The PvE vs PvP Thread
-
@jetah Nope. I'm a pvper too but I don't go for PKing gatherers/merchants, neither gank squad (except MOBA). Said this it's right differentiate the 2 things. Gankers are similar role as campers in Counter Strike.
@jetah
yes, it's easier to kill and steal than it is to work for something.Well in albion gankers had to start gahtering cause there where no more gatherers to kill around.
@jetah
as for your PS, if you hate 7 of 10 core elements of a game then i don't see how you'll enjoy just 3 core elements.I don't like the ganking option on Arboreus. So tell me the other 6 things.
-
snipers job is to camp. they aren't ganking they're doing their job. although i'd believe they should get a kill or 2 then move.
pvp is killing that's the point. there isn't a difference between killing gatherers or in an arena.
-
@jetah said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
you say bullying but it's part of the game.
That doesnt change the fact that the act is bullying. Just because something is possible to do doesnt change what it is.
Truth is what others like @vengu @EvolGrinZ have said is whats going to happen. You're pushing so much to be able to kill players that want no part in it they are going to be turned off from trying the game out. People will lose interest because of it and then whether you can kill PvE'rs or not you wont have any to kill. Your desire to kill them just makes no sense. They want to be left alone, so leave them alone lol. If they want to pvp they will go to one of TWO planets that have it.
The fact that you cant see that does show a bully mentality. Thats the issue they have with you guys.
-
if it's within the rules of the game it isn't bullying. just because it's unwanted doesn't mean it's bullying.
I've stated my desire plenty of times. I want the challenge of fighting on the beast planet because there's a penalty. If they want to be left alone then they'll stay in the safe areas where demons and evil humans can't go.
I believe there will be plenty of beast there to play with us at the gate. Don't make it sound like every beastkin doesn't want to pvp.
-
@jetah said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
I've stated my desire plenty of times. I want the challenge of fighting on the beast planet because there's a penalty. If they want to be left alone then they'll stay in the safe areas where demons and evil humans can't go.
I believe there will be plenty of beast there to play with us at the gate. Don't make it sound like every beastkin doesn't want to pvp.
The problem will be if they will be forced to go out of safe zone to fully enjoy the game. If there will be endgame in safe zone then it shouldn't be a problem. That little bit that everyone will have to explore in unsafe zone should be ok. Probably best way to pull PvEers to PvP is a positive incentive - forcing them to do it will only make them quit. And killing players that want to go pure PvE will make them quit for sure.
-
@tulukaruk said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@phaethonas said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
First of all there won't be any defenseless farmers. Is that so hard for you to understand? Beastkin will be able to arm themselves and will have an advantage because their adversaries will have debuffs on them.
Secondly, although the beast planet will be pve oriented, pvp will exist. Evil aligned players will bring that with them. Wanting something else is like wanting another game, in which case, go and find it.We have no idea what the debuff will be and how will it work - so don't give a Beastman easy win yet
PvE players quite often do PvE - when you fight a mob and a PvP player shows and joins the fight on mob side it can be really hard to survive. And then again - I disagree with you - pure PvE player are quite often very bad at PvP.There will be regions on Beastman world that will be PvP free - no PvP at all there. How it will work? We'll find out in next spotlight.
I don't think they will make that planet completely PvP free but I surely don't want them to delete that pure PvE regions. I will try the game and see how it works and if I enjoy it I'll stay, if not I'll leave. They're promising game fun for PvE players so I do hope it will be fun. Some PvP players think that only way the game will be fun for them is if it's not fun for PvEers... that's why I still post in this topic
It's late so my post might be a bit chaotic.And I think you're wrong about planets being race specific - they will be alignment specific.
Planets are race specific, read one of the first spotlights. That does not exclude traveling though.
As for the PvP vs PvE subject, I will repeat once more that; Beastkin will not be easy prey. So in the context of the mechanics and features of Fractured, PvE players won't be easy pickings for "gankers".
As we don't know a number of things, including how bad the debuffs will be for the demons, how long will the demons stay at Arboreus etc, anything we are discussing is moot. What is important is that these mechanics will be there and that they will be "optimized" throughout the game's lifetime.
What is important is for pvp players to accept those hindrances and for the pve players to accept that they will die occasionally. Both are aspects of the game. Both are core aspects of the game. If you don't like either, then you don't like what Fractured tries to be. In that case the person who doesn't like either of these features (or other core features) can move along and find something else.
-
@finland said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@phaethonas said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
So, if you are a care bear that want nothing to do with pvp?
I told you 100 times that I'm going to play Human on Syndesia for the siege thingy. I'm just defending PvErs in general.
So, let me get this straight; You are not against PvP as you will play in a PvPvE environment, yet you dislike a core feature of the game (PvP at Arboreus), that won't affect you, and you dislike it so much, that you go as far as to say that you want to put pressure to the devs (through community pressure) in order to change that core feature!
OK. Got it!
-
@vengu said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@evolgrinz said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
I must admit I am already starting to lose interest int he game as mostly PvE player in all games I play, reading how the PvP players are talking here and how they basically just want to bully the PvE players and make their life miserable any way they can.
Same here. Back when I first joined this forum, I warned Prometheus this would happen. If he thinks PvE and PvP can coexist together like this, Fractured will be dead within the year. There are people on this forum who are going to play this game solely to get rid of all the PvE Beastmen. The upcoming spotlight is going to be very interesting, and probably the determining factor for many people here, on both the PvE and PvP side.
I haven't given up yet, waiting patiently for the new spotlight and then I might decide, we'll see.
-
@phaethonas said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@finland said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@phaethonas said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
So, if you are a care bear that want nothing to do with pvp?
I told you 100 times that I'm going to play Human on Syndesia for the siege thingy. I'm just defending PvErs in general.
So, let me get this straight; You are not against PvP as you will play in a PvPvE environment, yet you dislike a core feature of the game (PvP at Arboreus), that won't affect you, and you dislike it so much, that you go as far as to say that you want to put pressure to the devs (through community pressure) in order to change that core feature!
OK. Got it!
Nope. That's not right. I'll play on Syndesia for the siege feature if will be intresting. That's the kind of PvP I like on Fractured. I don't care to bitching around killing players to steal thingy. For sure I'll go grind resources on Arboreus if will be safe. If I want fighting for PvErs it's just because I want see this game with alot players (possibly happy that enjoys the game). I'm bored to recruit 10-20 players that will leave (rage quit) after 1-2-10 days. The main problem related to gankers is the full loot. So or you give a safe planet or you remove the full loot. In both ways gankers will be not happy and there is where I want to go. Gankers are the cancers of those games but as I said many times if the game will be a gank fest the game will die and you will quit too due the low care bears (beasts) population.
If moba would have the full loot none would have played them same for the fps. Those kind of games are pure pvp only and not mixed like an rpg, so when you talk about pvp keep that in mind. Pure PvP and no full loot there should be a reson. The risk is not achieving if you have to lose time except in one situation:
- You lose you char (deleted) like in Diablo. There I would enjoy killing gankers and would be risky balanced.
Anyway who invented the "sandbox full loot" was prolly a fan of "gank and steal". A "new" trend of niche dead games.
-
@finland said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
Anyway who invented the "sandbox full loot" was prolly a fan of "gank and steal". A "new" trend of niche dead games.
No,
in it's first weeks.Edit:
@miffi said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:(...)Your desire to kill them just makes no sense. They want to be left alone, so leave them alone lol. If they want to pvp they will go to one of TWO planets that have it.
The fact that you cant see that does show a bully mentality. Thats the issue they have with you guys.
The issue is that these same people don't understand designing game features is a bit like a cog wheel. If you change one, it influences (plenty of) others. If there is no interaction and exchange between planets, then you'd be completely right, but that's not the case.
-
@logain said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
The issue is that these same people don't understand designing game features is a bit like a cog wheel. If you change one, it influences (plenty of) others. If there is no interaction and exchange between planets, then you'd be completely right, but that's not the case.
But there would be interaction, just not the find a player minding his own business, kill him and take his stuff. Also, this would only apply to one of the planets, that makes two still having this kind you so desire. What I dont understand is why its such a big deal to kill beastkin? Its not a factions game, you are not 'with' the other demons, they are still your prey and that is who you should want to steal from. And if you wish to still go the 'factions' way you can go to the human planet to raid and pillage all you want. They would also fight back since they opted in for the PvP.
Also which mechanic are you referring to specifically? The resources being different for each planet? If so, it actually makes things simpler. You would be able to go to Arboreus and mine/gather your resource and leave. That doesnt change anything there?
-
I don't think this game will cater to "carebears" and I think if you're going into this game expecting to just spend all your time on Arboreus safely PvEing this game probably won't be for you.
-
Full loot shows that the devs intend for this game to be fairly hardcore. They want risk to be involved. A self-contained extremely safe Arboreus goes against the idea of risk.
-
They described Arboreus as PvE-centric, not PvE exclusive. Just like Tartaros will be PvP-centric but will most likely also have plenty of PvE. I strongly suspect the safe areas of Arboreus will mostly be the big hubs, and venturing away from those hubs will always always carry risk; decreased risk compared to other planets, but risk nontheless. I very much doubt spending all your time in safe zones will be rewarding or fun.
-
The knowledge system is heavily exploration based. You will have to leave your safe zones to develop your talents and abilities. What is a carebear going to do when they have to travel to Tartaros to learn an ability they want or to upgrade one of their abilities?
I feel for those who are looking to live their digital lives as peaceful farmers permanently safe from all those evil gankers, but from what we know about the game so far, I don't think it will really support that. The closest you might get is joining a guild and living on their settlement as peacefully as you can under their protection, but there will never be guaranteed safety.
-
-
@target Well said, and maybe there is the middle ground. Staying in safezones is possible but with little risk comes little reward, and there I feel would be a good compromise. Giving people the choice to go or not with more reward, but not forcing them to do so.
-
@target I would say that "peaceful/cooperative player" is pretty close to "carebear"
And they said that that kind of player is also their target. One of us has to be wrong - either I misunderstand the devs or you do.
-
@tulukaruk said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
@target I would say that "peaceful/cooperative player" is pretty close to "carebear"
And they said that that kind of player is also their target. One of us has to be wrong - either I misunderstand the devs or you do.And that's the confusing part. Here we have a dev company that advertises a hardcore PvP game with full loot, free4all PvP, etc, while at the same time also advertising the game to peaceful PvE players who aren't interested in hardcore PvP, and they seem to believe they can blend these 2 things together. That obviously confuses a lot of people which has lead to many clashes in this thread. Some of us believe this game will be very peaceful towards PvE players while others believe this game will lean heavily to the PvP side, even on Arboreus. The upcoming spotlight will most certainly be the most important spotlight we've had so far.
-
If I had to guess or speculate the invasion to Arboreus will happen weekly or bi-monthly. I can't see invasions happening more often than that. that gives the beastkin plenty of time to themselves.
I can see the eclipse happening between tartaros and syndesia happening every day for 2-5 hours. I believe this will be offset so that eventually every night or day player has a chance to invade.
-
@target as I said many times open world dungeons/raids/boss in a full loot pvp world is not PvE. Everything that involve to combat players became pvp. PvE means no pvp fight. I'm bored to tell this.
-
One great thing about a sandbox is making rules that aren't programmed. So get some people and guard those inside!
-
Full loot sandbox games aren't always a failure. Just look at EVE-Online.
It doesn't have a huge player base like the popular mmorpg's, but the game has been running strong for a long time.The game has good options to give you time to run or hide like if you are mining asteroids in a system, I usually pick a dead end system where I am alone or with very few others, then keep an eye on the players in chat and check info of anyone who comes into the system, and if they have negative influence you know they could have bad intentions and you know it's best to jump to a station or a another safe spot . And if you are in free for all zone have your friendly corporations/alliances defend space and kill everyone who doesn't belong there.
Question is, if something like that can be done for the worlds here, as they are just 3 worlds while EVE has a lot of systems.
-
@miffi said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
But there would be interaction
That's exactly the point I was trying to highlight. Like I said, the concept works if there is NO interaction, but soon as you allow that interaction the design breaks and you force people into cheating (which frankly, no game should, since that's strange and poor design).
@miffi said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:
(...)What I dont understand is why its such a big deal to kill beastkin?
(...)Also which mechanic are you referring to specifically?If there is any way where resources can be exchanged between a completely PvP on and a completely PvP off area, every competitive PvP player 'has to' break the rules and run bots in order to keep a steady influx on equipment, otherwise the players that come from the PvP off into the PvP on area for timed and planned PvP are always going to have an edge. Finland even mentioned he had been doing that himself in another game earlier in the thread. Which means every honest PVP player that does not break the rules gets screwed.
Is that good design? If so, why even have equipment?Edit:
@evolgrinz said in The PvE vs PvP Thread:Question is, if something like that can be done for the worlds here, as they are just 3 worlds while EVE has a lot of systems.
It could be done, since you can always fragment a planet into smaller 'areas'. But a 'difficult and still possible' is not what the 'no PvP at all on Arboreus'-crowd wants. That's the problem the developers are facing.
