[ QUOTE ]
In the meantime, heres a question for you all:
If PvE is such a dead duck and not financially worthwhile, why is it that I see threads over and over again about how PvPers are trying to get more people into their zones and trying to come up with more ways to have PvP forced into other zones but I do not think I have ever seen a thread started with the idea that PvE areas need to have more incentive to get all those PvPers to come out of their zones and join us?
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm sure this has been answered a thousand times, but I'll lend my own spin to it.
This is equivalent to players whining to the devs to turn up spawn timers for critters. It happens. PVPers tell the devs to force PVP upon the playerbase, the PVE crowd tell the devs to up spawn timers for mobs. Same thing. Steel canyon will always be full of Tsoo, Clockwork, Vahzilok, CoT, and of course Outcasts... but Siren's Call will not always be full of other players.
Are they ghost towns? Not really, but unless you are me, you don't really hang around in them at 4 in the morning badge hunting, getting temp powers, or doing missions. When the pvp zone has a low population, it stops people from staying. You don't stay there because it's empty, and it's empty because you don't stay there. It's a self perpetuating negative situation. When a pve zone has a low pop... broadcast is a thousand times less annoying.
[ QUOTE ]
In General, I think its a moot point. PvP appears to be a sideline issue for CoX. Despite the number of nerfs it appears to drive, it is not yet in my opinion the foremost issue in the minds of the Developers. It is my hope that the Developers will continue to keep PvP as a secondary issue, but it is my fear that they are more and more listening to the minority in CoX. And it is my belief that this will cause CoX to die.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here's a quick and easy way to own you even more, not that you need it seeing how you're on the wrong end of a losing argument.
How many people log in every day to play Counter-strike? Now how many log in to play Half Life?
I love Half Life 2. One of my favorite games of all time. FANTASTIC game. I haven't played Halo 2, but Halo 1 wasn't even in the same dimension, let alone league.
But I've played through HL2 like 4 times now, and I'm pretty sure that doesn't even touch the amount of time I've logged in CS.
PVP = Long Term. PvE = Short Term.
When people complain about a lack of end game content, it's because they overlook PvP.
Many games still going today that have been around for a while depend on user generated content, and that's what pvp is.
If you don't want CoX to die, and it will one day, then PvP should be supported and balanced.
[ QUOTE ]
Getting back on topic, I agree pvp can be a big draw if its promoted and maintained, but I still say not by itself.
So far that hasn't been a game that can do that by itself. Fury on the other hand might.
What I'm saying is pvp and pve is needed together.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've tried to stay away from this thread but theres a fundamental flaw with this reasoning. If PvP and PvE are joined at the hip, per se, then how do MMOFPSes survive? Nobody plays Battlefield, Halo, or SW Battlefront for the PvE game (for more then a week anyways) and the PvE game has no effect whatsoever on the PvP game. Yet many players, such as myself, have racked up weeks on those games just on basic server PvP.
Yes, MMOFPSes are fundamentally different from MMORPGs, but they are very similar. I know for one I would jump at the chance to PvP without a significant PvE investment. I eagerly await both Fury and WAR. But my point is, it is and has been possible to create PvP focused games with no PvE.
Here's an idea inspired by the OP.
**Disclaimer** I do not no if this is even possible with the coding, <<<is programming illiterate.
Is it possible to make it so that when you roll a toon, you have the option of making it for PvE/P or strictly PvP.
If you make a PvP toon then that toon is limited to PvP Zones only and Pocket D. When you roll it, the system treats it like a respec and you may pick your powers accordingly. This raises all kinds of questions about getting inf to buy enhancements/IO's and the likes but it's just a very vague idea that popped into my head, that will solve a some peoples issues and potentially not damage the game either. Since villains has no EAT this could be a reward for once you hit 50.
If you roll a character for PvE/P then you have all regular access to the game and nothing is changed for you.
Not trying to threadjack but this just came to mind.
That is very close to what Guild Wars does currently, and works quite well (now) for the most part. One item to learn from the GW PvP character experiment was the fact that when certain facets of the game evolved, mainly armor switching in the middle of a battle, it gave an advantage to PvE characters over PvP only ones because a PvP only character can only have one set of armor. This created a great deal of frustration in the PvP community for quite some time, because that one disadvantage forced many of them to level PvE characters that they didn't want to.
Thorizdin
Lords of the Dead
Old School Legends
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Getting back on topic, I agree pvp can be a big draw if its promoted and maintained, but I still say not by itself.
So far that hasn't been a game that can do that by itself. Fury on the other hand might.
What I'm saying is pvp and pve is needed together.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've tried to stay away from this thread but theres a fundamental flaw with this reasoning. If PvP and PvE are joined at the hip, per se, then how do MMOFPSes survive? Nobody plays Battlefield, Halo, or SW Battlefront for the PvE game (for more then a week anyways) and the PvE game has no effect whatsoever on the PvP game. Yet many players, such as myself, have racked up weeks on those games just on basic server PvP.
Yes, MMOFPSes are fundamentally different from MMORPGs, but they are very similar. I know for one I would jump at the chance to PvP without a significant PvE investment. I eagerly await both Fury and WAR. But my point is, it is and has been possible to create PvP focused games with no PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
See the problem with this is FPS does not equal RPGs. If people wanted to play an FPS, they'd play an FPS. If they wanted to play an RPG they'd play an RPG. There is a reason its easier to balance one over the other. And that is inherent in the letters. Role Playing Game is mainly what they have been about. The grandaddy of them all, D&D was often built on the who player versus environment model. Sure GMs could give players a reason to fight. But traditionally it hasn't been that way. Hell the whole "alignment" issue shows this in that tradition. Granted, I think that's a flawed mindset. But I think that might be where RPG players (traditional) might come from.
And a PVP rpg does not exist yet. A pvp FPS exists. If people want to play an FPS more than this game, they are already there. What some are looking for is an RPG with FPS style, but that doesn't have the PVE grind. (And technically is that even an rpg anymore? I think it is, but some might disagree). That doesn't exist yet. (though Fury I hear is now in alpha or beta. 
)
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
That is very close to what Guild Wars does currently, and works quite well (now) for the most part. One item to learn from the GW PvP character experiment was the fact that when certain facets of the game evolved, mainly armor switching in the middle of a battle, it gave an advantage to PvE characters over PvP only ones because a PvP only character can only have one set of armor. This created a great deal of frustration in the PvP community for quite some time, because that one disadvantage forced many of them to level PvE characters that they didn't want to.
[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting. I would personally like to see a game where you can lvl by pvping ONLY. Fury looks to be it. So far nothing else seems to be close.
And I mean 100% pvp, none of this having to dip into pve to get good armor.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
[ QUOTE ]
I would personally like to see a game where you can lvl by pvping ONLY.
[/ QUOTE ]
In Dark Age of Camelot (back when I played) you could lvl your character from 1 to 50 in PvP. It's not the same because there was still PvE, and you needed to PvE to get the uber loot to make you viable in PvP, but it was fun nonetheless.
I had a main character with loads of platinum to buy equiplent for all my alts, so I basically was able to avoid PvE'ing alltogether. Loads of fun.
(Unfortunately, to be able to compete in top-level PvP required non-stop PvE raiding for equipment and Artifacts, but lvls 1-44 were hellafun.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would personally like to see a game where you can lvl by pvping ONLY.
[/ QUOTE ]
In Dark Age of Camelot (back when I played) you could lvl your character from 1 to 50 in PvP. It's not the same because there was still PvE, and you needed to PvE to get the uber loot to make you viable in PvP, but it was fun nonetheless.
I had a main character with loads of platinum to buy equiplent for all my alts, so I basically was able to avoid PvE'ing alltogether. Loads of fun.
(Unfortunately, to be able to compete in top-level PvP required non-stop PvE raiding for equipment and Artifacts, but lvls 1-44 were hellafun.)
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah close, but still no quite there. I'm hoping fury doesn't bow to pressure and decided to add pve based raiding. So far it looks like the devs of the game are fairly consistent with their pvp-advancement only mantra and style.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
my only problem with PvP is that there is no way to do a realistic simulation of conflict.
There are no consequences involved.
In real life, if the hero falls back, people get hurt.
If the villain falls back, weeks, if not months, of preparation are ruined.
In CoH, if a hero falls back....nothing much happens. If a villain falls back....nothing much happens.
In real life, people in battle often have to get involved in battles they know or think are going to be losing (reference the 300 Spartans, Bastogne, Coral Sea...etc) because even a tactical loss there might avert a more important strategic loss.
PvP turns into a bunch of random ganking where people do not get into battles that they don't think they can win.
There is no reason to hang around if you're losing.
There is no reason to push it, because nothing all that bad will happen if you decide to run away.
It turns into a frustrating give and take that never quite goes anywhere.
Battles are meaningless and unimportant and, over all, forgetable.
There are occasional exceptions, there are always exceptions, but in general the PvP is unsatisfying.
If there were something REAL at stake, even something like Recluse's Victory NOT being reset, it would be a little better. But even that is not nearly enough to make people decide to fight it out instead of flee.
After all, who cares if an isolated zone/reality is left in the control of the enemy if it has no effect on the world at large.
Thrythlind's Deviant Art Page
"Notice at the end, there: Arcanaville did the math and KICKED IT INTO EXISTENCE." - Ironik on the power of Arcanaville's math
Well, since this thread just won't die; I'm going to try to politely demonstrate when someone decides they have a strong enough opinion that it just *has* to be fact. So quoting the OP:
[ QUOTE ]
PVP isn't optional for COX's long term survival. The PVE is stale and most people in the anti pvp crowd turn to badge hunting just to keep themselves entertained. Most of the people I talked to had servers that went through a shock when the zone bugs effectively shut down pvp on most servers from november to february. Most people stopped logging in and serveral people quit, who are only now coming back. Since COX is a game of many alts, these people turned out to be a lot of toons people had known in other venues.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't remember "most" people leaving when the PvP zones had their issues; in fact, this is the first I (and most of the people in the myriad of SGs I play in) have heard of it. It's all relative. While the sun, moon, stars and cocker spaniels of your universe rotate around PvP, there's quite a bit of us that couldn't care less insofar as our portion of the game remains undisturbed. This view tends to be one of the main sticking points imo- PvP and PvPers need to get over yourselves.
[ QUOTE ]
On one of the first four pages on this thread someone brought up that SWG had been pvp centric as it's end game and had then switched to pve for a bit. They incorrectly assumed that's what hurt that game. By contrast, in 2003, SWG had the biggest openning of any MMORPG which it lost by being eclipsed by WOW. It's numbers dropped overnight and half it's servers closed by becoming a grind game with Jedi and the CU. It numbers were harmed even worse by becoming even more PVE centric NGE. SWG had to suck up that PVP paid the bills to begin regrowing now.
[/ QUOTE ]
This might as well have been written in gibberish, because you have all your "facts" entirely backwards. SWG actually has a lot in common with COX- Both games that are based on concepts that should almost cater to PvP; both were made with such robust PvE systems that it made balancing for PvP impossible; and both have tried to reconcile their PvE based game to a PvP crowd.
It also lost out to WoW because of a myriad of other reasons- Warcraft having a rather large computer gamer following already, word of mouth, and SWG being about the most ridiculously shallow game ever seen (hint: it made money at all because it was based on one of the most popular sci-fi licenses of all time).
Now to get to the downright propaganda, or fabrications (which a less polite soul would just call lies): SWG has (and had) 36 servers, if you consider the Japanese and Euro servers that were opened briefly around a year and a half after launch... then yeah, they cut their server load, by maybe 1/6.
The NGE was, also ironically, meant to be -and is- PvP centric. They dropped an unbalancable skill system with 36 different professions, to a rigid level-based system that now has 9 -which, btb is why they lost customers.... trying to CATER to PvP, and not letting the whiners whine and get on with the game; or do you seem to think that their change to a twitch-based targeting system was PvE based? Why do you think Vanguard chose to launch *without* official-supported forums? All those heated PvE discussions?
As to the rest of your very hollow arguement:
PvP causes the exact same problems as you claim PvE does, in it's own unmistakable fashion. Instead of being able to spend time creating fun, new content for everyone to enjoy, they have to spend that development time ever-balancing the PvP monster to satisfy (to use your own terminology) crying, obsessive compulsive PvPers that can't accept that they got beat by a better player- it must be because the other person "cheated" because the game isn't balanced. Never mind that almost all MMOGs have to make some concessions to the rock/paper/scissors school- spend more to balance the game for the 10% that demand it!
PvP spends just as many checks as PvE, but the 150 people that happen to indulge in it seem to think that the other 90% of the playerbase must be suffering dementia for not supporting, no.... worshipping their little niche gamestyle.
For the record, I could care less about PvP one way or the other... except that PvPers in general seem to consider that they are entitled in ways that no numbers have been able to prove.
Since you have your version, I figured a little truth would be nice. After all, we are all about killing myths in this thread right? Enjoy. 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember "most" people leaving when the PvP zones had their issues; in fact, this is the first I (and most of the people in the myriad of SGs I play in) have heard of it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ditto here, never even knew there ever were zone problems in the PvP
Thrythlind's Deviant Art Page
"Notice at the end, there: Arcanaville did the math and KICKED IT INTO EXISTENCE." - Ironik on the power of Arcanaville's math
whats this pvp you speak of? It shut down? when? did it ever start again?
Oh, I don't doubt it.
In fact, when I bought the game, PvP was what I looked forward to the most.
However.
I just REALLY suck at it, lol.
And nearly every time I enter a PvP zone...there is no one there. Empty. Silent as the grave. And I think it's due to what seems to me to be the fact that you have to build your toon SOLELY for PvP. Not alot of people want to do that. I don't.
I don't hate PvP. Far from it. I enjoy it from time to time, even though I ALWAYS lose, lol, if there is even anyone around to fight. PvP is a GREAT idea. And I've had fun with it, even though I get killed. EVERY SINGLE TIME. I do think that the PvP haters serve a purpose though because let's face it, the majority of people playing the game are not spending most of thier time in the PvP zones. They just aren't. If they were, I'd be able to fight someone everytime I went to a PvP zone instead of wandering around aimlessly. What the haters will hopefully accomplish is to give the developers (And I'm not bashing them either, they've done a great job and I love the game) the idea that maybe it's time to make PvP more accessible to everyone and not just the hardcore PvP'ers. I mean, if you enjoy playing Doms, you can forget about PvP. Even on a team you won't accomplish much. Unless you're a hardcore PvP'er that would know how to somehow successfully pit his Dom against a Brute, you may as well forget about it.
I'm just saying that well, PvP blows PvE away as far as thrills go, but it might be a good idea to make a few adjustments to a really cool idea. I mean, if PvP is sustaining the game, which it seems to be, imagine how amazing it would be if it were accessible to everyone, and not just hardcore PvP'ers?
Thanks for the post, by the way. Very imformative.
I read a bunch on this topic, so now I can't resist throwing in my two cents. I personally don't do PvP, I've tried it and just didn't like it, and it wasn't because I got owned, although I did die my fair share, it just didn't and doesn't appeal. I played WoW, and I enjoyed PvP on that, the key reason is the Battlegrounds. The only thing CoH/CoV has is contested territory where Heroes and Villains can fight, though it does usually end up in ganking, with some simple mishs to do that have little to do with other players, the opposing side is merely an obstacle. Simple buffs, or de-buffs on your enemy, can be earned, but it ends there. Here is a perfect example of something that I think NEEDS to be added to greatly up the PvP quality...Hero vs Villain Safeguard mishs, it can be teams, or even just large groups, where the Villains must rob a Bank or Store, or do something Villainy, and the Heroes must obviously stop them. It could be either round based like Counter-Strike, or simply everyone respawns until the Villains succeed or the Heroes "secure" the objective somehow, and the victors can get influence, badge(s), experience, gladiators, perhaps all of the above, like influence and exp each win, a badge after a certain amount of wins...things like that, it would also make the game what it should be, not just Heroes beating up gangs and thugs and stopping petty crimes, or Villains terrorizing gangs and thugs to get what they want...but Heroes saving the day and Villains doing what they do best. This kind of PvP, while keeping the normal PvP zones, is what would keep this game alive, and make it more competitive to other MMOs, even the monster that is WoW.
WoW = 7,000,000 Players
Co* <<<<<<<<<<<<&l t;< 7,000,000
The idea of shared missions randomly assigned is only good when you have a large pool of people that want to participate. Otherwise, what you are looking for are arena matches with goals -- and when put into the player's hands, will undoubtably get exploited (or have the potential in the Dev's eyes).
this thread has 666 replies
oh wait.. nvm >.<
Personally I don't like PvP at all, but even so, totally agree with OP, /signed as long as they don't put PvP above PvE, unless they make PvP more balanced and enjoyable.
Just wondering, has I10 with its co-op missions changed anyone's views on PvP/PvE?
I believe that a Kheldian Gold Standard should be based on SO's, and for anything above that... there's Platinum!
Save Ms. Liberty (#5349) � Augmenting Peacebringers � The Umbra Illuminati
Save Ms. Liberty (#5349) � Augmenting Peacebringers � The Umbra Illuminati
Why would it?
yes.
it changed my mind i thought that the difference of population in CoH/CoV was tiny lol. no there are usually 2 villains for 6 heros ><
and it demonstrated that when you look for a team you have interest to be a ill/ /kin /emp controller, a rad/ or emp/fender or a stone tank if you want to have the luck to get an invit instead of answer like "why would i take you when i can have a fire/kin ?"
PvP: Never wanted to participate. Tried it a few times, not really my bag. I'm sure if I researched it as heavily as I did the PvE content, I'd be good.
My grief is I wish there was a way to turn off PvP abilities while in a PvP zone. What if I'm only in the zone to get badges? Some MM with a Gang War unleashes an attack on me, then a Corruptor or Brute comes in and finishes the job.
Rinse, lather, repeat.
I just feel that if you are going to put rewards in a PvP zone that don't require an actual participation in PvP, then PvP should be something that can be toggled on or off.
Let me toggle my PvP off, collect my exploration badges, plaques, etc. and then let me go on my way.
But, I guess that's the allure of the PvP zone for PvP people: attacking people who don't fight back and killing them a.s.a.p.
For those who claim that PvE is boring, I can't imagine killing defenseless characters who intentionally don't fight back can be that much fun either. It's got to get boring if there's no challenge. Isn't that the arguement against the L-50 content? No challenge?
So the game's population is up 7% thanks to PvE content. Like PvPers say, PWND.
The best comics are still 10�!
My City of Heroes Blog Freedom Feature Article: "Going Rageless?"
If you only read one guide this year, make it this one.
Super Reflexes: the Golden Fox of power sets!
WARNING: I bold names.
Only reason I play this game is because of PvP, and I think I will leave soon, well...you know why....
[ QUOTE ]
The game was successful from the start due to the gimmick, the audience that it appeals/appealed to. PvP can be a big draw if it is promoted and maintained - unfortunately, the pvp in this game hasn't received either of the two, promotion or maintenance - aside from promotion done by the playerbase.
[/ QUOTE ]
I went and looked back at the original post that started this discussion between us.
Getting back on topic, I agree pvp can be a big draw if its promoted and maintained, but I still say not by itself.
So far that hasn't been a game that can do that by itself. Fury on the other hand might.
What I'm saying is pvp and pve is needed together.
I'd even go as far as to say for this audience its the pve currently carrying it. If the pvp was that important to this audience the lack of maintenance and promotion to pvp, should very well have killed this game by now. I just don't pvp will ever be that important to this playerbase as a whole cause the dev's fist presentation of it sucked.
First impressions and all.
/shrug.
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!