[PvP Poll] If you had to chose, what type of PvP do like more?


  • TF#10 - CONSUL


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    I myself like the most PvP that occurs naturally and spontaneously over different reasons, while you are playing the game doing something other than PvP.

    For example, you are grinding, exploring or something else, and something happens that naturally leads to PvP engagement. I like both solo and group action, but since I have to chose I'll chose group because it's more fun when it's social, and you laugh with your friends about situations afterwards. Also, the more people engaged, the more fun it is for me, and team tactics and organisation comes into play.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    It is a pity that you did survey 1 answer, not a few(


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @gothix i like the PVP as you described it.

    PVP by opportunity, same as i like Roleplay at opportunity.
    I always need a reason to step into PVP, if it is a defending of something, guarding someone or just chasing bad people.

    To kill another player just „because you can“ is a kind of ganking. I don‘t like ganking in all its kinds.

    Also i don‘t like instanced PVP.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    @muker said in [PvP Poll] If you had to chose, what type of PvP do like more?:

    It is a pity that you did survey 1 answer, not a few(

    I wanted to see what people prefer the most, if they had to chose only one.

    If I allowed people to select more, I couldn't see what they like "the most".


  • TF#6 - DIPLOMAT

    Long as it is at least somewhat fair it's fun. Killing crafters or gatherers who have no hope of doing anything is just boring.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    Depends on my mood.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    I vote for the first one (but maybe the third, depend if I'm in a group ^^). I like to kill strong players when I see a fight and it's not fair, I've always prefered the weakest guys to the strongest x)


  • TF#5 - LEGATE

    I voted third cause i prefer to play in group, but the first choice is an option too, you can PVP while you do random stuff like gathering materials, exploring etc.


  • TF#6 - DIPLOMAT

    Voted third, because i ...

    don't know what i should write, because @Kralith described it way better than i could have done it. 😄


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    I wen t with white knight group, but I wouldn't mind some other options either.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    that totally depends on the playstyle of the character

    as mage i like fair and square pvp
    mostly in groups

    but as an assassin character i would love predator 1v1 in the woods or something

    i mean its something that changes on the playstyle, you know


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    Other: Modified natural occurring 1 v 1 - ie, both sides have to accept the pvp in some fashion before the fight is really "on"

    (I like Fallout's model - you offer pvp by attacking someone (for micro damage), and they accept by attacking back (for micro damage) and then the fight begins. if the other side ain't interested, you can try to get the kill with micro damage, but it's a) unlikely, b) seriously unrewarding (even if you kill them, you get no loot or money, a miniscule amount of experience, and you get slapped with the killer tag, which makes you appear on everyone's radar, and auto-accepts all pvp attempts with everyone that offers, for...3 days, I think? aka, anyone can "start" a duel with you by pot-shotting you for full damage. conversely, they encourage pvp by making it an exceptional way to gain experience, loot, and resources, if both sides accept - more experience than a similarly leveled critter, significantly more loot and money than is possible for any monster to drop. It's basically the best thing ever, if everyone wants to play, but it discourages some of the more bullying tactics that you can see in some games)

    I also enjoy arranged huge messes - 100+ characters just going all out all over the place, either teamed or battle royale - something I'm looking forward to in the eclipse raids and sieges)


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    I chose the 3rd option, but it really depends. When it comes to more competetive gameplay I would go with instanced PvP either with objectives or not, doesn't matter.



  • If I’m honest, I like them all. From 1v1’ing to casually killing some random newbie with 4 other people. They’re all great.



  • I voted for natural group pvp because that's where my most fun MMO experiences have been, particularly when my group has been outnumbered, but I like it all except for maybe ganking. But even ganking has its place: my group once ganked members of a particular guild to provoke them into going to war with us which led to fun naturally occurring pvp.


  • TF#10 - CONSUL

    While I am not going to be looking for PvP all the time I could see it for resources. Groups and guilds doing battle for stuff is fun.... getting ganked hunting or on my way to a location... not so much. PvP if done correctly can be quite fun. I loved Ice Crown in WoW using items and attacking fortified positions was pretty fun, defending was also exciting. I just do not like forced or bully'ish PvP.


  • TF#2 - MESSENGER

    i will avoid pvp whenever i can.


  • TF#8 - GENERAL AMBASSADOR

    I prefer 'structured' group PvP. That is, PvP with some basic rules of engagement and less of the imbalances that tend to make solo PvP on two or three other people possible in so many MMOs. For me, that means War-decs need to be important and limited in some fashion (at least for humans, because PvP on Tartaros is a whole different thing).

    I think a hard-cap on outgoing war-decs would be the important thing. You could have as many incoming as you could get... but without the outgoing cap there will be people who simply declare war on everyone to run around with less consequences for attacking anyone they find at a disadvantage. Those players need to be on Tartaros, not the human world.

    I strongly believe that the best use of the worlds is to segment out the types of PvP as well as the levels of such conflict.

    P.S. This survey basically confirms for any developers out there why community based policing doesn't work. Very few people want to WK PvP. Not only is it mostly chasing people, but if you want to have a group set up you have to wait for somebody to chase. The idea that such a thing will work for a game based on player actions alone... is something that really needs to die already!


  • TF#4 - EMISSARY

    Best PvP is naturally occuring solo or small scale PvP. 1v1, 1v2, 1v3, 2v2, etc.
    Even better if it has a reason. For example, I want to gather magic mushrooms and catch fairy butterflies that can be found only in this area, and here is a guy that's giving me a competition for those. Of course he should be forced to leave this spot in a gruesome way.

    Second best is coordinated small scale fights for resources. Say, 5 guys are mining carelessly. So another group appears and attacks them, and a fight ensures. Whoever wins, gets a cart full of good stuff.

    Third best, is a siege scenario. Where you participate a town/castle/whatever siege as a guild member, as a mercenary, or as a guy who asked to join just for fun.

    This might be the best PvP absolutely, if implemented right. Requires correct town/castle planning, various tasks, objectives and possibilities, so that every build will have something to do. Some hold the main gate, others press them. Some guard the smaller passages with smaller groups, some are doing infiltration, espionage kind of work, doing some kind of sabotaging and killing behind enemy lines, etc.

    And this might be the worst, if it's implemented in a bad way, where sieges will end up as an AoE spam galore, with only "Tank", "Ranged DPS", and "Healer/support" type of characters having place in this clusterkek of a PvP (See: Albion).


 

Copyright © 2018 Dynamight Studios Srl | Fractured