[AoC] PvP Direction

[CnCGOD]

Originally Posted by Northerner

It is almost identical to the situation DAoC was in at release.

PvE is mostly but not entirely complete and has exploits and balance issues galore. PvP is fun but largely pointless and has even worse balance issues. It also really isn't even close to complete content wise.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out actually, although I'll likely drop sub and check it out again in a few months.

Did you play DAOC at release? There wasnt even MID level itemization. And PVP ballance was 10x worse than aoc.... some classes were completely worthless and rangers could 1 shot FROM STEALTH most classes in the game.

[Northerner]

I sure did play it at release. Hell, most of the lack of itemization was a blessing! I loved me that pure coin loot across the land. Playing Mid at the time was amusing to painful depending on how you like your MMO.

Small ball PvP was still pretty fun but between hammer of lag and the idiocy that was initial balance, it was an awful time for mass RvR. We spent a good bit of time Stealther hunting and controlling some exp areas however and while fun, that was about as consequential as the old TM battles in WoW.

[KianwanCT]

The crafting items are fine, you just need atleast T2 buildings to access the better stuff and T3 for the really good stuff

[Pinchandroll]

Does anybody else feel that giving a huge amount of bank space, then allowing people the loot the inventory (obviously not equipped items) of dead players, would make pvp more meaningful?

On Sullon Zek, as well as Shadowbane, you never had any fear of losing your valuable stuff as long as you banked it when you got it. However, it was a pain to shuttle back and forth between town and the hunting zones too frequently, so you had to dance a fine line between staying and grinding out more levels and cash, or banking frequently and slowing down your exp noticeably.

I haven't played, not have I bought, AoC, so I can't comment on how this would affect the game, but it seems like this would satisfy people who want the chance to get something out of pvp, but it would also allow good items to be safely banked en masse as long as you didn't get greedy and continue farming and building up a bunch of cash and loot. This way the 'hardcore' pvp'ers who thrive off of the "spoils of war" are satisfied, but it won't alienate people who want the ffa pvp option without being in constant fear of losing all their loot.

[Itzena]

Item look in a diku-derivative with any sort of loot scaling at all is fundamentally broken.

[Pyros]

They don't really need item loot, while I've played UO and AC and loved it in those games, too many people would consider it a too harsh penalty I think.

They can make deaths meaningfull in other ways. The best way to prevent griefing imo is just add a death penalty to pvp death like current pve one, but it only works in pvp, and actually does something significant. After 2 or 3deaths, the guy you've been rez camping can't even fight back(-20%dmg/30%heal per death or stuff like that) and has to leave the zone. He'll still be able to kill mobs fine, but he won't be able to come back for the 14th time and maybe manage to kill you this time because you've been fighting his whole group for 15mins straight, after which you'll just rez and keep fighting too. Makes controlling zones annoying in some cases(atzel fortress is a pain for example). Keshatta doesn't have this issue because the rez points aren't on the fucking top of the leveling point. They're close, but it's still a 2-3mins walk from the town to the deathmaster spot, and longer for every other spot.

[TwiNCannoN]

Part of me wants to say "it's a shame AoC doesn't have a UO style item system" but upon thinking about it, it's probably only because I want a new version of UO so badly.

Either way, there's no way they could implement such a system now.

[findar]

Originally Posted by TwiNCannoN

Part of me wants to say "it's a shame AoC doesn't have a UO style item system" but upon thinking about it, it's probably only because I want a new version of UO so badly.

Either way, there's no way they could implement such a system now.

put a dumbed down version of uo on xbox live. im sold.

[Tolanin]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

Was the GM conversation with a member of the SA guild proven fake or something? I can't see how anyone could call it a PvP game if that was authentic at all.

because no one gives a fuck if retard goons get banned for starting a raid to camp no name newbies in the starter zone... in the real pvp the gms dont get involved unless there is like huge spawn camping and even then they dont get very involved.

if your idea of pvp game is taking a hundred people to camp the equivalent of red ridge with then ya this might not be your game. And even that is not a good example because alliance sometimes would defend red ridge, no guild in this game goes to defend tesso because there are no factions so theres not even the excuse that you do it to lure out the high lvls

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by Tolanin

because no one gives a fuck if retard goons get banned for starting a raid to camp no name newbies in the starter zone... in the real pvp the gms dont get involved unless there is like huge spawn camping and even then they dont get very involved.

if your idea of pvp game is taking a hundred people to camp the equivalent of red ridge with then ya this might not be your game. And even that is not a good example because alliance sometimes would defend red ridge, no guild in this game goes to defend tesso because there are no factions so theres not even the excuse that you do it to lure out the high lvls

My idea of a PvP game is having the freedom to do whatever I want. This includes taking over Deceit and this also includes camping the road outside of East Brit. This also includes everyone else having the freedom to do what THEY want, which just might involve organizing a guild or other form of group to deal with me and my guild. But no one will ever form their own police force if mommy GM will just come and save the day. "There is a PvP solution to this problem. Have a nice day and thank you for calling FunCom in-game support!"

[Aamina]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

My idea of a PvP game is having the freedom to do whatever I want. This includes taking over Deceit and this also includes camping the road outside of East Brit. This also includes everyone else having the freedom to do what THEY want, which just might involve organizing a guild or other form of group to deal with me and my guild. But no one will ever form their own police force if mommy GM will just come and save the day. "There is a PvP solution to this problem. Have a nice day and thank you for calling FunCom in-game support!"

What you want is for a company to tell paying customers that the real solution is sometimes to stop using the product and log out. That business model does not work.

[Manseed]

Originally Posted by Sidhe

My idea of a PvP game is having the freedom to do whatever I want. This includes taking over Deceit and this also includes camping the road outside of East Brit. This also includes everyone else having the freedom to do what THEY want, which just might involve organizing a guild or other form of group to deal with me and my guild. But no one will ever form their own police force if mommy GM will just come and save the day. "There is a PvP solution to this problem. Have a nice day and thank you for calling FunCom in-game support!"

They used to have a game like that, then this other game called Everquest came out and everyone left said game. You might see that game again, but it will be a flash game or something that cost 4 digits to make. Or it might be called Darkfall, but who knows.

[Elerion]

Freedom is great. The problem is absolute freedom drives new players away and turns the server into a slowly dying circle jerk. Giving up minor freedoms like the ability to cockblock the entire level 20 population for hours on end is a small price to pay for a game that stays healthy and populated for the part that matters.

Note that you could still stand around the level 20 zone and graveyard camp for 30 minutes without that being an issue. When you do it for hours, GMs will encourage you to stop. I don't think anyone has actually been banned yet.

[Sidhe]

Originally Posted by Manseed

They used to have a game like that, then this other game called Everquest came out and everyone left said game. You might see that game again, but it will be a flash game or something that cost 4 digits to make. Or it might be called Darkfall, but who knows.

I really don't find it fair to say that EverQuest killed Ultima Online. UO servers remained packed well after EQ launch (we're talking years, not a couple months). It's because the two games provided vastly different experiences, and not everyone wanted EQ.

Also, the folks over at CCP would like to have a word with you about their 4 digit MMO. Although Flash might perform better than Python.

e: In response to Aamina . . . Sandbox games shouldn't really make you feel like you want to log out. If you walk into them with the mindset that "today I am going to go to dungeon X and get sword Y," and dungeon X is camped, well then you set yourself up for failure. Maybe it does mean that the game is not for you if you want simple objectives with a clear path to them. That's not an insult to you or to the game. One game cannot and will not please everyone, and not every game has to have 10 million subscribers. I'd say Age of Conan strayed from "10 million subscribers" when they marketed their game as a "skill-based" console type PvP game. That's just fine.