be a fight saver and bring all ATs back into the playing field but who knows...
TP foe will help nothing. When you TP someone you can see the effect comeing around you the smart players will start runing and guess what you can hit a moving target in melee. If you have a range immobilerzer like "spines scrappers" impale it will be easier to use super jumb than TP to get your impale off.
TP foe is not going to be helpfull in player vs player even if it works perfectly except for the all blaster ambush teams. 8 blaster get in a 70ft circle one of them uses TP foe to bring on opponent into the middle of the circle the other 7 blasters vaporize the opponent. OK that works for blaster teams but it does not work for melee fighters at all.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
PVP will either make tankers useless or one of the most important things to have. It all comes down to if Taunt forces a PC to not be able to target anyone but the tanker or not.
[/ QUOTE ]
I definately hope it doesn't cause come down to a choice like that. Personally I would like to see a taunt cause an accuracy debuff to the effected targets against all other targets except the taunter (coding I am sure would be impossible but hey I can dream).
[/ QUOTE ]
Aggro control is hardly the only thing a Tanker is useful for. Many Tankers' melee attacks have some potent secondary effects (knockdown, disorient, slow) which can cause problems for their enemies. And a Tanker's damage output, while not as high as a Scrapper or Blaster, is not something you want to be receiving in the face either - and it will be very difficult to stop them.
DS
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly what i see being the biggest pain in the [censored] for PvP is all of the different Z axis issues. There would almost need to be a bubble of war or some sort of street instance that comes up so you don't have the crazy running around of fighting. Pretty much I see claw and spines/* taking the place of tankers in groups as they are the only ones with range. The only skill that will level the playing field for any non range AT will be AS since itll bring them to the ground, even then you gotta get in range. If they allow you to tp foe on PCs that will be a fight saver and bring all ATs back into the playing field but who knows...
[/ QUOTE ]
I think PvP will take place mostly in mission scenarios. That is, you'll be inside office complexes, warehouses, caves, instanced outdoor missions, etc. In many of these scenarios, going vertical is pretty much impossible, so while fliers may have an advantage in certain instances, there will be others where it confers no benefit at all.
DS
[ QUOTE ]
Aggro control is hardly the only thing a Tanker is useful for. Many Tankers' melee attacks have some potent secondary effects (knockdown, disorient, slow) which can cause problems for their enemies.
[/ QUOTE ]
Enemy hovers. Tank becomes useless.
Enemy kites tank. Tank becomes useless.
Enemy mezzes tank. Tank becomes useless.
Enemy is another tank. Everyone falls asleep waiting for the combat resolution.
[ QUOTE ]
And a Tanker's damage output, while not as high as a Scrapper or Blaster, is not something you want to be receiving in the face either - and it will be very difficult to stop them.
[/ QUOTE ]
You say that like tanker damage is a threat to anyone's existence. I'd ask you what you were smoking, but I'm sure the punny answer would be related to fire tankers.
Check the sig and hope the devs can compensate in a non-hackney fashion.
Im a SS/Inv Tanker and i can tell you i challange any Blaster to take a few hits of my Rage/Haymaker while i take a few hits of you snipe and guess what you will bleed while i will giggle at your puny human tickling
anyone have any clue what the new epic ats are going to be?
[ QUOTE ]
Since it mentions design is underway for PvP, so it's recent, because that's what I've been doing.
Am I going to tell you what we're planning? At this stage? Are you mad?!
[/ QUOTE ]
Muwahahahahhahaa*hackhackcoughcoughwheeeezzze*
Most stuff centered on other features, but there were these three facets of PvP I thought people here would find noteworthy:
[ QUOTE ]
GG: Are you planning on spending any time rebalancing classes after Villains comes out?
CoH: We're spending time now trying to adjust the Archetypes! That's an ongoing issue for us. We hope to get the Arena out before City of Villains so that we can get an idea of how PvP plays out. As every designer knows, plans go right out the window once players get a hold of a game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Looks like arena (or danger room) will come first, as suggested...
Also looks like the devs are keeping an open mind to player feedback. Let's keep fleshing out the excellent ideas folks!
[ QUOTE ]
GG: How will Hero vs Hero work, when it is implemented early next year?
CoH: We'll start out with an Arena, where heroes can test their might against one another. It's purely consensual and purely optional. We're making a couple of tweaks to powers so that no Archetype is too powerful, but I'm not ready to talk about those things yet.
[/ QUOTE ]
1) "Purely consensual and purely optional" to me suggests no substantial reward for playing / no penalty for staying away- nothing to make someone feel "coerced" into participating-- at least in the arena.
2) Looks like there will be some rebalancing after all. I know some have suggested that there won't be any effort to balance hero vs hero, but this suggests otherwise. That's 2 PvP / CoV references where "balance" has been mentioned.
[ QUOTE ]
GG: How is Villains vs Heroes going to work? Can you fight anyone anywhere or is it only going to be in certain areas?
CoH: We're working out the final designs at the moment, so I can say is this: PvP should be a choice. Players should never be forced into situations that they didn't want to be in. That said, there's a lot of stigma attached to PvP play that I hope we can do away with in City of Villains.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have some optimism here. I'm reading between the lines here, but from my prespective, I'm seeing:
1) A STRONG emphasis placed on consent, but SPECIFICALLY NOT drawing the line between PvP and PvE as separate entities. It would have been real easy to word it that way, but he used the more ambguous "never be forced into situations" part. I'm hoping this means a form of selective-PvP in some way (PvP consent to some players, but not all.)
2) They recognize the very negative reputation PvP has developed due to other gaming systems methods of handling it, so rather than imitate the past, they're trying something new that may offer appeal to people who have been turned off in the past.