A Non-PVPer's Solution To PVP
By
Acanous_Quietus,
Posted on: 2008-01-25 14:21 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Upon being invited to a challenge and accepting, both members would switch to a flagging scheme such that they could only attack one another. No one else could attack them and they could not attack anyone else. (I do not know if this is possible with existing tech.) If the challenger or challenged is a team leader, then all of their team would enter the challenge on their side.
[/ QUOTE ]
On re-reading HB's post, I think this part is unworkable because it's too easy to exploit. Arrange to meet a buddy in PVP, then work out a scheme for one character or the other to earn the merits or whatever other benefits are in the zone.
[/ QUOTE ]
I address part of that here with stating the zone mini-games granting significant buffs (i.e. Shivans and Nukes) should be inaccessible to someone in a challenge and vice versa.
As to teaming and trading "falls" for merits, people already do that with "Rep" and that was assumed in the formulation of what could be gotten with merit-alikes. The rewards there are useful but non-overwhelming or can be gotten elsewhere in the game without PVP at all (though in random fashion).
[ QUOTE ]
The point is I don't want something introduced into PvE zone broadcast to make the hostility worse.
[/ QUOTE ]
At no point did Human_Being (the OP) suggest PvP in PvE zones. Some others, I suspect fans of PvP, did make that suggestion.
Human_Being's suggestion wouldn't impact the PvE experience in any way, except that the current PvE draws to the PvP zones would become totally PvE (as an option), and that some further optional PvE content would be added to the existing PvP zones. Therefore broadcast in other zones won't change for the worse, or at all.
_________________________________
This idea isn't aimed at the hard core PvP haters, who will in no way be impacted by it (other than some potential missions in [now safe] PvP zones). Rather it is aimed at those that either have no opinion on the subject, or primarily object to the current incarnation of PvP.
In other words, if this happens, it won't harm you a damned bit.
I read the OP, and skimmed most of the following conversation.
As others have said, GREAT post. Very thoughtful.
I am well known on my own server for disliking - no, despising PvP.
The OP hit the nail directly on the head with many of his points. In fact, the next time I am asked why I'm so anti-PvP I may just point the asker to this thread.
The part that rang the most true to me was the inability to avoid griefing. In PvE if someone I'm playing with is causing a problem, I can kick him or quit the team. I can avoid the problem. In PvP if someone is causing a problem.. my ONLY choice is to leave the zone.
Thanks for taking the time to spell this out so well.
I'm sure you want more people to PVP, but until it gets fixed, !#@$ you.
The game wasn't made with PVP in mind, and as the time goes by, the devs show that they arn't going to do anything other then !#@$ it up some more. Whoever thought that specialized pvp builds would " Enhance" the pvp experience, or that the constant nerfs needs to just go back to working on the new zones, TF's, and power builds that we need more then this !@#$.
Nice post, but until they start giving some attention, you can wait another two years to get any kind of change to the pvp.
Until then, I'll do my PvPing in Battlefield 2.
!#@$ pvp. 
[ QUOTE ]
I read the OP, and skimmed most of the following conversation.
As others have said, GREAT post. Very thoughtful.
I am well known on my own server for disliking - no, despising PvP.
The OP hit the nail directly on the head with many of his points. In fact, the next time I am asked why I'm so anti-PvP I may just point the asker to this thread.
The part that rang the most true to me was the inability to avoid griefing. In PvE if someone I'm playing with is causing a problem, I can kick him or quit the team. I can avoid the problem. In PvP if someone is causing a problem.. my ONLY choice is to leave the zone.
Thanks for taking the time to spell this out so well.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you use the arena you only fight people you want to fight.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you want more people to PVP, but until it gets fixed, !#@$ you.
The game wasn't made with PVP in mind, and as the time goes by, the devs show that they arn't going to do anything other then !#@$ it up some more. Whoever thought that specialized pvp builds would " Enhance" the pvp experience, or that the constant nerfs needs to just go back to working on the new zones, TF's, and power builds that we need more then this !@#$.
Nice post, but until they start giving some attention, you can wait another two years to get any kind of change to the pvp.
Until then, I'll do my PvPing in Battlefield 2.
!#@$ pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
So what you're saying is, they should ignore this post on how to fix PvP until they fix PvP?
Very nice post. I've been hoping for PvE/PvP builds for a while now.
Merit System- One idea I had for 'rewards' in PvP was adding bounty systems to every zone. You could trade the points in for specific (not random) IO's you wanted. However, these IO's would not be tradeable at the Black Market/Wentworths and (if your PvE/PvP build idea is implemented) can only be slotted into your PvP build.
Flagging- My only quip about this is the flag would have to set you into a Only Affecting Self state. So not only can you not attack players, you can't affect anything else around you (NPC's, grabbing heavies, turrets, etc). This will allow you to explore, but not abuse the system.
Challenges- Uninterupted street duels is something I can't get into. A better option would be to add Arena Kiosks into the warzones so people who want to duel can duel in peace without having to leave the zone. Adding so many limitations to warzoning will cause more frustration than good and people will abuse the system. Quite frankly when I enter a warzone I want to be able to attack the first target I see without any strings attached, Zone PvP should be fairly open and chaotic. The Arena is where you go if you want organized battles without interuption.
The difficulty settings would be a lovely addition to the Arena, however, and would help out against duels that would otherwise end in a stalemate (melee duels ftw). I would also like to see more maps and the ability to choose a map. Heck, maybe even add entire warzones as map options.
[ QUOTE ]
No, what you're saying is that I should shut off an entire public channel because of them. THAT is just plain stupid.
[/ QUOTE ]
Do you really read everything that scrolls through your chat bar?
I guess a better question is, do you really have to read everything that scrolls through your chat bar?
For myself, I can't stand the majority of the crap that is broadcast in AP. Most often it is just childish and insulting. I don't really have any reason to believe that there is going to be anything said that I will need to know about, so I just look for tells. If it aint yellow, I don't even worry about it.
Try it some time. It's not that hard.
Unless of course that isn't really the issue, in which case I can't help you.
Post deleted by Ex Libris
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And to Tal-N I ask, what does that same Scrapper do when he has to chase down a flying NPC?
[/ QUOTE ]
Flying NPCs can be brought down through patience and sometimes tactics, because the developers know that not all heroes and villains have the ability to fly you will notice that flying NPCs are somewhat rare in the game as a result. When NPCs do fly away they will inherantly return to their ground based spawn point if left alone plus you are able to duck out of LoS to cause the NPC to follow you at which point they usually return to ground level.
You point is moot however, we're dealing with PvP here and ways to keep it enjoyable. An NPC might have a tactical advantage over a ground based melee character but has no sense of survival, no sense of enjoyment and in many cases does not need to be defeated by the player to advance through the game. In PvP all of these things are different, there is no fun in fighting a fight you have no chance in losing and there is also no fun in a fight you have no chance of winning. Enjoyment comes in PvP from the fight, the to and fore between two players fighting for victory. If this doesn't happen the enjoyment of the game is greatly reduced.
The solution to have a PvP spec character isn't going to help because it's the ATs which provide the problem, the fact that the devs have been trying to fit a square peg into a round hole now is self evident. They've had to make special rules for status effects, changes to how blaster damage functions, endurance drain is tweaked, invisibility has to be restricted to name but a few special conditions which change how certain ATs function. The thing is though that despite all of these changes it's possible to go into a PvP situational casually and run up against players you have utterly no chance of defeating or can defeat with utter discrimination not because of how skilled you or they are but because their AT and build has weaknesses which happen to be your strengths.
That's broken and can't be easily fixed.
Example:
A regen brute, has fury to help with extended fights. So a blaster comes down with frontloaded damage and obliterates him in 2-3 hits before the brute can even get a hit off. Now only the most pathetic of players will get any enjoyment from doing this again and again when that regen brute has almost no chance of countering that kind of attack. And you can be sure the brute is getting more and more frustrated at having to sit back as hospital waiting for Rest to recharge or his health to return normally.
[/ QUOTE ]
So that same Brut has no way of getting in the air and punishing the blaster at melee range? Or even to bring that same blaster out of the sky? I agree, an initial attack in that situation will result in the Brutes demise, but such shortcomings are easily remedied through the purchasable temp-powers available at the entrance of the zone.
"Samual_Tow - Be disappointed all you want, people. You just don't appreciate the miracles that are taking place here."
Post deleted by Ex Libris
"...freedom isn't a commodity to compromise." -- Captain America, New Avengers #21
Guide to Base Teleporters
If we're talking about PvP in PvP zones, what is barring these people from talking in broadcast in PvE zones already? The game doesn't disable broadcast for an account as soon as a player kills someone in PvP or anything. It's a pretty stupid idea anyway but what makes you think the people in the zone would change and what do you have against the hide opposing faction chat feature?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I read the OP, and skimmed most of the following conversation.
As others have said, GREAT post. Very thoughtful.
I am well known on my own server for disliking - no, despising PvP.
The OP hit the nail directly on the head with many of his points. In fact, the next time I am asked why I'm so anti-PvP I may just point the asker to this thread.
The part that rang the most true to me was the inability to avoid griefing. In PvE if someone I'm playing with is causing a problem, I can kick him or quit the team. I can avoid the problem. In PvP if someone is causing a problem.. my ONLY choice is to leave the zone.
Thanks for taking the time to spell this out so well.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you use the arena you only fight people you want to fight.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm sure you want more people to PVP, but until it gets fixed, !#@$ you.
The game wasn't made with PVP in mind, and as the time goes by, the devs show that they arn't going to do anything other then !#@$ it up some more. Whoever thought that specialized pvp builds would " Enhance" the pvp experience, or that the constant nerfs needs to just go back to working on the new zones, TF's, and power builds that we need more then this !@#$.
Nice post, but until they start giving some attention, you can wait another two years to get any kind of change to the pvp.
Until then, I'll do my PvPing in Battlefield 2.
!#@$ pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]
So what you're saying is, they should ignore this post on how to fix PvP until they fix PvP?
[/ QUOTE ]
They've ignored all of the other posts asking for the same thing countless times before, why should this be any different?
Wow, that was unexpected.
"...freedom isn't a commodity to compromise." -- Captain America, New Avengers #21
Guide to Base Teleporters
[ QUOTE ]
But the argument, and it's a valid one, can be made, "Why should I have to turn off broadcast, and potentially miss out on information I want/need to hear, because some people choose to be jerks?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Because in every known online software obscenity filters and the like are known to degrade the performance of the person suffering abuse while the jerk gets no penalty.
One of the more interesting things I have seen in PvP games recently is a vote option where a certain number of votes boots problem players from servers. Usually a hot key controls voting to make it simple. It works just like a time out that parents use for small children but placed on a game account .
Lets say there are 20 people in Bloody Bay running an event and I happily log in as Dronemeister and start teleporting people into debt. One person puts up a motion to boot me and its 20 yes and 1 no. I get a time based boot from Bloody Bay on Test Server based on my login.
You would be amazed how well people learn after several time outs. Someone shows up abusing the latest known game issues and *boot*. First obscene tirade about someone's mom and *boot* . This allows a group of players to remove troublemakers without the GMs and frees up the development staff from having to put in special code to deal with idiots.
[ QUOTE ]
There is no draw for the zones other than PVP. The non-PVP content of the PVP zones consists of badges, BB & WB mini-games (which PVPers do not play), and zone missions which are uniform and boring. If the majority of casual-players in the game are going to consider participating, there needs to be more reason to enter the zones and be exposed to it. The monolithic single-purpose mentality of the zones has failed. The model needs to be more along the lines of a mall food store where in someone walks by with other errands in mind and spontaneously thinks "I'd like to have...a Cinnabon @.@". A high level of traffic is critical for that kind of model. Beyond limiting things that actively repel players (see previous points), there needs to be content in the PVP zones which appeals to a broad section of the playerbase for its own sake
[/ QUOTE ]
No.
Remove PvE content from PvP zones altogether. Don't add more, don't make the current options more appealing.
Remove them.
No more missions of any kind.
Remove the XP and drops from any NPC in the zones.
If you want to make a new zone with PvE content that both sides can access, make it a purely PvE zone.
You can't make both sides happy by forcing them to interact.
"Through Avarice evil smiles; through insanity it sings"
Forum Troll Rule #1: Anyone who disagrees with my point of view is either a fanboy or an idiot.
I'm a proud carebear.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the argument, and it's a valid one, can be made, "Why should I have to turn off broadcast, and potentially miss out on information I want/need to hear, because some people choose to be jerks?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Because in every known online software obscenity filters and the like are known to degrade the performance of the person suffering abuse while the jerk gets no penalty.
One of the more interesting things I have seen in PvP games recently is a vote option where a certain number of votes boots problem players from servers. Usually a hot key controls voting to make it simple. It works just like a time out that parents use for small children but placed on a game account .
Lets say there are 20 people in Bloody Bay running an event and I happily log in as Dronemeister and start teleporting people into debt. One person puts up a motion to boot me and its 20 yes and 1 no. I get a time based boot from Bloody Bay on Test Server based on my login.
You would be amazed how well people learn after several time outs. Someone shows up abusing the latest known game issues and *boot*. First obscene tirade about someone's mom and *boot* . This allows a group of players to remove troublemakers without the GMs and frees up the development staff from having to put in special code to deal with idiots.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, you log in Dronemeister and are generally regarded as a very good PVP-er. You take a few minutes to get on a good team and get started. You gank me (as fair as can be and as pure as driven snow). I say to my SG (or in general villain chat) "Hey, everyone vote to boot Dronemeister". Everyone clicks "Boot". You get ejected from the zone for no good reason.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no draw for the zones other than PVP. The non-PVP content of the PVP zones consists of badges, BB & WB mini-games (which PVPers do not play), and zone missions which are uniform and boring. If the majority of casual-players in the game are going to consider participating, there needs to be more reason to enter the zones and be exposed to it. The monolithic single-purpose mentality of the zones has failed. The model needs to be more along the lines of a mall food store where in someone walks by with other errands in mind and spontaneously thinks "I'd like to have...a Cinnabon @.@". A high level of traffic is critical for that kind of model. Beyond limiting things that actively repel players (see previous points), there needs to be content in the PVP zones which appeals to a broad section of the playerbase for its own sake
[/ QUOTE ]
No.
Remove PvE content from PvP zones altogether. Don't add more, don't make the current options more appealing.
Remove them.
No more missions of any kind.
Remove the XP and drops from any NPC in the zones.
If you want to make a new zone with PvE content that both sides can access, make it a purely PvE zone.
You can't make both sides happy by forcing them to interact.
[/ QUOTE ]
100% full agreement. Keep PVP out of PVE and take PVE out of PVP.
IF PVP is a viable, legitimate playstyle, it should be able to stand on it's own merit rather than having to force (OK, I agree people aren't forced, but that's the perception) or bribe players into PVP.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the argument, and it's a valid one, can be made, "Why should I have to turn off broadcast, and potentially miss out on information I want/need to hear, because some people choose to be jerks?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Because in every known online software obscenity filters and the like are known to degrade the performance of the person suffering abuse while the jerk gets no penalty.
One of the more interesting things I have seen in PvP games recently is a vote option where a certain number of votes boots problem players from servers. Usually a hot key controls voting to make it simple. It works just like a time out that parents use for small children but placed on a game account .
Lets say there are 20 people in Bloody Bay running an event and I happily log in as Dronemeister and start teleporting people into debt. One person puts up a motion to boot me and its 20 yes and 1 no. I get a time based boot from Bloody Bay on Test Server based on my login.
You would be amazed how well people learn after several time outs. Someone shows up abusing the latest known game issues and *boot*. First obscene tirade about someone's mom and *boot* . This allows a group of players to remove troublemakers without the GMs and frees up the development staff from having to put in special code to deal with idiots.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, you log in Dronemeister and are generally regarded as a very good PVP-er. You take a few minutes to get on a good team and get started. You gank me (as fair as can be and as pure as driven snow). I say to my SG (or in general villain chat) "Hey, everyone vote to boot Dronemeister". Everyone clicks "Boot". You get ejected from the zone for no good reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was in a recent PvP game where someone tried that and myself and others blocked the vote. You seem to be suggesting that the PvP community in COX is incapable of behaving like adults or policing themselves if given a chance but yet somehow the PvE community is mature enough to use the boot mechanism without systemic abuse.
I really like this idea of flagging. L2 has something similar, as does SWG. However, as Xury said, it could be exploited by either 'buffer' non-flagged or non-pvp people buffing LR in GV. My solution would be to propose to make the pvp flag viral, like in L2.
So, if you see someone engaged in pve thats flagged pvp and getting their butt kicked, you can play the 'hero' and rescue them as a non-pvp flagged toon, however the second you do, you become pvp flagged. You could also make certain npcs in the zone flagged as pvp npcs, i.e. AVs/Heros/turrets/mechs in GV and the combatants at siren's call hotspots, if you buff, debuff or attack them, you get flagged. I would also make it so the pvp flag can't be shut off easily, once active, its active for 30 min or an hour, even if you zone out of the zone and back in. I would also remove the 30 second count down timer, simply put anyone in the zone, entering from wherever, mish, base, another zone, enter all at the same point, a protected area where you cant be teleganked so you don't get hosed by load times. This would eliminate the wankers that die, rezone in from their base, and rebuff/heal allies while 'protected'.
Personally, I don't understand the purists on either side, much like I don't understand the purists on either side of any argument, i.e. politics, religion, etc. What's the harm in letting pvers into a pvp zone to do just the pve part? They're not interested in fighting so why force it upon them. The same goes for the PvErs that dont ever wanna see PvPers. Yes, you can say 'you don't NEED nukes, you dont NEED shivans,' but they sure as heck make the STF/LRSF a heck of a lot easier and faster for less optimal teams. Also, my toons speced for the LRSF and STF are definitely not pvp optimized. As it currently stands, I just wait until the pvpers leave to get my nukes/shivs, or just ignore them by running around with pff or a couple purple skittles on which isn't much different than the flagging proposal.
The only thing the pvpers stand to lose by this is easy rep by teleganking some poor kin defender or similar squishy who has no interest in fighting. I mean honestly, what the heck is the point of killing these folks other than just to stand on your little hill and thump your chest, its akin to going to atlas and killing hellions with your 50 and calling yourself uber. Personally, when I pvp I like a little challenge and I leave the non-pvpers alone if they leave me alone (with the exception of RV RMT farmers).
Personally, one other change I'd like to see in pvp is the elimination of names, ATs and hp/end on the target bar of all the hostile players. People are either Hero or Villain and thats all you know. If you wanna know what they are, you have to get closer and see what they're actually doing to decide what they are. It'd add an element of risk and challenge that I'd like to see. Eventually, you'd get to recognize people by their costumes (unless they change costumes, adding another bit of randomness to it for a little more fun). Wolverene certainly doesn't have "Wolverene" floating over his head in orange letters with a scrapper icon next to his name and he does have a few different costumes. They've already hidden powersets from opposing 'inspectors' they may as well hide the rest of it. I could see teams/sgs wearing all the same costume having a bit of fun with this. It would also certianly put a little more risk in teleganking (and I'm not talking just stalkers, there's plenty of blaster telegankers too).
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But the argument, and it's a valid one, can be made, "Why should I have to turn off broadcast, and potentially miss out on information I want/need to hear, because some people choose to be jerks?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Because in every known online software obscenity filters and the like are known to degrade the performance of the person suffering abuse while the jerk gets no penalty.
One of the more interesting things I have seen in PvP games recently is a vote option where a certain number of votes boots problem players from servers. Usually a hot key controls voting to make it simple. It works just like a time out that parents use for small children but placed on a game account .
Lets say there are 20 people in Bloody Bay running an event and I happily log in as Dronemeister and start teleporting people into debt. One person puts up a motion to boot me and its 20 yes and 1 no. I get a time based boot from Bloody Bay on Test Server based on my login.
You would be amazed how well people learn after several time outs. Someone shows up abusing the latest known game issues and *boot*. First obscene tirade about someone's mom and *boot* . This allows a group of players to remove troublemakers without the GMs and frees up the development staff from having to put in special code to deal with idiots.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, you log in Dronemeister and are generally regarded as a very good PVP-er. You take a few minutes to get on a good team and get started. You gank me (as fair as can be and as pure as driven snow). I say to my SG (or in general villain chat) "Hey, everyone vote to boot Dronemeister". Everyone clicks "Boot". You get ejected from the zone for no good reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was in a recent PvP game where someone tried that and myself and others blocked the vote. You seem to be suggesting that the PvP community in COX is incapable of behaving like adults or policing themselves if given a chance but yet somehow the PvE community is mature enough to use the boot mechanism without systemic abuse.
[/ QUOTE ]
You overestimate people's morality and sense of fair play.
I was a co-leader of a leading edge guild in EQ. I've seen people do absolutely wretched things to each other just because they can. I'm not talking about 2 or 3. I'm talking about a concerted effort of 50-70 people to force non-guildmates to fail, even though it didn't gain them anything. And that was in just PVE.
I've seen PVPers go to great lengths and trouble to cause others grief. Again, not one or two people, but 30-40 at a time.
PVE-ers are no better or worse than PVPers. But, the example you gave was a PVP-boot system. I simply followed your precedent, and following the rules you laid out.
In short, if a system can be exploited, it will be exploited. Now, every little in MMO systems can't be exploited in one fashion or another, and sometimes it's not worth the effort to stop it.
But when it comes to one group of people being able to directly and adversely effect someone else's enjoyment of the game through an exploit, that should be curbed, I don't care if you're talking about PVP or PVE.
Nice post OP, very concise and there's a lot of common sense in it.
It's difficult to gauge where the developers see PvP going in their future plans, but they could surly improve the experience by bulletin boarding your thread. =]
-A