Quote:
I agree with this, especially if the minigame gave rewards. And greater participation in pvp by the player base would then make it more likely that pvp mechanic issues would be taken more seriously.
| If CoX had a fun pvp minigame even with the weird mechanics of i13, people would still play. |
The problem here is that there are two different groups of people here: people who PvP for the sake of PvP (generally because they consider PvE unchallenging/boring/predicatable/repetitive), and the people who PvP for the rewards. The second group did not exist before I14 because there were no PvP rewards (save IoPs in base raids). Sure, I13 introduced inf/prestige/salvage for PvP kills, but it's a laughably small amount even while solo, and I14's introduction of PvP recipe drops didn't help the situation because they're so ungodly rare during actual PvP (because unlike in PvE, you're attacking an intelligent opponent who is trying to actively avoid dying).
Prior to I13, people PvP'd because they wanted to, not because there were rewards involved. The current state of PvP is proof enough that adding rewards does not a decent-sized population make, as it's fairly obvious that more people PvPd before there were rewards than do now. While rewards and minigames might bring in more people, they won't be enough to replace the players (and the knowledge) driven away by the I13 changes. The current PvP population isn't interested in minigames or rewards, they're interested in a system that's fun and makes sense. Minigames and rewards are icing on the cake for that group - people who come only for the rewards are going to be sorely disappointed when they find themselves losing again and again at the hands of a group of players who know what they're doing, and they won't bother to figure out why and they'll just give up, thus not solving anything.
@macskull, @Not Mac | XBL: macskull | Steam: macskull | Skype: macskull
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
"One day we all may see each other elsewhere. In Tyria, in Azeroth. We may pass each other and never know it. And that's sad. But if nothing else, we'll still have Rhode Island."
Quote:
The statement used was that "regular pvp participation had gradually shrunk to just above 10%" with "regular" meaning more than one hour per week.
|
Originally Posted by Brillig
And your basis for assuming that Ex Libris' number was at the lower bound?
It seems it would be just as easy to argue that the community fluctuated between 5-10%. It's a meaningless number anyway, though, because we don't know what she defined as 'community'. |
"the reason there are so many sarcastic pvpers is we already had a better version of pvp taken away from us to appease bad players. Back then we chuckled at how bad players came here and whined. If we knew that was the actual voice devs would listen to instead of informed, educated players we probably would have been bigger dicks back then." -ConFlict
Quote:
They invented two entirely new statistics, resilience and, I forget the other one that have no effect at all in PvE and slapped them on all PvP gear, but not on any PvE loot. They are now called "crit rating" and "resilience rating" one allows crits the other negates them. After a couple patches they allowed crit rating to apply to PvE content as well, but the impact was far below the importance in PvP. When I could attack with a 40% chance to crit and you were literally incapabble of critting me, if we both had the same armor value and same damage and use the same attacks, I would kill you and still have 80% of my health left 10 out of 10 tries, and you'd have no idea why your attacks were doing half the damage mine were. Add onto it that because of this whole builds had to change, where people packed on +HP items instead of +damage because monsters have at a base many times the HP of players (like if all CoH powers were scaled to kill bosses not minions and then we turned them on each other) so all attacks are already overpowered, and then the insta cast powers are used over the slow hard hitting ones, etc, certain debuffs do nothing, others are crippling... It is similar enough that people think they know how it works but different enough that they constantly lose and can't figure out why. Very weird actually. I admit CoH is more different, but in WoW it was quite a difference between PvP and PvE too. The real difference is where you nailed it, in City our buffers/debuffers are screwed. THAT is a major problem. I'm with you 100%|
Originally Posted by PC_guy
what you're describing here isn't changing mechanics. you're basically just describing pvp in any MMO. yea, you're going to have to slot and prepare for different things but its still the same system when you go in between pve and pvp. im not really up to date on WoW mechanics but from what i've seen from watching my friends. if you have, say 500 armor stat, then you have a 500 armor state where ever you go. and if my arrow shot does 1000 damage (excluding armor and all of that) then it does 1000 damage every where. this is NOT AT ALL how coh mechanics work in that every power does different damage in pve and pvp and each buff/debuff has a different stat in pvp and pve. builds will always change in pvp, thats pvp, but stuff should work the same in both arenas.
|
Quote:
| Just to be clear, I agree with you that an implementation of a mini game would be a good thing. But implementing one without fixing mechanics is just a band aid over the open gash that is pvp. i13 pvp discourages a large part of the character player base (namely buffers) which to me would be a large problem with any team objective based anything. you would open up alot more possibilities by fiixing the mechanics which would effect zone, arena, and whatever mini game you put in, instead of just putting in a mini game that might be fun in a broken system. |
Rather than going point by point, let me try to step back and talk more broadly. Rebalancing the mechanics is the goal, yes. But to the new player the zones and the arena are just as much a part of the problem as the bad mechanics are. The difference is that creating a newb friendly instanced pvp environment is (or should be) easier than rebalancing everything. Giving new players a positive first experience, win or lose, rather than a gang r$ping at the hands of a group of veterans in a zone, or the pure frustration that is trying to teach yourself how to join an arena match, is gong to get people to come back. Yes I agree the bad mechanics will chase them away after a while. But it gives us a window to recruit them. And each new recruit adds a voice to get the real change implemented.
If they fixed the mechanics first we'd still have the problem that the zones and the arenas chase away new players so the PvP base would not grow. If they create a newb friendly experience the base will grow. if they fix the mechanics the new recruits will stay. Neither alone is enough, but one is easier and has more effect on new players.
I hear you on the camel's back thing, but I am giving them credit, perhaps deserved perhaps not, for not claiming the new environment would be a fix. If they called it a fix, oh yea you are right that's bad. But if they just said, here rebalncing is taking time (whether or not this is true let's let them say it), we hear you, but in the mean time here is something new for you to experience. That's called throwing a bone. and I am giving the pvp community the benefit of the ability to see it as such. But you're right, if it was presented as a fix and not as a step only, that would be bad.
"Hmm, I guess I'm not as omniscient as I thought" -Gavin Runeblade.
I can be found, outside of paragon city here.
Thank you everyone at Paragon and on Virtue. When the lights go out in November, you'll find me on Razor Bunny.
I remember early on Arcanaville had come out with a formula that made my head spin. But the basics, as I understood them, were that each attribute had its own ED-like curve and the further to the right you moved down the curve, the more you took a hit. Some attributes had a softer, more forgiving curve but most of them had a fairly severe curve.
I know that Mids tried to plug in those formulas but I hear from several pros that it isn't very reliable. Some numbers are right and others are wrong. Is there a reliable source for these numbers?
Positron's i13 letter: We are trying to make PvP more accessible to new players, while giving experienced PvP'ers the advantage that comes with formulating tactics around the new systems we're putting in place. PvP from now on will be on our priority list. If something isn't working out, we'll be in there tweaking it and making it work, for the entire future of the product, not just Issue 13.