Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
MJayed

PvP Options Outside of CWs

Recommended Posts

i could be down for this, although it be cool if they implanted this into a hunger games style, where instead of you coming in with your own gear you come in completely naked and find gear, food, disc randomly placed with the same being said for many other players in a decent sized map with a timer(although this could just be another different they could add and spice it up with their own version of it so its not completely based off another idea)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

If it's random, it's a meta you simply can't account for.  There is a reason there are Lanes and Lane champions in League of Legends, and why each champion works best in one lane,  some tolerable in two, with massive outliers that can play three or more.

If you can end up against any random race/class, with any set of random disciplines (2 major, 1 weapon, 3 minor), the meta is going to be too chaotic to have a "counter".  You'll be kitted for anti archer, and just as likely to find yourself against a myrmidon bruiser, and crushed. This game was designed around the idea you could pick and try to control your encounters based on the advantages you have, and arenas are exactly the opposite of that.  A set of fixed parameters where the only major variance is the characters and player skill.

It would be like trying to design a game with a chess board, using chess,checkers, go, monopoly and game of life pieces all with different rules.

Sorry, ACE didn't promise that, it's not a goal, and frankly it's not as needed as you seem to believe it is.

So? There is counter play outside of disciplines as well such as player skill. I know guys who make builds to kill their counters. This isn't supposed to be a competitive game mode. Some people love beating people when they are at a disadvantage. There is no risk or rewards. The real competition is CWs. Arenas are for fun.

Edited by MJayed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MJayed said:

So? There is counter play outside of disciplines as well such as player skill. I know guys who make builds to kill their counters. This isn't supposed to be a competitive game mode. Some people love beating people when they are at a disadvantage. There is no risk or rewards. The real competition is CWs.

Feel free to keep thinking about it, but arena is probably not going to happen unless players built it in the EK, for at least 2-3 years after launch. 

There are so many other short world options for ACE to explore that don't have the team/player balance issue.

  • PUBG style last man standing survival.
  • Small team raids into very hostile world that you have a very low chance of surviving.
  • Hunger dome.
  • With the world building randomizer thingy I could see a worlds built just for an Amazing Race style raid. First one through the exit gate gets the goodies.

And these three from the FAQ

  • You want to try a world without magic? Cool.
  • You want to try a world where we introduce cannons as a siege weapon? Sounds interesting.
  • You want to try a world where each character only has one life – meaning that if you die once, you are permanently banned from the World? Sure, let’s do it.

Arena has already been done, and done very well.  I don't want CF to become just another arena game, I personally want to see NEW things from this NEW game.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

Feel free to keep thinking about it, but arena is probably not going to happen unless players built it in the EK, for at least 2-3 years after launch. 

There are so many other short world options for ACE to explore that don't have the team balance issue.

  • PUBG style last man standing survival.
  • Small team raids into very hostile world that you have a very low chance of surviving.
  • Hunger dome.
  • With the world building randomizer thingy I could see a worlds built just for an Amazing Race style raid. First one through the gate gets the goodies.

And these three from the FAQ

  • You want to try a world without magic? Cool.
  • You want to try a world where we introduce cannons as a siege weapon? Sounds interesting.
  • You want to try a world where each character only has one life – meaning that if you die once, you are permanently banned from the World? Sure, let’s do it.

Arena has already been done, and done very well.  I don't want CF to become just another arena game, I personally want to see NEW things from this NEW game.

Do you agree that there should be a CW alternative for using exported gear? Specifically an alternative that is viable 24/7 and requires minimal preparation time. Edit: that is fun 

Edited by MJayed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MJayed said:

Do you agree that there should be a CW alternative for using exported gear? Specifically an alternative that is viable 24/7 and requires minimal preparation time. Edit: that is fun 

Yea I do, I just don't think it's a priority for ACE to support that early. 

You have an EK, you can build an arena, (many will), and try to convince people to bash their shiny stuff against each other in it.  I think that what ACE should focus on more is better EK tools, over and above any additional game modes.

Players will use good tools to build way more than ACE ever could, and help with finding all those interesting game mode corner cases.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

Yea I do, I just don't think it's a priority for ACE to support that early. 

You have an EK, you can build an arena, (many will), and try to convince people to bash their shiny stuff against each other in it.  I think that what ACE should focus on more is better EK tools, over and above any additional game modes.

Players will use good tools to build way more than ACE ever could, and help with finding all those interesting game mode corner cases.

 

Ok. I just don't believe EKs can provide what arenas do. I stated my reasons why previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind limited duration events that feature different types of PvX.  We had the Hungerdome and I'd love to see it come back for 3 weeks to a month then disappear till next year.

At some point people will get tired of the CW loop and will want something different, having Hunderdome and a few seasonal events would be enough to change the face/feel of the game. Add in some limited cosmetics and people will want to participate in them.


etDenA9.png
Camaraderie ~ Loyalty ~ Honor ~ Maturity ~ Integrity ~ Duty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arenas are an easy way to have players, importantly new players, compete in public groups with randomly assigned teams. This allows players to build their skills and establish a repertoire with other players. Face it, when players are new, they may not have a guild to run with and may end up tiring of being badly trampled in open world. It's difficult to develop skill when you are constantly outnumbered, and if you aren't skilled you are not as likely to be recruited to join a relevant guild. The problem is cyclical. Sure, EKs might provide an out, but the shortfalls there are somewhat understood. There will always be a decent portion of gamers that appreciate spending 80% of their time in arenas, and 20% of their time roaming the world. Similar to what MJayed was saying, roaming the map for hours looking for a fight or two gets boring quickly.

I don't really understand the argument against an arena. If EKs prove superior, then the devs can stop putting time into arenas. On the other hand, I feel like arenas would require a relatively small development burden to establish and represent a large portion of the gaming experience for many players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, YewFearsinger said:

Arenas are an easy way to have players, importantly new players, compete in public groups with randomly assigned teams. This allows players to build their skills and establish a repertoire with other players. Face it, when players are new, they may not have a guild to run with and may end up tiring of being badly trampled in open world. It's difficult to develop skill when you are constantly outnumbered, and if you aren't skilled you are not as likely to be recruited to join a relevant guild. The problem is cyclical. Sure, EKs might provide an out, but the shortfalls there are somewhat understood. There will always be a decent portion of gamers that appreciate spending 80% of their time in arenas, and 20% of their time roaming the world. Similar to what MJayed was saying, roaming the map for hours looking for a fight or two gets boring quickly.

I don't really understand the argument against an arena. If EKs prove superior, then the devs can stop putting time into arenas. On the other hand, I feel like arenas would require a relatively small development burden to establish and represent a large portion of the gaming experience for many players.

Dilly Dilly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, YewFearsinger said:

Arenas are an easy way to have players, importantly new players, compete in public groups with randomly assigned teams. This allows players to build their skills and establish a repertoire with other players. Face it, when players are new, they may not have a guild to run with and may end up tiring of being badly trampled in open world. It's difficult to develop skill when you are constantly outnumbered, and if you aren't skilled you are not as likely to be recruited to join a relevant guild. The problem is cyclical. Sure, EKs might provide an out, but the shortfalls there are somewhat understood. There will always be a decent portion of gamers that appreciate spending 80% of their time in arenas, and 20% of their time roaming the world. Similar to what MJayed was saying, roaming the map for hours looking for a fight or two gets boring quickly.

I don't really understand the argument against an arena. If EKs prove superior, then the devs can stop putting time into arenas. On the other hand, I feel like arenas would require a relatively small development burden to establish and represent a large portion of the gaming experience for many players.

The argument is simple to understand, if you understand that for an arena game to be fun it has to be balanced, and if ACE builds it, they have to support it and make efforts to balance it.

If ACE does not do that, then they will get dragged into the vortex of complaints about imbalance in the characters, and rightfully so.  If they offer an arena mode they are effectively promising, "our characters are balanced and fun to play in an arena environment" when they are not, and are not designed to be. There may only be 2 or 3 race/class combos that actually work well in an arena setting.  

There is nothing in your post that can not be accomplished, and in fact is supposed to be accomplished, between players in EK's.  It's up to ACE to build the tools to guide new players to those EK's that offer cheap/free gear, and the settings to start learning skills.  Don't you think that every major guild will have an EK dedicated to recruiting and training, as well as a market full of usable cheap gear that's just below what the guild uses in campaigns. The more important new recruits are to a guild, the more effort they will put into these, not to mention those that are not in guilds, but do want to try to build arenas for themselves.

Players are going to fill the gap of "not being trampled in open world", staged arena like fighting, and many of the other content items.  Not all combat and player content is going to be in campaign worlds. 

ACE setting up arenas would be stepping on players toes in that they would lose the opportunity to try to create something great, as well as making an implied promise that every race/class combo is viable as an arena combatant. 

 

 

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

The argument is simple to understand, if you understand that for an arena game to be fun it has to be balanced, and if ACE builds it, they have to support it and make efforts to balance it.

If ACE does not do that, then they will get dragged into the vortex of complaints about imbalance in the characters, and rightfully so.  If they offer an arena mode they are effectively promising, "our characters are balanced and fun to play in an arena environment" when they are not, and are not designed to be. There may only be 2 or 3 race/class combos that actually work well in an arena setting.  

There is nothing in your post that can not be accomplished, and in fact is supposed to be accomplished, between players in EK's.  It's up to ACE to build the tools to guide new players to those EK's that offer cheap/free gear, and the settings to start learning skills.  Don't you think that every major guild will have an EK dedicated to recruiting and training, as well as a market full of usable cheap gear that's just below what the guild uses in campaigns. The more important new recruits are to a guild, the more effort they will put into these, not to mention those that are not in guilds, but do want to try to build arenas for themselves.

Players are going to fill the gap of "not being trampled in open world", staged arena like fighting, and many of the other content items.  Not all combat and player content is going to be in campaign worlds. 

ACE setting up arenas would be stepping on players toes in that they would lose the opportunity to try to create something great, as well as making an implied promise that every race/class combo is viable as an arena combatant. 

 

 

The bolded is what I want to see.  Let the players come-up with their own arenas.  They have allowed PvP in Ek's so they can. I would rather see energy for development spent on making campaigns and combat/crafting/exploration more enjoyable. This should be a never ending battle. 

 

Lets keep as many sandbox elements as possible.  Having Ace make a Arena system puts it on rails.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good points but I'm sure there would be a good portion of people that would be content with an arena that is class imbalanced vs no arena at all. There would be many benefits of having an arena that is normalized when it comes to training and gear though. A huge benefit that I could see is to allow someone to test multiple classes before committing to one that they invest training time into. I bet a lot more people would be playing this game right now if they could just jump right into battle and test different classes even if they were imbalanced.

The "You can do this now in an EK" is not a good argument for obvious reasons that were already listed. "This is not the game for you, go play PUBG or Fortnite if you want to get instant battle" is also a narrow-sighted response. Everyone is trying to offer constructive advice that would be advantageous to retaining players and attracting new ones. If they are worried that a ton of time will be spent on arena balancing,  ACE could throw up a disclaimer stating that arena is imbalanced and for testing purposes only... Enter at your own risk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MJayed said:

Ok. I just don't believe EKs can provide what arenas do. I stated my reasons why previously.

I have little to no interest in EKs and player created content. I'm not one of those that stands game cities all day dueling...

I bought into CF because of the concept/promise of ACE trying new things.

Modes/rulesets and different ways to play are what draw me to many games. I wouldn't have backed CF without this on the table.

The player driven, open world pvp, player economy, blah blah blah concept isn't unique and CF is not the only one coming with the same bullet points. Heck if they don't get the performance in check, can toss large scale combat out the window, while others will have it.

What makes it unique (potentially) are the modes.

They might not have the resources to make a variety upfront, but hopefully launch and soon after we have options. Not just GvG/Dregs or 3/6/12 Faction or whatever with the same CW rules.

We already had the Hungerdome back at the start, clearly they are capable of whipping together something that deviates from the base game mode.

I and others have suggested campaigns that have separate training pools/options (sped up training or given X points to spend at the start), one vessel per campaign, battle royale (hungerdome), "real" friendly fire, new player "tutorial" hungerdome or small campaigns open 24/7 (DAoC style small format), etc.

The base concept doesn't need to be redone or huge amounts of time invested in any of these possibilities. If they design the core game well enough, making small changes and turning the dials as they say, should make it rather easy. Obviously any work takes resources, but game design is a risk/reward process just like how gameplay should be.

I fully understand that some want ACE to focus on how they want to play and anything outside of that box is a waste or not important right now, but games need to grow as players drop off and modes or simply doing new things will draw in some new, retain others, all while keeping the core version for those that only want that. It's a Win/Win if done well, which is the key I guess.

I have some hope/faith that ACE knows what they are doing and will actually support/embrace the very concept they hyped and sold their product with.

Edited by APE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

The argument is simple to understand, if you understand that for an arena game to be fun it has to be balanced, and if ACE builds it, they have to support it and make efforts to balance it.

If ACE does not do that, then they will get dragged into the vortex of complaints about imbalance in the characters, and rightfully so.  If they offer an arena mode they are effectively promising, "our characters are balanced and fun to play in an arena environment" when they are not, and are not designed to be. There may only be 2 or 3 race/class combos that actually work well in an arena setting.  

MMO Arenas - Not balanced.

MOBAs - Not balanced.

Overwatch/Paladin types - Not balanced.

Battle Royales (Fortnite, PUBG, H1Z1) - RNG not balanced

FPS (CS:GO) - Close as it gets I guess.

As is, CF will not be balanced regardless of 1v1, 100v100, or X build vs Y build.

Pretty much baked in that there will be tears raining down about imbalance no matter what happens.

Saying there may only be 2-3 options that work in an arena setting is missing some context. What an "arena" is, win conditions, player options, team options, etc all could be fiddled with that make just as many variations fun and viable as in any CF campaign ruleset. If something is so overly broken in an "arena" that it is the only option, pretty sure that would also impact regular modes as well. ACE is creating a balance monster.

2 hours ago, Nakawe said:

The bolded is what I want to see.  Let the players come-up with their own arenas.  They have allowed PvP in Ek's so they can. I would rather see energy for development spent on making campaigns and combat/crafting/exploration more enjoyable. This should be a never ending battle. 

Lets keep as many sandbox elements as possible.  Having Ace make a Arena system puts it on rails.  

If an "Arena" is putting it on rails, not sure how having Campaigns with dev predetermined win conditions that players must follow isn't any different.

The idea of a "sandbox" is just that, an idea. There are no rules to follow.

I'd rather they don't rework the boring passive training system/UI over and over, but is what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, APE said:

 

If an "Arena" is putting it on rails, not sure how having Campaigns with dev predetermined win conditions that players must follow isn't any different.

 

As per today q&a, campaign worlds will be dynamic and based on a sandbox play-style (player action changes the world) not a theme-park (rails).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me a buster if you want, but I'm actually very much against having any kind of PvP outside of the CWs. CF isn't going to have a huge population as it is, I don't want see a competing feature that would potentially take away from the CW population.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The initial topic of how to make exports more important is a good one to consider. That along with having a real tangible reason for winning CWs and making EKs a needed part of the game loop is the single biggest issue yet to be tackled. This is the fulcrum which all of CF success or failure balances on.

 

The other thing being talked about is player driven vs game provided. It can feel like a broken game to those that haven't experienced a sandbox/player driven MMO. It can feel world and foreign. The we can do is hope to explain the positives well enough that some get a basic understanding of the value this type of game has. In the end only having been through it will people truly grasp the full scope of such a great play style. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nakawe said:

As per today q&a, campaign worlds will be dynamic and based on a sandbox play-style (player action changes the world) not a theme-park (rails)

Players change the world within the dev provided content and options... (there be rails under that there sand).

Plenty of theme-parks have had changing landscapes, seasons, triggered events (short term or permanent outcomes), and other "dynamic" elements to support dev marketing about how a live their games are... WoW's AQ event in 09' was basically what Todd described. If player's impacting the world is what makes something a "sandbox" then I guess WoW is one?

Sounded like "dynamic" was more about the mirco and less macro for him. I'm all for "an open world simulator" as he called it with player actions impacting other players (that's kind of the point), but I don't see why this couldn't apply to something like an Arena, Battleground, or Battle Royale type setup. OP seemed to mean a more traditional one and done fight situation, but along with that, they could likely come up with a mini-CW system lasting a few hours or whatever as well (Hungerdome with more content).

Something that exists outside the regular stuff that people can do in-between campaigns, when friends aren't online, to have more relaxed setting, whatever.

Basically for me, there is no one or right way to go about it. What they have as a foundation can be used for any number of ways to play and that's the beauty.

If some only want a traditional open world PVP game that happens to end and restart once in a while, great, some of us would like to see a tad bit more creativity involved. 

Considering very little is permanent on the world side of things, as in nothing, I'm looking to Camelot Unchained and Ashes of Creation for more long term player actions mattering and dynamic stuff. If I can lose in one CW and start another with basically the same potential (with whatever import options), however I changed the last world won't matter all that much.

And then there is Tournaments from the Kickstarter. ACE doesn't seem too opposed (at least then) to the idea of alternate game modes that might be riding along those rails...

 - Championship Campaign Tournaments. The Tournament system exists as a meta-game layer on top of the Campaigns. To qualify for the Tournament, guilds must be victorious in one or more Campaigns. These elimination tournament ladders will separate the effective guilds from the mediocre, and the great guilds from the good. Complete for the ultimate prize in each band of Worlds (the Dragon Throne, or the greatsword Grievance)

 

Edited by APE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Keaggan said:

The initial topic of how to make exports more important is a good one to consider. That along with having a real tangible reason for winning CWs and making EKs a needed part of the game loop is the single biggest issue yet to be tackled. This is the fulcrum which all of CF success or failure balances on.

I believe this is going to be tough for them to get right for everyone in a way that makes it fair for new/old, good/bad players a like without Uncle Bob coming into play.

For me, I don't need a shiny trophy if I win. Playing and simply winning is enough for me. However, if I lose and the outcome is so negative that my next go is even harder, likely won't continue on. This is where I see imports/exports/rewards messing with players will to continue as more will lose than win as it usually goes.

Will be interesting to see how they manage it all.

At the start they said it would be possible to avoid EKs for the most part if not all together, I hope it ends up that way. I'd be fine playing zero import campaigns with everything done in campaign instead of who did what previously.

58 minutes ago, Keaggan said:

The other thing being talked about is player driven vs game provided. It can feel like a broken game to those that haven't experienced a sandbox/player driven MMO. It can feel world and foreign. The we can do is hope to explain the positives well enough that some get a basic understanding of the value this type of game has. In the end only having been through it will people truly grasp the full scope of such a great play style. 

A great "sandbox" experience doesn't remove the value of other ways to play that could function within the same overall game design. I can play PVE Fortnite and enjoy fighting off alien zombies with friends just as much as doing a 50 v 50 battle royale or 1v100. Don't see it is lack of understanding or experience with X game type, but simply some enjoying more than one option, especially when more are possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Keaggan said:

The other thing being talked about is player driven vs game provided. It can feel like a broken game to those that haven't experienced a sandbox/player driven MMO. It can feel world and foreign. The we can do is hope to explain the positives well enough that some get a basic understanding of the value this type of game has. In the end only having been through it will people truly grasp the full scope of such a great play style. 

An arena mode does not threaten the player-driven focus of this game. If an arena(or alternative PvP gamemode) uses gear obtained through CW/EKs, the players will have to participate in the core game to its full extent to be relevant in those modes. EK's that want to have PvP arenas and/or events won't be obsolete. They can be used for practice, tournaments/events with prizes, and pickup fights.

Game-provided instant PvP options has vast appeal to many types of players. PvP with low stress/risk and minimal downtime is something a lot of players will want from time to time. This game is advertised as a PvP mmo and it will attract players that will enjoy an option like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...