PDA

View Full Version : Successfully Implimenting a PvP system



prowessss
03-14-2010, 07:28 AM
Step 1: There are several minor adjustments and perhaps even more major additions that could be done to the game that would dramatically increase certain classes viability in combat.
I edited step 1 but didnt even re-read step 2.

Ultimately, due to the uniqueness of each individual player's style and build, it is impossible to balance the game. this does not mean the game is not balanced enough for PvP.



Step 2: Add incentive. I suggest we piggyback DAoC's castle warfare... It goes like this, each servers' dominant guilds purchase or aquire a keep in which they can house a relic. These relics would grant a small boost.. say one relic that gives +1 attack rolls, one that gives +1 AC, one that gives +1 spell DCs, one that gives +1 skills, one that gives +1 saves, etc. I purpose having all the way to +5s, with 17-20 competing for the +5s, 13-16 competing for the +4s, etc... each guild would only be able to have one relic at a time. This would give guilds a some kind of purpose, give pvp some kind of purpose, and it wouldn't offset pve in any big way. Sure these relics would be an advantage but not too significant... Have guilds set their raid time, and have other guilds wait in line to challenge them for their relic, this way the chinese don't steal our relics while we sleep.


I planned on having a 3rd step but it got late really quick. There's dozens of players in the wayward lobster at all hours pvping away... but the brawl pit is no pvp system. We need a system with substance. I dont see it feasable for xp or loot rewards for pvp as this would basically be implimenting grinding.

Anyway i hope my ideas are well recieved and I look forward to seeing you all in game :-D

Lorien_the_First_One
03-14-2010, 07:42 AM
The best thing to do for PvP is ignore it totally. Everything you do to help PvP will hurt the game overall, the OPs suggestions are evidence of this.

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 07:50 AM
Working on PvP in DDO is on the top of the DEVs "Do Not Do" list.

Dutch01
03-14-2010, 07:52 AM
I've covered this 7 ways to Sunday before and at this point I just don't care to explain why again so I'm just going to say NO!

/notsigned

/nevergoingtosign

/willneverthinkaboutsigning

prowessss
03-14-2010, 08:00 AM
we already know how people who don't like PvP feel about this subject... Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 08:03 AM
we already know how people who don't like PvP feel about this subject... Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.


If you do us the service of no more posts from people that look for a PvP experience.

Deal?

Lorien_the_First_One
03-14-2010, 08:05 AM
we already know how people who don't like PvP feel about this subject... Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.

Sorry, forums don't work like that. You make a suggestion, people tell you what they think of it. If they don't, the devs will foolishly think everyone agrees with you. There have been about 1000 of these posts previously, you will see pvp lovers are in the minority and if you bother to search them, there are good reasons PvP would be bad for this game.

Dandonk
03-14-2010, 08:07 AM
Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.

Keep hoping, but that won't happen.

People here don't like PvP. Deal with it.

Now, personally I never PvP, and I fail to see how it could be made to work without using waaaaay too many dev hours that could be better used to create new quests, races, classes and weapons (I live in eternal hope). But if it could, and it would bring more money in that they've used on developing it, well fine. But really, I doubt that would be the case.

Oh, and on the subject of saveless spells. Get Spell Resistance, and in some cases more HP.

Symar-FangofLloth
03-14-2010, 08:08 AM
I don't look for PvP.
However, if it's there, I'll usually give it a try.


Step 1: Fix the saveless spells.
Step 2: I purpose having all the way to +5s

1: Only if it was in PvP that they had a save. Of course, when you have the +5DC item you're proposing, it won't really matter that there's a save on it anyway, a lot of the time.

2: +5 is way, way too high. (Except for the Saves, as there are already +5 saves items. Unless it's supposed to stack.) Unless it only took effect in PvP. Still too high, but at least it wouldn't trivialize the rest of the game. If you're wanting it to take effect in the whole game, you're talking +2 max, and not until level 14+.

You're talking about ideas, and you want something. That's good.
However, you seem to be showing a lack of knowledge on game mechanics with the rewards you want.
Also, I don't really understand how your proposed keep deal works.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 08:42 AM
The system i propose will not subtract any significance from the PvE content. Each relic would be server-wide and only one guild would be able to possess each relic... So if there's one +5 relic, a lot of people will have their eyes on it... and the amount of guilds in the game currently, the relics would change hands very frequently until eventually guilds would swell as people would seek the most powerful allies and guilds would be more inclined to increase their numbers. This system would be a step towards creating a more complete world. those who don't want pvp can simply ignore this system and never really be missing out on much but a lot of action.. +5 might be a little extreme... but some way to segregate the level-ranges is desirable. perhaps have 1-10s competing for the +1 relics and 10-20s competing for the +2 relics... The biggest problem i see with this is the server load.. we can't have Korthos Army constantly battling for the +1s...
I have a better idea, make it 10+... 10-15s fighting for the +1s and 15-20s fighting for the +2s? Or perhaps just have +1s and no level restrictions? And just have relic keeps... 4 per server so that 4 guilds per server would be able to seize a relic keep...

Basically my ideas are piggybacked from shadowbane and DAoC... Say my guild got a relic keep and your guild wants it. your guild would sign our challenge sheet and we would pick the time.. then at the scheduled time, your raid starts. If we can keep you from taking our relic for 30 minutes, we keep it. If you can take the relic and make it back to your camps, the relic is yours and if we want it back we have to buy a challenge... Perhaps challenge stones can be a random drop or quest reward? tradable on the auction house... this puts a price tag on a challenge... keepin you from being harrassed by constant challenges... I'm not on the dev team so i can't polish all these details...

Oh yeah and anyone who's ever played pnp knows that most enemies are actually player characters just being manned by the DM... Dungeons and Dragons has always had PvP. In pnp, alignment wasn't limited to chaotic-lawful good-neutral... it had everything from chaotic evil to lawful good... and this system would be way easier to impliment than creating a City of Villains kind of deal...

Visty
03-14-2010, 08:46 AM
sure, change the spells

but then melees are only allowed to use plain +5 weapons max

Bufo_Alvarius
03-14-2010, 08:53 AM
Otherwise the game is pretty well balanced and ready for a pvp system.


So heavy fort is balanced? So stealth is balanced? 1hit KO spells balanced? I played shadowbane. ALOT. And im telling you, give up on pvp here. Its a sideshow and it always will be. To get the pvp you want here would require a huge combat revamp. GL with that.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 08:57 AM
sure, change the spells

but then melees are only allowed to use plain +5 weapons max

lol that's silly. the spells i propose changing are "I win" spells. you can't have a spell that disables a character or monster or anything without a save possibility. Yes spell resistance works but fascinate goes straight thru spell resistance and has almost an infallable save. works as intended. but as is a bard can fascinate a crowd, and even if they've got ridiculous spell resistance, he has plenty of time to keep trying until he hits the spell that ends the fight. Maybe just a timer on power words? like you can still power word stun and power word kill, but only one every 2 minutes? and a much longer cast time on irresistible dance with a unique animation that lets you know to get away from that guy until you're stuck dancing until you die? in order to make pvp viable there has to be a change to these I-win-buttons.
For those of you who don't like pvp, I'm sorry that I do, STOP GIVING ME NEGATIVE REP FOR IT! Gosh!

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:01 AM
So heavy fort is balanced? So stealth is balanced? 1hit KO spells balanced? I played shadowbane. ALOT. And im telling you, give up on pvp here. Its a sideshow and it always will be. To get the pvp you want here would require a huge combat revamp. GL with that.

As a spellcaster... yes. heavy fort, while destroys rogues viability, certainly doesn't help me survive against a good fighter. and 1hit KO spells, with the exception of POWER WORD KILL, all have a save against. that's as balanced as it gets. you fail a save, you die...
I don't want to make PvP a main attraction... I just would prefer it be a more appealing sideshow.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:07 AM
I'll ammend... Also perhaps just halve sneak attack damage with heavy fortification? 100% chance to halve sneak attack damage... I'm not expecting this to happen quickly but anyone who knows anything about marketing an mmo knows this would broaden the player base. more players more money. more money more content. more content more fun!

There's already a lot of players joining because the banner said "best combat in any mmo" and they're not canceling their subscription to WoW and paying for this game instead because there's nothing fulfilling about the PvP experience currently in game.
I would also like to note that this is the only suggestion up on the front page that would potentially increase revenue.

toastjeff
03-14-2010, 09:19 AM
For those of you who don't like pvp, I'm sorry that I do, STOP GIVING ME NEGATIVE REP FOR IT! Gosh!

I'm sorry, but you're posting ideas that are not new, taking a position that is almost universaly disagreed with, on a mechanic that you are vastly overselling the popularity of, all the while thinking your post is different than the dozens that came before it.

What exactly were you expecting?

krud
03-14-2010, 09:20 AM
/not signed

The problem with 'fixing' spells to work in PvP is that you bork them for use in quests. They are meant to be "I win" against mobs. Do not take that away just to please some upset melee PvPers. Plus, they took away plenty of caster spells from PvP use already, and you want to 'fix' the rest?

PvP works with whatever you get in game. You just have to put up with the fact that the classes are not balanced against each other. Trying to balance the classes for PvP unbalances them for the rest of the game. Ever wonder why you don't see rogues in PvP?

Incentives. The problem with giving away incentives that have real use in the game is that you always run the risk of people abusing the system. People could run their naked mules/retired toons in PvP just so they can get ganked by friends/guildies who will rack up all the rewards.

Dutch01
03-14-2010, 09:22 AM
we already know how people who don't like PvP feel about this subject... Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.

Sorry pal you don't get to have your cake and eat it too! You opened it up to the public forum by posing a question on the boards, you can not at that point think that anyone with the ability to do so would not weigh in with their opinion. There are and will be people like me who think no tweaking should be done because it does not belong in this game to begin with.

Elation
03-14-2010, 09:23 AM
Really dont like this idea at all specially your guild challanging my guild sort of thing. I dont have time we have to many players from all over the place sure we could pull of a raid full but cant be sure who would be on and people have real lifes in this game. I would hate to hear the guild wars for this **** just not worth it. Instead of having allies and such everyones guild would want this bonus so now you are making enemies great fun yay!!! lol So really dont agree.... Pvp should stay where it is on some other game like DaoC :)

Arel
03-14-2010, 09:25 AM
<snip>
There's already a lot of players joining because the banner said "best combat in any mmo" and they're not canceling their subscription to WoW and paying for this game instead because there's nothing fulfilling about the PvP experience currently in game.
<sinp>

Nebulous statements, for the win... While I don't doubt there are some people that don't stay because the PvP is limited, you're going to have to back up your statement of 'a lot of players' with some numbers. Especially with how much the player base has grown since F2P came out.

Also, 'Software is Hard.' It's not as easy to change/make stuff like this as getting an idea and snapping your fingers. What you're proposing, particularly with this 'relic' thing, would require massive amounts of time and money for development, and at the same time would distract from what the existing player base wants; namely more quests, races, classes, and PrCs. Why turn away most of your players just so you can possibly add a few more?

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:32 AM
/not signed

The problem with 'fixing' spells to work in PvP is that you bork them for use in quests. They are meant to be "I win" against mobs. Do not take that away just to please some upset melee PvPers. Plus, they took away plenty of caster spells from PvP use already, and you want to 'fix' the rest?

PvP works with whatever you get in game. You just have to put up with the fact that the classes are not balanced against each other. Trying to balance the classes for PvP unbalances them for the rest of the game. Ever wonder why you don't see rogues in PvP?

Incentives. The problem with giving away incentives that have real use in the game is that you always run the risk of people abusing the system. People could run their naked mules/retired toons in PvP just so they can get ganked by friends/guildies who will rack up all the rewards.

You missed some of my major points... These spells wouldn't be hampered in pve... as in, anything you could cast dance on anyway probably isn't going to make the save... my major point with wanting adjustments made to some spells is not to balance for pvp but to balance. In pnp, monsters are governed by the same ruleset as players. a monster's character sheet is identical to a player's. in this game we've been given significant advantages against specific mobs, and if the devs feel the advantage too great, they just make that mob immune to that effect. this is half-assed.

NO spells are disabled in pvp. they are disabled in tavern brawl.

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 09:32 AM
lol that's silly. the spells i propose changing are "I win" spells. you can't have a spell that disables a character or monster or anything without a save possibility. Yes spell resistance works but fascinate goes straight thru spell resistance and has almost an infallable save. works as intended. but as is a bard can fascinate a crowd, and even if they've got ridiculous spell resistance, he has plenty of time to keep trying until he hits the spell that ends the fight. Maybe just a timer on power words? like you can still power word stun and power word kill, but only one every 2 minutes? and a much longer cast time on irresistible dance with a unique animation that lets you know to get away from that guy until you're stuck dancing until you die? in order to make pvp viable there has to be a change to these I-win-buttons.
For those of you who don't like pvp, I'm sorry that I do, STOP GIVING ME NEGATIVE REP FOR IT! Gosh!

I 'worked' hard to attain the 95+ DC to my songs, if you wish to save vs that, well, GL!

Read up on the Power Word spells too.

If you want to change these "I win buttons" you have to look at everything. Stun, Trip, Stat Damage and more.

Or you can just go into an Arena with nothing but melee stand toe to toe with auto attack on and not use skills or weapons that give advantages over others. There, you now have your 'balanced PvP'.

You are getting neg rep because people do not agree with your idea's and you seem, no offense, to have limited knowledge of game mechanics.

toastjeff
03-14-2010, 09:33 AM
Basically my ideas are piggybacked from shadowbane and DAoC... Say my guild got a relic keep and your guild wants it. your guild would sign our challenge sheet and we would pick the time.. then at the scheduled time, your raid starts. If we can keep you from taking our relic for 30 minutes, we keep it. If you can take the relic and make it back to your camps, the relic is yours and if we want it back we have to buy a challenge... Perhaps challenge stones can be a random drop or quest reward? tradable on the auction house... this puts a price tag on a challenge... keepin you from being harrassed by constant challenges... I'm not on the dev team so i can't polish all these details...

Okay, let's say my guild wins the +whatever relic whateverness. What exactly is my guilds incentive to let anyone challenge us for it? My guild gets it, you can be darn sure we will never put ourselves in a position to lose it.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:35 AM
Okay, let's say my guild wins the +whatever relic whateverness. What exactly is my guilds incentive to let anyone challenge us for it? My guild gets it, you can be darn sure we will never put ourselves in a position to lose it.

well obviously you would have to accept the challenge lol... you would be able to push it back a couple days, stall, set it for a time that is unfavorable to your attackers, but you'd have to accept...

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 09:38 AM
You missed some of my major points... These spells wouldn't be hampered in pve... as in, anything you could cast dance on anyway probably isn't going to make the save... my major point with wanting adjustments made to some spells is not to balance for pvp but to balance. In pnp, monsters are governed by the same ruleset as players. a monster's character sheet is identical to a player's. in this game we've been given significant advantages against specific mobs, and if the devs feel the advantage too great, they just make that mob immune to that effect. this is half-assed.

NO spells are disabled in pvp. they are disabled in tavern brawl.

Tavern brawls ARE PvP.

If you do not want to get ganked by a character much more powerful then you, find a different Pit or go to an Arena.

You can also 'challenge' other guilds via the challenge system.

However, you will NEVER be rewarded for PvP in DDO. NEVER.

Visty
03-14-2010, 09:40 AM
lol that's silly. the spells i propose changing are "I win" spells. you can't have a spell that disables a character or monster or anything without a save possibility. Yes spell resistance works but fascinate goes straight thru spell resistance and has almost an infallable save. works as intended. but as is a bard can fascinate a crowd, and even if they've got ridiculous spell resistance, he has plenty of time to keep trying until he hits the spell that ends the fight. Maybe just a timer on power words? like you can still power word stun and power word kill, but only one every 2 minutes? and a much longer cast time on irresistible dance with a unique animation that lets you know to get away from that guy until you're stuck dancing until you die? in order to make pvp viable there has to be a change to these I-win-buttons.
For those of you who don't like pvp, I'm sorry that I do, STOP GIVING ME NEGATIVE REP FOR IT! Gosh!

its not silly, its exact the same thing
vorpals have no save, lightning strike has no save, disintegrate has no save, holy has no save, shocking burst has no save
and you can have all that on weapons so its just fair to balance them too

(you know, current weapons are balanced against mobs hps not pc hps which are like only a 30th of what mobs have)

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:40 AM
Really dont like this idea at all specially your guild challanging my guild sort of thing. I dont have time we have to many players from all over the place sure we could pull of a raid full but cant be sure who would be on and people have real lifes in this game. I would hate to hear the guild wars for this **** just not worth it. Instead of having allies and such everyones guild would want this bonus so now you are making enemies great fun yay!!! lol So really dont agree.... Pvp should stay where it is on some other game like DaoC :)

guilds who don't want to participate would not have to participate... you'd miss out on pvp action and the ability to try your best to hold onto a +1 bonus... not really something that would force you to pvp... And it's only immature people who are personally upset by pvp. Really, it all boils down to a dice roll... so while i'm sure there could be some heated battles, at the end of the day, we're all enjoying the same game! So we're all friends... actually i make a lot of friends in the brawl pit... and if you're the type that's going to get mad about being killed then you have no business in the pit! simple as that.

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 09:42 AM
guilds who don't want to participate would not have to participate... you'd miss out on pvp action and the ability to try your best to hold onto a +1 bonus... not really something that would force you to pvp... And it's only immature people who are personally upset by pvp. Really, it all boils down to a dice roll... so while i'm sure there could be some heated battles, at the end of the day, we're all enjoying the same game! So we're all friends... actually i make a lot of friends in the brawl pit... and if you're the type that's going to get mad about being killed then you have no business in the pit! simple as that.

Heed your own advice - stay out of the pits.

;)

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:42 AM
Nebulous statements, for the win... While I don't doubt there are some people that don't stay because the PvP is limited, you're going to have to back up your statement of 'a lot of players' with some numbers. Especially with how much the player base has grown since F2P came out.

Also, 'Software is Hard.' It's not as easy to change/make stuff like this as getting an idea and snapping your fingers. What you're proposing, particularly with this 'relic' thing, would require massive amounts of time and money for development, and at the same time would distract from what the existing player base wants; namely more quests, races, classes, and PrCs. Why turn away most of your players just so you can possibly add a few more?

Turbine doesn't release any figures. never have never will. but it's safe to assume that this free model has more than doubled their revenue...

I first started playing this game when the cap was level 5... i quit and came back while it was still a p2p game... at that time our numbers were scarce... since mod9 it's very easy to see there's a lot more players. A LOT MORE. and there's no way for anyone outside of turbine to know the actual figures because turbine never releases any figures. ever.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:48 AM
its not silly, its exact the same thing
vorpals have no save, lightning strike has no save, disintegrate has no save, holy has no save, shocking burst has no save
and you can have all that on weapons so its just fair to balance them too

(you know, current weapons are balanced against mobs hps not pc hps which are like only a 30th of what mobs have)

to vorpal you have to roll a 20 and confirm the critical... lightning strike can be physically dodged. disintegrate does have a save lol... weapon effects are weapon effects... and the mobs hp is balanced with the consideration that the mob is going to stand there and take your blows... a player will not do that. two guys with greensteels going at each other is a pretty balanced fight... as is a caster trying desperately to gun down the melee before he two-shots him is a pretty balanced fight in my opinion too... what is not a balanced fight is the instant cast power words and dance button that end fights unless you have a 20 cleric there to cast spell resistance on you...

krud
03-14-2010, 09:49 AM
guilds who don't want to participate would not have to participate... you'd miss out on pvp action and the ability to try your best to hold onto a +1 bonus... not really something that would force you to pvp... And it's only immature people who are personally upset by pvp. Really, it all boils down to a dice roll... so while i'm sure there could be some heated battles, at the end of the day, we're all enjoying the same game! So we're all friends... actually i make a lot of friends in the brawl pit... and if you're the type that's going to get mad about being killed then you have no business in the pit! simple as that.
What's to stop a guild from forming a satellite guild made up of their unused toons, just to rack up rewards?

krud
03-14-2010, 09:51 AM
unless you have a 20 cleric there to cast spell resistance on you...
there's your balance. find a cleric. if you plan on having guild vs guild battles then they'll have one.

moomooprincess
03-14-2010, 09:52 AM
I have never, ever done it.

I know it can be a good way to test your gear, but I can accomplish that when doing a quest.

Will I feel superior because I can beat up some ten year old kid in my vapor world? Will I feel inferior when I get beat up by a ten year old kid? Two questions I do not care to answer.

We can measure how good we are by RAIDs completed and gear we have. We can measure how good we are by being the player that saves the quest from failure because the others died horribly or sillyily(new word).

We can measure how bad we are by how quickly we become the pocket lint of the party.

Elation
03-14-2010, 09:52 AM
guilds who don't want to participate would not have to participate... you'd miss out on pvp action and the ability to try your best to hold onto a +1 bonus... not really something that would force you to pvp... And it's only immature people who are personally upset by pvp. Really, it all boils down to a dice roll... so while i'm sure there could be some heated battles, at the end of the day, we're all enjoying the same game! So we're all friends... actually i make a lot of friends in the brawl pit... and if you're the type that's going to get mad about being killed then you have no business in the pit! simple as that.

Actually depending on how you implement your guild prize for this it does make a difference... and as you stated you made alot of friends in there so its working as its supposed to in this game mostly a social fun thing that has no real consequence on the game! As far as my type it doesnt matter I do not like the idea of one guild gaining adventage in the way you propose regardless of whether its just plus one or not! pvp should not effect the actual game play ever!

prowessss
03-14-2010, 09:55 AM
What's to stop a guild from forming a satellite guild made up of their unused toons, just to rack up rewards?

the fact that there's only one reward to achieve and once you've got it you have to hold it and if you want to dump all that cash into putting up fake challenges on yourself well i guess your guild is just that rich...
The relic system i propose involves serverwide items that your guild would hosue in its keep... as long as that relic is in your keep, everyone in your guild recieves a +1 bonus to whatever it is the relic does... i would propose challenge stones be rare drops or really expensive from vendors just to prevent this little exploit...

krud
03-14-2010, 10:00 AM
the fact that there's only one reward to achieve and once you've got it you have to hold it and if you want to dump all that cash into putting up fake challenges on yourself well i guess your guild is just that rich...
The relic system i propose involves serverwide items that your guild would hosue in its keep... as long as that relic is in your keep, everyone in your guild recieves a +1 bonus to whatever it is the relic does... i would propose challenge stones be rare drops or really expensive from vendors just to prevent this little exploit...
Yes, some guilds are that rich. Could guilds accept the challenge when they know the other guild has few people logged on? Could they challenge the other when they know they have few members logged on?

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:03 AM
I have never, ever done it.

I know it can be a good way to test your gear, but I can accomplish that when doing a quest.

Will I feel superior because I can beat up some ten year old kid in my vapor world? Will I feel inferior when I get beat up by a ten year old kid? Two questions I do not care to answer.

We can measure how good we are by RAIDs completed and gear we have. We can measure how good we are by being the player that saves the quest from failure because the others died horribly or sillyily(new word).

We can measure how bad we are by how quickly we become the pocket lint of the party.

I appreciate your stance on the matter but with all due respect I believe you're missing the point of pvp. it is not so much to test yourself against others... because anyone who has ever been in a real fight can tell you anything can happen!! even the best boxer in the world got knocked out. and this game rolls a dice every time you take a swing on someone.

when it comes to group vs group warfare like i'm proposing, it would mostly be balanced groups who know their roles and can organize the best that would usually come out on top.

and the point is to just have fun in a different way than noobing it up in the bar or going on a quest.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:06 AM
Yes, some guilds are that rich. Could guilds accept the challenge when they know the other guild has few people logged on? Could they challenge the other when they know they have few members logged on?

the way i see it, it'd be like... you have a relic right? I put up a challenge on you, you pick a time and a day... the range would be 3-7 days so say i put the challenge up on monday, you wouldn't be able to set the fight for any earlier than thursday and no later than the next monday.

Newtons_Apple
03-14-2010, 10:06 AM
I'll ammend... Also perhaps just halve sneak attack damage with heavy fortification? 100% chance to halve sneak attack damage... I'm not expecting this to happen quickly but anyone who knows anything about marketing an mmo knows this would broaden the player base. more players more money. more money more content. more content more fun!

There's already a lot of players joining because the banner said "best combat in any mmo" and they're not canceling their subscription to WoW and paying for this game instead because there's nothing fulfilling about the PvP experience currently in game.
I would also like to note that this is the only suggestion up on the front page that would potentially increase revenue.

It seems to me that DDO EU has been a resounding success in terms of Turbines revenue stream. I don't know about subscription levels compared to WoW, but I doubt you do either.

A company would be foolish to ignore any chance to increase revenue, and it seems Turbine is on track in a general sense to continue their revenue stream.

However PvP has never been a front burner item for Turbine. It is an after thought, and rightfully so. This game does have the best mmo combat system (that I have seen). But you are now suggesting we change some of the fundamental mechanics, at a great cost to developer time, just so you can have more than bragging rights in PvP.

It just doesn't make sense to me. From what I've seen, people are drawn to this game because it is different from the WoW's, etc. of the world. If Turbine makes PvP "successful", the difference between DDO and other MMO's will appear to be smaller, and therefore less appealing.

/not signed

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:09 AM
Actually depending on how you implement your guild prize for this it does make a difference... and as you stated you made alot of friends in there so its working as its supposed to in this game mostly a social fun thing that has no real consequence on the game! As far as my type it doesnt matter I do not like the idea of one guild gaining adventage in the way you propose regardless of whether its just plus one or not! pvp should not effect the actual game play ever!

are you saying you'd quit if they implimented something like this? are you saying the addition of a +1 boost only attainable thru pvp would ruin the game for you?

My2Cents
03-14-2010, 10:11 AM
Came from another MMO where PVP was highly developed (or rather they kept trying), no doubt to "cash in" on the "I wanna fightcha" mentality. In my opinion it was a major distraction to the adventuring part of the game.

Unless some unique system of PVP is implemented in some seemless way with current adventuring, I think it would be dangerous and destructive to focus too much on it. I'm not a big "Im gonna fightcha" fan so for my 2 Cents it can be an entirely separate game and it would be fine with me.

There's enough Fight games out there to make the kids and macho happy.

The PVE spirit of DND (the adventuring) was what attracted me in years past, and to DDO now.

Now if only I could get experience for each encounter or at least the quest XP penalty could be cut back for those of us required by life to solo, my life would be complete.

Newtons_Apple
03-14-2010, 10:14 AM
I appreciate your stance on the matter but with all due respect I believe you're missing the point of pvp. it is not so much to test yourself against others... because anyone who has ever been in a real fight can tell you anything can happen!! even the best boxer in the world got knocked out. and this game rolls a dice every time you take a swing on someone.

when it comes to group vs group warfare like i'm proposing, it would mostly be balanced groups who know their roles and can organize the best that would usually come out on top.

and the point is to just have fun in a different way than noobing it up in the bar or going on a quest.

Group combat will be balanced or unbalanced based on the makeup of the group. A group of 6 casters against a group of 6 melee would probably wipe the floor with the melee.

But a mixed group of casters, melee and support, equally geared out and with equal ability set against a similar group would win or lose based upon luck, much like the real world example you gave above.

jomonkey527
03-14-2010, 10:17 AM
I loved PVP back in the days (bracing myself for negative rep lol) when I played WOW. No however in DDO it would alter the game for the worse, and I have no interest. I would like to see more "world events." but that is best left for another thread.

krud
03-14-2010, 10:22 AM
the way i see it, it'd be like... you have a relic right? I put up a challenge on you, you pick a time and a day... the range would be 3-7 days so say i put the challenge up on monday, you wouldn't be able to set the fight for any earlier than thursday and no later than the next monday.
My guild, for instance, is fairly well populated by high level characters during the day. If I see the challenging guild is not regularly populated at 3pm est, I could accpt the challenge at that time. Or will we need a team of negotiators to hammer out the time?

If there are to be PvP rewards, then they should be useful only in PvP.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:24 AM
It seems to me that DDO EU has been a resounding success in terms of Turbines revenue stream. I don't know about subscription levels compared to WoW, but I doubt you do either.

A company would be foolish to ignore any chance to increase revenue, and it seems Turbine is on track in a general sense to continue their revenue stream.

However PvP has never been a front burner item for Turbine. It is an after thought, and rightfully so. This game does have the best mmo combat system (that I have seen). But you are now suggesting we change some of the fundamental mechanics, at a great cost to developer time, just so you can have more than bragging rights in PvP.

It just doesn't make sense to me. From what I've seen, people are drawn to this game because it is different from the WoW's, etc. of the world. If Turbine makes PvP "successful", the difference between DDO and other MMO's will appear to be smaller, and therefore less appealing.

/not signed

I agree with the vast majority of what you have said but let me address them individually...
#1 no one knows how many people play this game. turbine won't tell us (and frankly it's their business and theirs alone). WoW has given their numbers at something like 60,000,000 currently... by the way i hate WoW. played it til level 60 and then wanted to kill myself lol. I've been playing dungeons and dragons since 2nd edition. There are quite a number of official adventure packs that end up pitting player vs player.

#2 If you didn't notice they've already made small changes to spells in pvp... hypnotize got nerfed, so did resistable dance... actually the majority of low level CC spells got a big ole nerf in pvp. and rightfully so. I'm proposing just taking those little pull backs in the effectiveness of CC in pvp just one step further by nerfing the high level spells as well.. not a huge nerf as these spells will not be unuseful.. they just won't end a fight like they do currently... this is not a fundamental change. Everything i proposed besides the nerfs would be new content. yes a lot of dev time but far less than a full expansion... It's very possible that they are already working on implimenting something like this... as the rumors have been going on since mod2...

The game will still be 100% unique with a pvp system... these kind of features wouldn't drive anyone away. all it would do is expand the game into a more complete form.

I personally think housing should be implimented first but this is still a great pipe dream :-D

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:28 AM
My guild, for instance, is fairly well populated by high level characters during the day. If I see the challenging guild is not regularly populated at 3pm est, I could accpt the challenge at that time. Or will we need a team of negotiators to hammer out the time?

If there are to be PvP rewards, then they should be useful only in PvP.

Defenders always set the time and date. That's my opinion on it... But i can definitely get behind the pvp rewards only useful in pvp... i want this mostly just for incentive for group vs group fights. it's so hard to get something like that together and i think it would be just a lot of fun.

toastjeff
03-14-2010, 10:29 AM
Question, OP:

Here we are well into page three of this thread and there has not been one post of support. Does that tell you anything?

Newtons_Apple
03-14-2010, 10:36 AM
I agree with the vast majority of what you have said but let me address them individually...
#1 no one knows how many people play this game. turbine won't tell us (and frankly it's their business and theirs alone). WoW has given their numbers at something like 60,000,000 currently... by the way i hate WoW. played it til level 60 and then wanted to kill myself lol. I've been playing dungeons and dragons since 2nd edition. There are quite a number of official adventure packs that end up pitting player vs player.

#2 If you didn't notice they've already made small changes to spells in pvp... hypnotize got nerfed, so did resistable dance... actually the majority of low level CC spells got a big ole nerf in pvp. and rightfully so. I'm proposing just taking those little pull backs in the effectiveness of CC in pvp just one step further by nerfing the high level spells as well.. not a huge nerf as these spells will not be unuseful.. they just won't end a fight like they do currently... this is not a fundamental change. Everything i proposed besides the nerfs would be new content. yes a lot of dev time but far less than a full expansion... It's very possible that they are already working on implimenting something like this... as the rumors have been going on since mod2...

The game will still be 100% unique with a pvp system... these kind of features wouldn't drive anyone away. all it would do is expand the game into a more complete form.

I personally think housing should be implimented first but this is still a great pipe dream :-D

This goes back to the point of coding all these changes. They may be able to change the way the spells work JUST for PvP, but it seems to me the majority of players don't want the devs to work on something they're not going to bother doing anyway.

There are ways to avoid being hit by the "I win" spells BTW. One needs to invest the time and resources to get there, but my barb does have the ability to charge a caster, stun or trip and kill him in the amount of time it takes him to be unstunned/stand up, all the while ignoring most of what he's throwing at me on the way there. Scarabs FTW. :)

Astria
03-14-2010, 10:36 AM
Spell absorption item + trip.

The end.

Visty
03-14-2010, 10:41 AM
to vorpal you have to roll a 20 and confirm the critical... lightning strike can be physically dodged. disintegrate does have a save lol... weapon effects are weapon effects... and the mobs hp is balanced with the consideration that the mob is going to stand there and take your blows... a player will not do that. two guys with greensteels going at each other is a pretty balanced fight... as is a caster trying desperately to gun down the melee before he two-shots him is a pretty balanced fight in my opinion too... what is not a balanced fight is the instant cast power words and dance button that end fights unless you have a 20 cleric there to cast spell resistance on you...

see, you dont even know what youre talking about
i was talking about lightning strike and disintegrate on shroud weapons, those dont have saves, those cant be dodged and are insta death to 99.9% of chars they hit

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:42 AM
Question, OP:

Here we are well into page three of this thread and there has not been one post of support. Does that tell you anything?

But here's undisputable proof that what i'm proposing deserves at least some consideration by the dev team::: The wayward lobster has dozens of people in it at peak time blowing each other up and 24/7 you can find people in there fighting. just these people don't have the attention span to post on forums :-P


I'm not saying PvP should take priority... All I'm really working towards is people to not be so blindly opposed to it. come on, people, any addition to the game is good and just because you all are so radically opposed doesn't mean there's not a lot of people supporting it.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:46 AM
see, you dont even know what youre talking about
i was talking about lightning strike and disintegrate on shroud weapons, those dont have saves, those cant be dodged and are insta death to 99.9% of chars they hit

i didnt know what you're talking about lol. ok well that's a greensteel for you... The most powerful weapons in the game are really really powerful... but you're overstating it. those effects have only a small chance to go off. and a shield negates these effects.
I don't see green steel or any of the other raid gear diminishing pvp.

toastjeff
03-14-2010, 10:58 AM
But here's undisputable proof that what i'm proposing deserves at least some consideration by the dev team::: The wayward lobster has dozens of people in it at peak time blowing each other up and 24/7 you can find people in there fighting. just these people don't have the attention span to post on forums :-P


I'm not saying PvP should take priority... All I'm really working towards is people to not be so blindly opposed to it. come on, people, any addition to the game is good and just because you all are so radically opposed doesn't mean there's not a lot of people supporting it.

Yup, that's what I thought you'd get out of it. Can't possibly be that you're wrong about the popularity of PvP.

Visty
03-14-2010, 10:58 AM
i didnt know what you're talking about lol. ok well that's a greensteel for you... The most powerful weapons in the game are really really powerful... but you're overstating it. those effects have only a small chance to go off. and a shield negates these effects.
I don't see green steel or any of the other raid gear diminishing pvp.

even if you would leave those in ANd remove the saveless spells, then still casters would whipe your sorry melee ass.
if you come to close to a wizard you eat 3d4 neg lvls and a fod, if you come to close to a cleric you eat lots of unavoidable damage and 2d4 neg lvls and if you come even closer you die in purple lightning

you cant balance ddo for pvp unless creating a whole new game

Elation
03-14-2010, 11:01 AM
A shield does not negate the effect of lightning strike nor does it effect guard items which most melee have so for the most part it would be melee verse melee whos guards go off first!!! lol oh magma surge lightning strike crushing wave and they will go off its kinda fun watching new players beat on ya in the pit and then get annihalted by lightning strike or such!!!! Just not thinking its a good time sink since we have been promised alot of other stuff over the years that we are still waiting on and pvp is not on the map for most players and you can track number of players if you really want to but if this turns completly into WOW i am running out the door! Actually turning pvp into a main point of this game may actaully cause me to leave it after four years of not caring about it at all really dont want to start.

DagazUlf
03-14-2010, 11:05 AM
To Hades with PvP and the dead horse it rode in on. :)

Angelus_dead
03-14-2010, 11:15 AM
even if you would leave those in ANd remove the saveless spells, then still casters would whipe your sorry melee ass.
if you come to close to a wizard you eat 3d4 neg lvls and a fod
Nobody eats negs in pvp. Fights don't last long enough to use 10 shots of silver flame.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 11:17 AM
A shield does not negate the effect of lightning strike nor does it effect guard items which most melee have so for the most part it would be melee verse melee whos guards go off first!!! lol oh magma surge lightning strike crushing wave and they will go off its kinda fun watching new players beat on ya in the pit and then get annihalted by lightning strike or such!!!! Just not thinking its a good time sink since we have been promised alot of other stuff over the years that we are still waiting on and pvp is not on the map for most players and you can track number of players if you really want to but if this turns completly into WOW i am running out the door! Actually turning pvp into a main point of this game may actaully cause me to leave it after four years of not caring about it at all really dont want to start.

i hated wow. it's repackaged EQ. and shields do negate "most weapon effects." i've seen a lot of action in the pit between two green steel holding people... if one holds down block the other doesn't hit with his weapon effects... in fact i just got done getting hit with a greensteel... with my shield up i survived until my stoneskin dropped. if these weapon effects were as effective as you say... that shouldn't be.

And there's no way for this game to ever put pvp in the forefront. that's not what this game's about. but it could be an interesting sideshow! it could be a lot of fun as is. no class has a supreme advantage over anyone else except everything vs rogue... but that's why rogues are basically meant to be multiclassed.

I said this before... I'd rather see housing first... yeah and more quest content... I'd rather see druids in the game before anything else. but this shouldn't be something to be violently opposed.. any content added is more content in game.

Xaearth
03-14-2010, 11:17 AM
#2 If you didn't notice they've already made small changes to spells in pvp... hypnotize got nerfed, so did resistable dance... actually the majority of low level CC spells got a big ole nerf in pvp. and rightfully so. I'm proposing just taking those little pull backs in the effectiveness of CC in pvp just one step further by nerfing the high level spells as well.. not a huge nerf as these spells will not be unuseful.. they just won't end a fight like they do currently... this is not a fundamental change. Everything i proposed besides the nerfs would be new content. yes a lot of dev time but far less than a full expansion... It's very possible that they are already working on implimenting something like this... as the rumors have been going on since mod2...


The game will still be 100% unique with a pvp system... these kind of features wouldn't drive anyone away. all it would do is expand the game into a more complete form.

As a long-time competitive pvper, I have to disagree. There's plenty of great games with (kinda) balanced and engaging pvp combat.

I play DDO because it's different. It's a break from that hardcore mindset that so often ends in an argument of which moron screwed up most that last pvp match. :rolleyes:

I've seen many good games become, for all intents and purposes, unfun for pve play due to class/skill/spell changes made to balance pvp. And I've seen it happen enough times to safely say, without a doubt, I would 100% cancel my subscription and never look back the day the devs start attempting to balance this game for pvp. :(

I'm sorry, but I quite honestly have 0 confidence that the devs could successfully pull it off. So the moment they try balancing the game for pvp, I'm not wasting my money on a sinking ship.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 11:23 AM
As a long-time competitive pvper, I have to disagree. There's plenty of great games with (kinda) balanced and engaging pvp combat.

I play DDO because it's different. It's a break from that hardcore mindset that so often ends in an argument of which moron screwed up most that last pvp match. :rolleyes:

I've seen many good games become, for all intents and purposes, unfun for pve play due to class/skill/spell changes made to balance pvp. And I've seen it happen enough times to safely say, without a doubt, I would 100% cancel my subscription and never look back the day the devs start attempting to balance this game for pvp. :(

I'm sorry, but I quite honestly have 0 confidence that the devs could successfully pull it off. So the moment they try balancing the game for pvp, I'm not wasting my money on a sinking ship.

well then you should have already canceled because last update contained spell changes for the purposes of balancing pvp...

The changes i'm purposing would affect pve as much as flesh to stone and blindness now having a timer does.

Angelus_dead
03-14-2010, 11:24 AM
i hated wow. it's repackaged EQ. and shields do negate "most weapon effects." i've seen a lot of action in the pit between two green steel holding people... if one holds down block the other doesn't hit with his weapon effects... in fact i just got done getting hit with a greensteel... with my shield up i survived until my stoneskin dropped. if these weapon effects were as effective as you say... that shouldn't be.
They're not talking about weapon effects! Greensteel isn't only weapons, ya know.

Xaearth
03-14-2010, 11:27 AM
well then you should have already canceled because last update contained spell changes for the purposes of balancing pvp...

The changes i'm purposing would affect pve as much as flesh to stone and blindness now having a timer does.

Those changes had nothing to do with pvp, they were made as part of the completely idiotic heroic surge update and as of yet have not been fixed.

Sutekx
03-14-2010, 11:30 AM
even if you would leave those in ANd remove the saveless spells, then still casters would whipe your sorry melee ass.
if you come to close to a wizard you eat 3d4 neg lvls and a fod, if you come to close to a cleric you eat lots of unavoidable damage and 2d4 neg lvls and if you come even closer you die in purple lightning

you cant balance ddo for pvp unless creating a whole new game

Why waste the time, just enervation or energy drain, then flesh to stone and walk away. ;)

But I do agree, that DDO embraces variety and creation via characters and crafted items, that you really cannot balance it for PVP where it would be deemed fair by most (even then I can hear the ghostly future cries of "cheater and "hacker" be brought into the game while GMs pop over 1200mgs or more of Excedrin Migraine just from the reports alone coming in from disgruntled pvp players). I would have probably looked at a post saying that they need to add "more maps" for PVP challenges to the game for variety of a playing field(s), but going out into left field stating there should be a pvp guild reward and this spell x, y, and z needs to be out of PVP, no dice. We would probably see Tiefling as a PC race and the ability to select Chaotic Evil as an alignment before a massive overhaul to the game coding to go for the PVP idea he has right now.

Sutekx
03-14-2010, 11:46 AM
They're not talking about weapon effects! Greensteel isn't only weapons, ya know.

Greensteel goggles that earth grab or slay living.... it can't be! :p

Visty
03-14-2010, 12:00 PM
Why waste the time, just enervation or energy drain, then flesh to stone and walk away. ;)

cause that can get you banned maybe?

and asp: yes, there are ways to avoid negative lvls but i bet ppl like prowessss dont have them and so eat the negs

Lorien_the_First_One
03-14-2010, 12:25 PM
The system i propose will not subtract any significance from the PvE content. ...

Any PvP reward of value would mean that there would be cries to "balance" characters for PvP so it would end up harming the PvE game.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 12:28 PM
no as a sorc i don't have death ward lol but i do spam enervation as often as i can :-P but really what i'm proposing is not a major overhaul... under 5 very minor changes to the functionality of a small number of spells... they just did an update, i guess it was the one before last, that changed the functionality of a few spells... IE, flesh to stone now has a timer and more rapid saves against, hypno doesn't last for nothin and has very rapid saves, and resistable dance has very rapid saves and doesn't last for junk.
You guys are all like confusing things your paranoia is saying i said with things i actually said.
::::Changes I do want::::
Power Words should have like a timer or something? say one power word per 2 minutes oughta be fine. as most power words are "I win" buttons
Otto's Irresistable Dance ought to have a longer cast time and either a unique animation or a sound of warning letting players know that his "I win" button is coming and to move out of melee range?

That's it. no more changes than those... if that's radical well just call me Che :-P

I do know about green steel items... This is not what the discussion is about. Of course it's really difficult to balance players when we've all got unique builds and unique items customized to our playstyles but that's not what this game is about. if they try to balance the game they'll ruin it! and maybe that's what you all have been thinking i was saying that we need to alter the game is some major ways to balance it for pvp... NO I want the game to stay mostly as it is except for a few minor adjustments in the functionality and practicality of a small number of spells. You all didn't give turbine negative rep when they altered spells for PvP balance just recently!!

Visty
03-14-2010, 12:41 PM
::::Changes I do want::::
Power Words should have like a timer or something? say one power word per 2 minutes oughta be fine. as most power words are "I win" buttons
Otto's Irresistable Dance ought to have a longer cast time and either a unique animation or a sound of warning letting players know that his "I win" button is coming and to move out of melee range?

power words are **** with the current hp limit. if they are win buttons against you, then your char is the problem, not the spell system

and ottos irresistable dance will already get a nerf with heroic surge

prowessss
03-14-2010, 12:54 PM
power words are **** with the current hp limit. if they are win buttons against you, then your char is the problem, not the spell system

and ottos irresistable dance will already get a nerf with heroic surge

hmmm... power word stun is the one i'm really concerned with and if you've got the hp to negate that you probably wouldn't worry about being stunned anyway... I'm only a level 16 sorc currently... 194 hp is not enough for power word kill to not kill but i don't mind it so much as power word stun... i dont really mind any spells really as i can accept the rules no matter what... i just feel as though a true pvp system wouldn't be possible with such spells... either that or WF would dominate until you bring a rogue mechanic in the scene... and that's silly.

Borror0
03-14-2010, 01:03 PM
It makes no sense to focus on PvP in DDO:

The D&D ruleset makes balancing incredibly more difficult than in other MMOs.
A large part of DDO's revenues come from selling adventure packs.
The current playerbase is simply not interested in PvP as the game has been existing for too long.
The combat is too fast-paced for PvP to be generally enjoyable.

Simply put, DDO is not a game well-suited to be a PvP game. A PvP would have to be designed very differently from the start. The resources that would be required to create a solid PvP experience could be better spent in other aspects of the game. While PvP might attract a greater playerbase (it's a might - not a would - because PvP games have statistically worse communities and that drives away players), it's possible for Turbine to spread itself too thin.

Sometimes, it's better to be a game focusing on a very specific niche than to be a generic game with no unique selling points.

gavagai
03-14-2010, 01:06 PM
but really what i'm proposing is not a major overhaul... under 5 very minor changes to the functionality of a small number of spells... they just did an update, i guess it was the one before last, that changed the functionality of a few spells... IE, flesh to stone now has a timer and more rapid saves against, hypno doesn't last for nothin and has very rapid saves, and resistable dance has very rapid saves and doesn't last for junk.
You guys are all like confusing things your paranoia is saying i said with things i actually said.

Suggestions for improving your request to improve PvP.

1. Cannot "fix" what is not broken; and pretending it is broken does not mean it is broken.
When someone asks to "fix" something that is a powerful ability so that it isn't a powerful ability, people get the impression you are whining about something that is personally inconvenient. If I were to write "fix Death Frenzy so it works like Power Surge" I would tick off Barbs. This was as true on the forums in Scoutbane as it is in DDO.

Just be clear and say, "Death Frenzy is the ultimate in Barb power, but it might need to be nerfed to create more balance for x, y, and z reasons." It helps if you've thought through the ramifications, too, since "fixing" a strong ability to become a weak ability will make that class more vulnerable in most of the content.


2. What happens 2% of the time in PvP happens 98% of the time in PvE
In the context of PvP, its awfully irritating not getting a save on Irresistable Dance. In the context of PvE, your party may avoid a wipe because that 16/2/2 warchanter with a CHA of 2 cast irresistable dance.

How do the majority of players that don't PvP benefit from this spell nerf? If you can address that well, you'd face less animosity. [Hint: none of the other posters to address the issue have answered that, beyond calling them carebears.]


3. Nerfing casters without a broader vision of what casters do isn't wise.
Shadowbane and most other MMOs follow a simple balancing mechanism: each class has abilities that make damage numbers appear over heads. Balance the numbers and you have class balance.

You've made more moderate tweaks about how certain CC spells should be discouraged, but haven't really provided a vision of what you expect casters to do with their limited SP. Unlike Shadowbane, in DDO caster power is not a function of bigger damage numbers; it is a function of more powerful spells that bypass HPs and even bypass saves.

So why play a caster if your most powerful abilities:
-- Cannot be recast quickly due to a 10 second cooldown.
-- Last less time due to more frequent saves.
-- Have new saves inserted into the spell, making that level 8 spell identical to a heightened level 2 spell.

And no, +5 to saves isn't bringing back the SP you have to waste to reapply the CC (which might not land, even with +5).


4. Use imagination
One thing you haven't mentioned is that even irresistable dances have a "save" -- Spell Resistance.

One way to "fix" the "I-win buttons" in PvP without screwing everything else over is to stress SR in more builds.

And the fact that most fighters have such bad SR? Perhaps there are things Turbine can do to improve that (*cough* Drow SR *cough*). But at the same time, it's their own fault for designing a build with such a glaring Achilles Heel, when there are items to absorb spells and such.

Newtons_Apple
03-14-2010, 01:15 PM
hmmm... power word stun is the one i'm really concerned with and if you've got the hp to negate that you probably wouldn't worry about being stunned anyway... I'm only a level 16 sorc currently... 194 hp is not enough for power word kill to not kill but i don't mind it so much as power word stun... i dont really mind any spells really as i can accept the rules no matter what... i just feel as though a true pvp system wouldn't be possible with such spells... either that or WF would dominate until you bring a rogue mechanic in the scene... and that's silly.

Again, this spell can be worked around by equipping a spell absorption item. Combine that with a deathward clicky, firestorm greaves, ring of the djinn, cloak of ice and a shield or nightshield clicky and a melee can typically engage and kill a caster before the caster can think of something the melee is not immune to or has high resistance to.

So it seems there currently is a method for a melee to be balanced against a caster. Granted it takes grinding and/or a cost, but it can be done.

Aashrym
03-14-2010, 01:27 PM
This is another 'not signed'.

Prowess, your 'I win' buttons are not 'I win' buttons. If you are playing a sorc you have the same opportunity to use the same spells. Are you winning with them? A person simply does not pw:stun or pw:kill a barbarian charging on up to trip/stun a player, which seems very effective btw. Each side has the same opportunities to use the same resources as is. This changes 'I win' to 'I win if I get lucky or manage the resource better or learn the best method of dealing with said resource.' Not broken for players who want to brawl as is.

As stated several times, the players posting would rather see development time on several other things more enjoyable than PVP. Stating that the existing posters are care-bears and the players who like PVP are not posting would suggest to me they enjoy it as is and that's why you see the brawling going on.

I'm kinda curious when exactly you played with a level cap of 5, btw. It's been a while but I remember the game releasing with 10 levels and Eckelberry saying no PVP. ;-)

Sutekx
03-14-2010, 01:29 PM
hmmm... power word stun is the one i'm really concerned with and if you've got the hp to negate that you probably wouldn't worry about being stunned anyway... I'm only a level 16 sorc currently... 194 hp is not enough for power word kill to not kill but i don't mind it so much as power word stun... i dont really mind any spells really as i can accept the rules no matter what... i just feel as though a true pvp system wouldn't be possible with such spells... either that or WF would dominate until you bring a rogue mechanic in the scene... and that's silly.


So you are basically upset that each time you go into PVP areas you are getting hammered by the spells you rage about and you want them changed for it to make your PVP experience better? Seriously? Start researching items to assist you on that, what is your weakness can be turned into a strength if you know how to fix it, by items, feats, etc.

KKDragonLord
03-14-2010, 01:50 PM
This

'Software is Hard.' It's not as easy to change/make stuff like this as getting an idea and snapping your fingers. What you're proposing would require massive amounts of time and money for development, and at the same time would distract from what the existing player base wants; namely more quests, races, classes, and PrCs. Why turn away most of your players just so you can possibly add a few more?
And This, +1 rep btw.

I'm sorry, but you're posting ideas that are not new, taking a position that is almost universaly disagreed with, on a mechanic that you are vastly overselling the popularity of, all the while thinking your post is different than the dozens that came before it.

What exactly were you expecting?

There IS a way to do PvP balanced, and that would be to make an entire set of rules for it, that sets it apart from the PvE game. Its not simple, its not easy, its not cheap, and if people still throw rocks at Turbine for not adding new content fast enough, even though they have been adding stuff every update faster than ever before, the amount of work Good PVP would only make it worse.

Frankly, i wouldnt mind some good competitive PVP: capture the flag, domination, castle siege, death match, team death match, time attack, last man standing, monster assault, and whatever else.

But to do Any of this, would take enough effort to almost make a Whole New Game, especially because of the whole mechanics tweaking, PVP Gear, Entirely new Areas, and an awful lot more stuff we can't even understand.

So please Drop it, or start a Donation Petition to pay Turbine 10million dolars to make a DDO PvP game, because if PvP is Not done Right, its a Problem, not a Solution.

Visty
03-14-2010, 02:10 PM
Frankly, i wouldnt mind some good competitive PVP: capture the flag, death match, team death match,

those do exist

Hendrik
03-14-2010, 02:21 PM
those do exist


And are a BLAST!!!!

Never laughed so hard getting my axe kicked....

:D

prowessss
03-14-2010, 10:21 PM
hmmm... where to begin... so many new posts...
Ok... I'm just going to restate everything i've said in a clear and concise manner... bare with me because while I've got a 34 charisma score, only have 10 int...


I don't want to see PvP made a priority and I don't want PvP affecting any of the current content negatively.

There are PvP modes like CTF and what not... but the problem is no one uses them. and if you try, you'll most likely end up in a game of four twenties and 2 level 1s vs a group of level 5s... What I want to see is some kind of way for this system to actually be utilized. whether it be just having the guy in the wayward lobster assign level ranges or it be a capture the keep kind of system i was talking about...

Spell adjustments..... The problem i wanted to address is not the relationship between classes but between those of the same class... a level 20 wizard vs a level 20 wizard... it doesn't matter what items either of them have, what spells they've got... It all boils down to who could target and cast power word stun first. pretty sure, having brawled quite a bit with my mantle on, crowd control spells go straight through spell absorb. And whether or not you've personally got spell resistance or you're a drow or whatever doesn't matter because your personal spell resistance doesn't stack with the spell resistance buff which is the only thing that can really prevent these spells effectively...

I know i didn't say everything i probably wanted to say but this is getting exhausting.

TheDjinnFor
03-14-2010, 11:04 PM
Step 1

What this amounts to is encouraging developers to create and fix mechanics by accounting for special cases. You acknowledge, then, that the current PvE system is impossible to translate over to PvP, so you encourage developers to make exceptions and change the rules around. What happens when you take that philosophy to it's logical conclusion? You have a game full of inconsistency, limited by the special cases it needs.

The problem with such a game, among many things, is that it is limited by what the developers can design special cases around. You will have a game with 100 special rulesets that can only be played 100 ways. If, instead, developers were to create a consistent, logical system that works no matter what you want to use it for (or make it adaptable enough so that its core workings can easily be adjusted) then you allow your players freedom to play in a wider variety of ways. On the other hand, if your game is designed in such a way that you need to arrange special cases and rules for everything, then your players can only play the way you've arranged special cases for (either that or spend decades outlining all the special cases).


Step 2

You're taking what was fun in another game that targeted a different audience and had different mechanics and trying to translate it over to this game. DDO is a party-based instancing game. It is not a guild-war game or a castle-building game. It does the developers no good to explore such a system when not only is it alien to the very nature of the game as it was designed, but also does not appeal to the majority of the players. This game is not a guild-versus-guild game.

prowessss
03-14-2010, 11:34 PM
the original purpose for this thread was not to debate whether or not PvP should be a focus for the developers... Of course it shouldn't be.

The purpose is to outline simple ways to successfully make PvP in this game a more fulfilling experience. then it turned into a bunch of people jumping on me for enjoying PvP and wanting to see more of it and me defending myself... Maybe we can return to the original purpose...

In my opinion, a few minor spell adjustments and a little rogue love would all that would be needed to achieve the balance necessary for pvp to be taken seriously. then all we'd need is some sort of motivation to get battles together.. I take it no one liked my idea of having a relic keep and having guilds battle for it... IMO +1 for the dominant guilds is pretty insignificant... yeah it would be pretty nice but ultimately insignificant.

love you all :-D

prowessss
03-15-2010, 01:13 AM
no lol the point is variety and fun... that's like saying housing is pointless cause this isn't the sims :-P

Trillea
03-15-2010, 01:17 AM
5 minutes spent by the Devs doing anything with PVP is 5 minutes that they could have done more important things with, like maybe.... well anything... including sleeping or doing nothing at all. The only thing I would like to see changed about PVP is its complete and total removal from DDO.

prowessss
03-15-2010, 04:14 AM
5 minutes spent by the Devs doing anything with PVP is 5 minutes that they could have done more important things with, like maybe.... well anything... including sleeping or doing nothing at all. The only thing I would like to see changed about PVP is its complete and total removal from DDO.

There are a lot of people who feel the same way. I look forward to questing with yous. But you have to realize there's a lot of people who really have a lot of fun with pvp in this game..

I've been giving turbine money since asheron's call exited beta... And in Asheron's Call the PvP community was the strongest of all the communities... in fact, without pvp, asheron's call would not have been half the success that it was. Like it or not, Turbine is passionate about PvP and whether you want it or not, it's here to stay and will more than definitely receive tweaks and upgrades.

Really, my posts were for turbine. Not all you. Hopefully they see my ideas and not just all the mindless pvp-bashing...

It doesn't matter how inconsequential pvp is to the pve gamer, you're still going to be violently opposed to it... I respect that this game is not about pvp. In my opinion if they start to focus the game on pvp it'll start destroying it. But this does not mean PvP doesn't deserve attention... If you pay close attention to the spell effects that were altered last update and the spell effects that are going to be altered next update, you'll see very clearly that turbine is slowly finding ways to make pvp more accessable and more fun.

Heroic surge is definitely inspired by pvp situations. in fact it's almost identical to the changes DAoC made right before they added Andred and Mordred (the PvP-only servers)

So cry if you must-- but pvp is not only a part of this game but a part of the gaming universe...

flynnjsw
03-15-2010, 07:10 AM
There are a lot of people who feel the same way. I look forward to questing with yous. But you have to realize there's a lot of people who really have a lot of fun with pvp in this game..

I've been giving turbine money since asheron's call exited beta... And in Asheron's Call the PvP community was the strongest of all the communities... in fact, without pvp, asheron's call would not have been half the success that it was. 1Like it or not, Turbine is passionate about PvP and whether you want it or not, it's here to stay and will more than definitely receive tweaks and upgrades.

Really, my posts were for turbine. Not all you. 2 Hopefully they see my ideas and not just all the mindless pvp-bashing...
It doesn't matter how inconsequential pvp is to the pve gamer, you're still going to be violently opposed to it... I respect that this game is not about pvp. In my opinion if they start to focus the game on pvp it'll start destroying it. 3But this does not mean PvP doesn't deserve attention... If you pay close attention to the spell effects that were altered last update and the spell effects that are going to be altered next update, you'll see very clearly that turbine is slowly finding ways to make pvp more accessable and more fun.

Heroic surge is definitely inspired by pvp situations. in fact it's almost identical to the changes DAoC made right before they added Andred and Mordred (the PvP-only servers)

So cry if you must-- 4but pvp is not only a part of this game but a part of the gaming universe...

So to make this easier (for me) I broke this down into sections...

1. Show me where any Devs have mentioned this; in essence, screen shot or it didn't/won't happen
2. You post on the open forums about something that has been talked about before, and hopefully they see the largest body rejecting the idea and will ignore said suggestion.
3. This, if you actually read the posts by the Devs when it was released even to Lam, that it was because "the game was too hard".
4. PvP is an after-thought in this game, and whether it is a part of every other MMO in existance or not, is not a valid argument.

Sutekx
03-15-2010, 07:22 AM
Spell adjustments..... The problem i wanted to address is not the relationship between classes but between those of the same class... a level 20 wizard vs a level 20 wizard... it doesn't matter what items either of them have, what spells they've got... It all boils down to who could target and cast power word stun first. pretty sure, having brawled quite a bit with my mantle on, crowd control spells go straight through spell absorb. And whether or not you've personally got spell resistance or you're a drow or whatever doesn't matter because your personal spell resistance doesn't stack with the spell resistance buff which is the only thing that can really prevent these spells effectively...

I stated it before you are targetting specific spells you don't like. A level 20 wizard and a level 20 wizard dueling without mantles, spell absorb items, personal spell buffs and SR items. It still comes down to who has what feats as well, one has quicken, and one doesn't ... it's going to go through, and if there was SR involved, there are the spell pen feats as well. So while trying to tweak out a spell which properties are the same in PVE and PVP so it works different in PVP, might as well throw Feats into the matter then.

It's like talking about changing the Redeemer weapon in Unreal Tournament series because it boils down who fires first and who can target who first, and would be considered "an easy button". Because a direct hit goes through the shields you have and kills you. PVP. Would you complain that it isn't fair? Because it hasn't change in the game in over, what 8 years?


There are a lot of people who feel the same way. I look forward to questing with yous. But you have to realize there's a lot of people who really have a lot of fun with pvp in this game..

I've been giving turbine money since asheron's call exited beta... And in Asheron's Call the PvP community was the strongest of all the communities... in fact, without pvp, asheron's call would not have been half the success that it was. Like it or not, Turbine is passionate about PvP and whether you want it or not, it's here to stay and will more than definitely receive tweaks and upgrades.

Really, my posts were for turbine. Not all you. Hopefully they see my ideas and not just all the mindless pvp-bashing...

It doesn't matter how inconsequential pvp is to the pve gamer, you're still going to be violently opposed to it... I respect that this game is not about pvp. In my opinion if they start to focus the game on pvp it'll start destroying it. But this does not mean PvP doesn't deserve attention... If you pay close attention to the spell effects that were altered last update and the spell effects that are going to be altered next update, you'll see very clearly that turbine is slowly finding ways to make pvp more accessable and more fun.

Heroic surge is definitely inspired by pvp situations. in fact it's almost identical to the changes DAoC made right before they added Andred and Mordred (the PvP-only servers)

So cry if you must-- but pvp is not only a part of this game but a part of the gaming universe...

Not everyone is bashing the PVP aspect of the game. It was stated in the thread that it is unbalanced due to the variety of elements in the game. You had targetted several spells and now have boiled it down to one spell in particular, power word stun. But you only have your mantle? You think with the scenerio with a lvl 20 wiz vs a lvl 20 wiz that you brought up, you would have more spell absorption items than just the mantle. Play smarter, not cry to the devs because someone might be able to play a better game in PVP or who gets off the first shot. They do see on their end which spells become over powered in the game and nerf them accordingly.

Sinni
03-15-2010, 07:30 AM
lol that's silly. the spells i propose changing are "I win" spells. you can't have a spell that disables a character or monster or anything without a save possibility. Yes spell resistance works but fascinate goes straight thru spell resistance and has almost an infallable save. works as intended. but as is a bard can fascinate a crowd, and even if they've got ridiculous spell resistance, he has plenty of time to keep trying until he hits the spell that ends the fight. Maybe just a timer on power words? like you can still power word stun and power word kill, but only one every 2 minutes? and a much longer cast time on irresistible dance with a unique animation that lets you know to get away from that guy until you're stuck dancing until you die? in order to make pvp viable there has to be a change to these I-win-buttons.


trip and stunning blow are pretty much i win buttons for str based melees against casters.

to balance pvp you have to change too much which is "balanced" for monsters.
and if you change it for only pvp it is just wasted dev time as a huge majority of the players has absolutely no interest in PvP in DDO

krud
03-15-2010, 10:13 AM
hmmm... where to begin... so many new posts...
Ok... I'm just going to restate everything i've said in a clear and concise manner... bare with me because while I've got a 34 charisma score, only have 10 int...


I don't want to see PvP made a priority and I don't want PvP affecting any of the current content negatively.

There are PvP modes like CTF and what not... but the problem is no one uses them. and if you try, you'll most likely end up in a game of four twenties and 2 level 1s vs a group of level 5s... What I want to see is some kind of way for this system to actually be utilized. whether it be just having the guy in the wayward lobster assign level ranges or it be a capture the keep kind of system i was talking about...

Spell adjustments..... The problem i wanted to address is not the relationship between classes but between those of the same class... a level 20 wizard vs a level 20 wizard... it doesn't matter what items either of them have, what spells they've got... It all boils down to who could target and cast power word stun first. pretty sure, having brawled quite a bit with my mantle on, crowd control spells go straight through spell absorb. And whether or not you've personally got spell resistance or you're a drow or whatever doesn't matter because your personal spell resistance doesn't stack with the spell resistance buff which is the only thing that can really prevent these spells effectively...

I know i didn't say everything i probably wanted to say but this is getting exhausting.

The only valid complaint you have is that they could implement range restrictions in various taverns. Make one level 1-5, another 6-10, and so on, with one area remaining open for all levels. Other than that any changes to spell/combat mechanics solely for the sake of PvP is a bad idea. Someone is always gonna get pwned by someone else's abilities, no matter how hard you try to balance things. You can't fix them all without borking some of them, unless you make them behave one way in PvP and another way in quests (which is an even worse idea).

Uska
03-15-2010, 11:13 AM
The system i propose will not subtract any significance from the PvE content. Each relic would be server-wide and only one guild would be able to possess each relic... So if there's one +5 relic, a lot of people will have their eyes on it... and the amount of guilds in the game currently, the relics would change hands very frequently until eventually guilds would swell as people would seek the most powerful allies and guilds would be more inclined to increase their numbers. This system would be a step towards creating a more complete world. those who don't want pvp can simply ignore this system and never really be missing out on much but a lot of action.. +5 might be a little extreme... but some way to segregate the level-ranges is desirable. perhaps have 1-10s competing for the +1 relics and 10-20s competing for the +2 relics... The biggest problem i see with this is the server load.. we can't have Korthos Army constantly battling for the +1s...
I have a better idea, make it 10+... 10-15s fighting for the +1s and 15-20s fighting for the +2s? Or perhaps just have +1s and no level restrictions? And just have relic keeps... 4 per server so that 4 guilds per server would be able to seize a relic keep...

Basically my ideas are piggybacked from shadowbane and DAoC... Say my guild got a relic keep and your guild wants it. your guild would sign our challenge sheet and we would pick the time.. then at the scheduled time, your raid starts. If we can keep you from taking our relic for 30 minutes, we keep it. If you can take the relic and make it back to your camps, the relic is yours and if we want it back we have to buy a challenge... Perhaps challenge stones can be a random drop or quest reward? tradable on the auction house... this puts a price tag on a challenge... keepin you from being harrassed by constant challenges... I'm not on the dev team so i can't polish all these details...

Oh yeah and anyone who's ever played pnp knows that most enemies are actually player characters just being manned by the DM... Dungeons and Dragons has always had PvP. In pnp, alignment wasn't limited to chaotic-lawful good-neutral... it had everything from chaotic evil to lawful good... and this system would be way easier to impliment than creating a City of Villains kind of deal...

yes it will take away from pve since it takes take to do develop it time better spent on better things

Uska
03-15-2010, 11:17 AM
Turbine doesn't release any figures. never have never will. but it's safe to assume that this free model has more than doubled their revenue...

I first started playing this game when the cap was level 5... i quit and came back while it was still a p2p game... at that time our numbers were scarce... since mod9 it's very easy to see there's a lot more players. A LOT MORE. and there's no way for anyone outside of turbine to know the actual figures because turbine never releases any figures. ever.

Your facts are wrong the lvl cap was never 5 if would ding you for this post for sure if I wasnt out of rep for the day well -1 in spirit for blatantly getting the facts so completely wrong wrong wrong the first lvl cap was 10

DoctorWhofan
03-15-2010, 11:21 AM
guilds who don't want to participate would not have to participate... you'd miss out on pvp action and the ability to try your best to hold onto a +1 bonus...

Game developer's time aside, PvP to be useful PvP, needs to have a reward. Punishing people for NOT participating is wrong.

not really something that would force you to pvp... And it's only immature people who are personally upset by pvp.

I'm personally offended by this statement. So you are calling me immature?

Really, it all boils down to a dice roll... so while i'm sure there could be some heated battles, at the end of the day, we're all enjoying the same game!

No it won't be! THis game after the devolopers "fix" it would be so different that noone will want to play it.

So we're all friends... actually i make a lot of friends in the brawl pit... and if you're the type that's going to get mad about being killed then you have no business in the pit! simple as that.

In LIME. Well duh! I don't go into the pit for that very reason. PvP is NOT part of DnD. I came here cuz there WASN'T any PvP worth mentioning.


NOT SIGNED.

DoctorWhofan
03-15-2010, 11:34 AM
Why would I think that I would trust the OP on anything? Been called an Carebear, 50 year old nerdage and immature.

I hate PvP. I also know that it will not work in this game. Nerfing the PvE for PvP will destroy most if not all characters, the game, the loot, EVERYTHING. It would be easier to start a new game.

Have fun in the new game.

Hendrik
03-15-2010, 12:32 PM
Why would I think that I would trust the OP on anything? Been called an Carebear, 50 year old nerdage and immature.

I hate PvP. I also know that it will not work in this game. Nerfing the PvE for PvP will destroy most if not all characters, the game, the loot, EVERYTHING. It would be easier to start a new game.

Have fun in the new game.


The Goddess hath spoken!

:o

flynnjsw
03-15-2010, 01:14 PM
The Goddess hath spoken!

:o

So it shall be written, so it shall be done...:D

Hendrik
03-15-2010, 01:17 PM
So it shall be written, so it shall be done...:D

So say we all!


:D

KKDragonLord
03-15-2010, 01:30 PM
Step 1: Fix the ... spells. there are several spells that can be treated like an "i win" button... that's just ridiculous.
Step 2: Add incentive. *snip*

I planned on having a 3rd step but it got late really quick. There's dozens of players in the wayward lobster at all hours pvping away... but the brawl pit is no pvp system. We need a system with substance. I dont see it feasable for xp or loot rewards for pvp as this would basically be implimenting grinding.

Anyway i hope my ideas are well recieved and I look forward to seeing you all in game :-D

There is nothing stopping you from forming a PvP guild with carefully defined rules of engagement, scheduled matches, rewards and prizes, and using the more deserted arenas such as the one in House D.

There are a lot of people who play this game differently even if their playstyles aren't officially supported. Take the example of the Permadeath and Roleplaying guilds.

This way you get all those things you want without having to break the game for everyone else or taking precious time away from the development of things such as Druids, more quests, and druids, cleric domains...and did i mention druids? :p

DoctorWhofan
03-15-2010, 01:32 PM
The Goddess hath spoken!

:o


So it shall be written, so it shall be done...:D


So say we all!


:D

STop picking on me!

DoctorWhofan
03-15-2010, 01:33 PM
There is nothing stopping you from forming a PvP guild with carefully defined rules of engagement, scheduled matches, rewards and prizes, and using the more deserted arenas such as the one in House D.

There are a lot of people who play this game differently even if their playstyles aren't officially supported. Take the example of the Permadeath and Roleplaying guilds.

This way you get all those things you want without having to break the game for everyone else or taking precious time away from the development of things such as Druids, more quests, and druids, cleric domains...and did i mention druids? :p

Costumes. Sitting. druids, cleric PrEs

Alavatar
03-15-2010, 01:43 PM
1. PvP was added to DDO. The key word there is "added". It was done as an afterthought, after the game had already been developed and released. No game with PvP tacked on after the fact has ever had quality PvP. In order to have quality PvP the game needs to be designed with PvP as part of the core component. Therefore, DDO will never have quality PvP.

2. The majority of the playerbase on the forums, the communication vehicle of the players to Turbine, do not want PvP. What we have now is tolerable, but just barely to most of the vocal community. If Turbine wants player retention they will not spend more time than tweaks to PvP.

3. PvP is integral to PnP, but it is not integral to DDO. Get over it.

4. PvP in PnP is not balanced. Therefore, in order to even resemble PnP, PvP in DDO (if ever further developed) should never be balanced. The L20 wizard should always dominate.

Return_To_Forever
03-15-2010, 02:00 PM
Always funny to read peoples reaction in this game to PVP. A lot who are so against it, have no solid reasons why not.

The truth is, PVP that matters for PVP, can be implemented without effecting how the PVE works. It can be implemented and balanced as an after thought, they have many examples and general MMO past exp to drawn from.

People like PVP/RVR for a lot of the same reasons, people like good DMs, its not a fight against the same mob, who spawns adds at 75, and starts AoEs at 50, and spawns more adds and chains you at 25, every time you fight them.

No, its a real enemy, who decides, oh they are doing this, so I will do this to counter it, and in turn you have to figure out what would be the right approach from there and so on.

Its all good, hopefully though the Devs are open to the ideas of PVP, it offers alot of playability in online games and would be a great addition to DDO. I mean hopefully they are open to everything that offers more game play options to this game.

Timjc86
03-15-2010, 02:16 PM
I think a well done PvP system in a DnD based MMO could be a lot of fun, but I don't think DDO is the place for that, for a number of reasons:

The real show-stopper is the game engine and how it deals with latency. There is a good bit of difference between where you see moving objects/mobs/players and where the server sees them, even in periods of very good latency. It's not a huge issue since mobs are fairly immobile in combat, but in PvP when people are dancing around like headless chickens, it just doesn't work well at all.
The second reason on my list is a combination of heavy fortification and stealth. The two times I've ever managed to kill somebody on my rogue in PvP have been radiance procs against a character who wasn't wearing a Blindness Immunity item and a Lightning Strike proc. PvP is so extremely stacked against rogues that it's just silly.
Attempting to balance classes against each other in PvP would also be quite a challenge, and I suspect it would conflict with PvE balance in a lot of ways (i.e. most raids won't take more than 1 or 2 casters, but casters are vastly superior in PvP - changing one aspect affects the other.)

gavagai
03-15-2010, 02:22 PM
Always funny to read peoples reaction in this game to PVP. A lot who are so against it, have no solid reasons why not.

I'm not going to write out my last post again, but I can assure you that there have been good reasons why we are against the specific design changes suggested here. However, the reasons why a specific idea are not good may not suit you.

-- The D&D Ruleset doesn't have well-balanced classes. So fidelity is one reason to oppose balancing for PvP.

-- Nerfing spells for PvP balance unbalances PvE balance; and since most players focus on PvE and benefit from those spells in a collaborative environment, it is unwise to achieve PvP balance by nerfing spells.

-- Whether for PvP balance or PvE balance, "balance" should not involve making high-power skills less powerful by making them identical to low-power skills. [Major complaint against Heroic Surge.]

There are others, but Ima grab a coffee instead. ;)

Hendrik
03-15-2010, 02:29 PM
STop picking on me!

/hug

:D

prowessss
03-15-2010, 09:43 PM
Classes aren't supposed to be balanced against each other... but rather they're all pretty well balanced together. There is no class that is not sought after in a group.

I don't know what to do about rogues tho... perhaps give all rogues the ability to bypass fort with some kind of a... sneak attack? maybe the first attack on the attack sequence (+0+0+5+10) could have this pvp-only property? EDIT: or maybe simply add a weapon property that temporarily decreases fort? say by like 1d20% reduction a hit on failed save? I think that would be cooler as a rogue only ability granted... so you'd throw it out as often as you can like sunder or trip... or maybe just add the property to sunder, as sunder is a very underutilized feat... i think it should probably not be on sunder but improved sunder? i dunno this all needs polish

I think perhaps they should take more of a sapper role in pvp... perhaps the defenders could have some sort of siege equiptment or auto-turrets and a rogue's job could be to take out those defenses with their disable device... but most rogues don't care about repair but it could have a tremendous use in the castle seige scene... repairing doors, barriers, siege equipment...
i like this idea

LunaCee
03-15-2010, 09:55 PM
As may have been mentioned earlier PvP requires a few things period to be worthwhile.

1. The game is created with PvP in mind from the very start. (DDO didn't have this)
2. The game's ruleset is created and balanced for PvP from the very start (PnP didn't have this)
3. The game's ruleset is maintained and kept balanced for PvP with every infusion of content.

Guild Wars Prophecies era. 1 & 2 met, 3 wasn't an issue yet. Great time!

Guild Wars Nightfall era... 3 is not met period, EotN rolls out 3 is ever MORE not met. Guild Wars of today is horrible PvP wise. And an example of why PvP is such a hassle.

Now if I game that was initially created for PvP can get seriously screwed up just try to imagine how screwed up a game that wasn't designed for PvP in the first place could get.

/end thread

prowessss
03-15-2010, 10:02 PM
All you carebears are so obsessed with the idea that pvp has to have some kind of balancing... Groups are balanced. every class is viable and desireable. therefore in a castle siege system, it wouldn't matter how well classes do 1vs1 because it's not 1vs1... 1vs1 was never my idea... you can already duel.

When i started playing this game I was playing asheron's call and i got into the beta... I quit at level 3 and was told the cap was 5... i quit because the instance-based, end reward, with absolutely no grinding threw me off. and there was no pvp... so i went back to asheron's call.

And anyone who thinks i called them a carebear or whatever other words i've thrown out to the entire internet... it's like this... i put those shoes on my posts but you're the one who put them on. So I guess they fit, huh?

DoctorWhofan
03-15-2010, 10:22 PM
All you carebears are so obsessed with the idea that pvp has to have some kind of balancing... Groups are balanced. every class is viable and desireable. therefore in a castle siege system, it wouldn't matter how well classes do 1vs1 because it's not 1vs1... 1vs1 was never my idea... you can already duel.

When i started playing this game I was playing asheron's call and i got into the beta... I quit at level 3 and was told the cap was 5... i quit because the instance-based, end reward, with absolutely no grinding threw me off. and there was no pvp... so i went back to asheron's call.

And anyone who thinks i called them a carebear or whatever other words i've thrown out to the entire internet... it's like this... i put those shoes on my posts but you're the one who put them on. So I guess they fit, huh?

andthis is why even if you make sense, you will never get heard. Insults get you NOWHERE.

Aashrym
03-15-2010, 10:38 PM
All you carebears are so obsessed with the idea that pvp has to have some kind of balancing... Groups are balanced. every class is viable and desireable. therefore in a castle siege system, it wouldn't matter how well classes do 1vs1 because it's not 1vs1... 1vs1 was never my idea... you can already duel.

When i started playing this game I was playing asheron's call and i got into the beta... I quit at level 3 and was told the cap was 5... i quit because the instance-based, end reward, with absolutely no grinding threw me off. and there was no pvp... so i went back to asheron's call.

And anyone who thinks i called them a carebear or whatever other words i've thrown out to the entire internet... it's like this... i put those shoes on my posts but you're the one who put them on. So I guess they fit, huh?

Name calling doesn't win a debate. Why would you assume someone who wants to see dev time put into new modules and more classes is a carebear anyway?

These forums existed when the level cap was 10 as well, btw. We all knew the level cap was 10 coming out of the beta when the new forums replaced the old forums and there was plenty of discussion about PvP and PvE back then too. (Among other things, too. I used to argue with Shade about bards not sucking and agreeing barbarians weren't useless, level 10 endgame was very different from today tho. Forum argument nostalgia FTW ;-) ) It is hard to believe anyone wouldn't know the level cap was 10 at that time.

When the PvP was created as an after-thought there was complaining for and against changes to it and it never really amounted to anything. The end result is we have some for people who want it and the majority of posters here seem agree that it's not something we want to see further developed.

I don't play this game for PvP. I play this game because there are a lot of options available to me that I like to play around with building characters and there is much more content that originally released. That is what I want to see my money going towards. I want to see more spells added, more classes added, new quests added for all levels, maybe epic levels eventually up to a higher cap.

It's not correct to call other posters carebears or PvP bashers when it's not really bashing. Most of the posts refer to developing other things that mean more to those players. That's letting the dev's know what we want to pay for, not bashing.

Aashrym
03-15-2010, 10:40 PM
andthis is why even if you make sense, you will never get heard. Insults get you NOWHERE.

I see you summed me up before I finished. Dang ur good ;-)

gavagai
03-15-2010, 10:45 PM
All you carebears are so obsessed with the idea that pvp has to have some kind of balancing...


You know us carebears. Obsessed with balance. Defending the "I win" unbalanced easy button stuns and instakills.

Speaking of carebear... what was the problem with getting stunned in PvP again? :rolleyes:

prowessss
03-15-2010, 10:50 PM
stop assuming i'm insulting you! I really don't mean it. It's 2010 you white dots need to get over being called carebears lol.
hey just cause i said potato doesn't mean i called you a potato... the way you have to see it is you're standing in a field of potatos and I just shouted "You damn potatos!" only a potato could possibly be offended by this... come on just know you're not a potato.

I really do love you all

Refer to the thread title... this thread was not a debate whether or not people want pvp. you all turned it into that. it's also not intended to be a debate on what devs should spend their time with. I meant for this thread to contain soundwalling for interesting pvp concepts that turbine could eventually refer to if they so desired to begin such a task. Like one person actually understood this... lol. so come on either contribute to the thread or leave it alone. I don't want to throw shoes all over my posts but you carebears keep messin up my thread!!

KKDragonLord
03-15-2010, 10:51 PM
I hope you guys dont mind if i repeat myself, this will be my last contribution.

As I said before and as Visty pointed out There is already some good competitive PVP in DDO:


Capture the flag, death match, team death match.

But to do Any of this an integral part of the game, it would require enough effort to almost make a New Game, especially because of the whole mechanics tweaking, PVP Gear, Entirely new Areas, and an awful lot more stuff we can't even understand.
If you think PvP does not require constant balance and maintenance Prowess you dont know much about it. If you think we already complain too much when mobs get overpowered immunities and abilities, you have no idea the amount of complaining the PvP crowd can come up with.

And if you REALLY want it so much, You can have PvP with all the restrictions it might need, making up all sorts of events to make it interesting. All it takes is some imagination and effort on your part to make it happen.


There is nothing stopping you from forming a PvP guild with carefully defined rules of engagement, scheduled matches, rewards and prizes, and using the more deserted arenas such as the one in House D.

There are a lot of people who play this game differently even if their playstyles aren't officially supported. Take the example of the Permadeath and Roleplaying guilds.

This way you get all those things you want without having to break the game for everyone else or taking precious time away from the development of things such as Druids

prowessss
03-15-2010, 10:59 PM
quoting myself just to make this post have extra gravity


stop assuming i'm insulting you! I really don't mean it. It's 2010 you white dots need to get over being called carebears lol.
hey just cause i said potato doesn't mean i called you a potato... the way you have to see it is you're standing in a field of potatos and I just shouted "You damn potatos!" only a potato could possibly be offended by this... come on just know you're not a potato.

I really do love you all

Refer to the thread title... this thread was not a debate whether or not people want pvp. you all turned it into that. it's also not intended to be a debate on what devs should spend their time with. I meant for this thread to contain soundwalling for interesting pvp concepts that turbine could eventually refer to if they so desired to begin such a task. Like one person actually understood this... lol. so come on either contribute to the thread or leave it alone. I don't want to throw shoes all over my posts but you carebears keep messin up my thread!!

There is no debate whether or not people want pvp... because I'm definitely people :-P and what a silly argument to state that the majority don't care about pvp and would rather see something else. duh, did you forget what game you're playing?

And as far as PvP being high matainance... this is wrong. the dev team is not going to make significant adjustments to the game due to people's complaint that a wizard is too powerful... their answer to that would probably be "I guess you better make some wizard friends then, huh?"

Please no more argumentative posts. seriously, either contribute or don't...

prowessss
03-16-2010, 12:01 AM
Another benefit of the addition of such things-- it'd really put all those WF who are so upset by "hand-holding" in their place. 6 of the leetest automotons could not beat a well coordinated and balanced 6man.

Sutekx
03-16-2010, 03:56 AM
Classes aren't supposed to be balanced against each other... but rather they're all pretty well balanced together. There is no class that is not sought after in a group.

That can be debatable depending on who is in a group and what they are trying to achieve at the time. It's more or less quest specific. If there are no traps or locks to be picked, why get a rogue? Some people will add others as a group filler depending on what criteria is met for their expectations of the quest group, same would go for a PVP group battle, instead of free for all in tavern brawls.



I don't know what to do about rogues tho... perhaps give all rogues the ability to bypass fort with some kind of a... sneak attack? maybe the first attack on the attack sequence (+0+0+5+10) could have this pvp-only property? EDIT: or maybe simply add a weapon property that temporarily decreases fort? say by like 1d20% reduction a hit on failed save? I think that would be cooler as a rogue only ability granted... so you'd throw it out as often as you can like sunder or trip... or maybe just add the property to sunder, as sunder is a very underutilized feat... i think it should probably not be on sunder but improved sunder? i dunno this all needs polish

Isn't the whole reason why fortification was setup was to prevent damage from a sneak attack? So why are you trying to go backwards, but how about a weapons that does paralyze?? Oh wait we do have that.


I think perhaps they should take more of a sapper role in pvp... perhaps the defenders could have some sort of siege equiptment or auto-turrets and a rogue's job could be to take out those defenses with their disable device... but most rogues don't care about repair but it could have a tremendous use in the castle seige scene... repairing doors, barriers, siege equipment...
i like this idea

Are you speaking of the repair skill? And making rogues or everyone into a carpenter by the use of the repair skill, adding a new item to the game for PVP... Carpenter Tools! Instead of buying repair kits. And the Pre for it is a hammer, or war hammer. And while your character is making repairs to the defense and offense devices, you can hear them whistle the tune "If I had a hammer..."


There is no debate whether or not people want pvp... because I'm definitely people :-P and what a silly argument to state that the majority don't care about pvp and would rather see something else. duh, did you forget what game you're playing?

Soylent Green is people. And if you are people, are you considering that as me, myself, and I? But it might explain some characteristics that could possibly be seen as delusional. Given the thread as a type of poll for a percentage of people who are for and against PVP, this percentage you are looking at so far is against it and there are other threads on the forums that also show this firm belief about being against PVP. Did we forget what game we are playing, no, I don't think so, but you might have at some point perhaps?


And as far as PvP being high matainance... this is wrong. the dev team is not going to make significant adjustments to the game due to people's complaint that a wizard is too powerful... their answer to that would probably be "I guess you better make some wizard friends then, huh?"

OK, now you are backpedaling on what you stated before regarding Power Word: Stun and other so called "easy button" spells a wizard or sorcerer uses in PVP which was argued regarding your thoughts on nerfing them for PVP purposes while others looked at how it would also effect PVE since they are in tandem with each other. So make up your mind.


Please no more argumentative posts. seriously, either contribute or don't...

Another benefit of the addition of such things-- it'd really put all those WF who are so upset by "hand-holding" in their place. 6 of the leetest automotons could not beat a well coordinated and balanced 6man.

Do you realize that you are setting up statements for arguments in the thread? For example...


stop assuming i'm insulting you! I really don't mean it. It's 2010 you white dots need to get over being called carebears lol.

This is considered racist. Using a racial slur for white dots, calling them "carebears" - It is demeaning to any white dot who reads this, this must end now. Agreed, it is 2010, but what ever you had against the white dots in the past, you really do need to get over and move on, instead of spreading the hate.

Now as for contributing to the thread. How about this, think about what is already implemented in the game - not trying to change a variety of perimeters of the game.

New PVP group challenge map - Say as an example, much like Irestone Inlet, a defending party must try to defend the ship from being blown up on a time limit scenario ... each barrel out of 6 has to be placed onto the ship, same as the quest and lit to blow the ship. Defending team has to stop this from happening until the time is up. A timer of 10 - 15 minutes?

Veriden
03-16-2010, 04:23 AM
That can be debatable depending on who is in a group and what they are trying to achieve at the time. It's more or less quest specific. If there are no traps or locks to be picked, why get a rogue? Some people will add others as a group filler depending on what criteria is met for their expectations of the quest group, same would go for a PVP group battle, instead of free for all in tavern brawls.




Isn't the whole reason why fortification was setup was to prevent damage from a sneak attack? So why are you trying to go backwards, but how about a weapons that does paralyze?? Oh wait we do have that.



Are you speaking of the repair skill? And making rogues or everyone into a carpenter by the use of the repair skill, adding a new item to the game for PVP... Carpenter Tools! Instead of buying repair kits. And the Pre for it is a hammer, or war hammer. And while your character is making repairs to the defense and offense devices, you can hear them whistle the tune "If I had a hammer..."



Soylent Green is people. And if you are people, are you considering that as me, myself, and I? But it might explain some characteristics that could possibly be seen as delusional. Given the thread as a type of poll for a percentage of people who are for and against PVP, this percentage you are looking at so far is against it and there are other threads on the forums that also show this firm belief about being against PVP. Did we forget what game we are playing, no, I don't think so, but you might have at some point perhaps?



OK, now you are backpedaling on what you stated before regarding Power Word: Stun and other so called "easy button" spells a wizard or sorcerer uses in PVP which was argued regarding your thoughts on nerfing them for PVP purposes while others looked at how it would also effect PVE since they are in tandem with each other. So make up your mind.




Do you realize that you are setting up statements for arguments in the thread? For example...



This is considered racist. Using a racial slur for white dots, calling them "carebears" - It is demeaning to any white dot who reads this, this must end now. Agreed, it is 2010, but what ever you had against the white dots in the past, you really do need to get over and move on, instead of spreading the hate.

Now as for contributing to the thread. How about this, think about what is already implemented in the game - not trying to change a variety of perimeters of the game.

New PVP group challenge map - Say as an example, much like Irestone Inlet, a defending party must try to defend the ship from being blown up on a time limit scenario ... each barrel out of 6 has to be placed onto the ship, same as the quest and lit to blow the ship. Defending team has to stop this from happening until the time is up. A timer of 10 - 15 minutes?

I don't get the white dot comment.....

any ways, the new pvp challenge map would be cool, seek and destroy missions in an old game I used to play with a few friends back about a decade ago...god what was that game >.< But anyways, it was a really good time. The only time I really pvp is when I have a group of people I know from either my guild or our allied guilds and we do capture the flag alot so seeing a invasion/seek and destroy style with two maps to pick from would be an awesome improvement to pvp. Other than that though...I can't say I agree to viable contribution for guild vs guild pvp. How ever a guild hall would be cool to have, like desginate one spare building in harbor or a house to be a guild hall. While any guild can use that house the only instance you get pends on what guild you are in. I think turbine would make a lot of money if they charged guild upgrades. (Guild bank, gold bank, guild hall, expansions to guild bank) The game takes money to maintain and with the ever growing number of guilds and new players I think that would be a good way of income for the game. Most people have shoveled 5-10 dollars into the game here and there to get the expansions if you're not vip. I have, I digress. Good evening.

Hendrik
03-16-2010, 07:50 AM
OP, if you have not figured it out by now, you never will.


You are fighting a battle that you will NEVER win. DDO has a mature, for the most part, playerbase - we do NOT want smacktards, leet B-net kiddies, WoW weetards corrupting our game and turning it into something that it is not.

If you do not like what DDO has to offer in PvP you can either;

a. Not Pvp.
b. Play with what you are given.
c. Find something else to PvP in.

The players have spoken, NO MORE DEV TIME ON PVP! They have listened and continue to do so.

kafrielveddicus
03-16-2010, 08:09 AM
I'll ammend... Also perhaps just halve sneak attack damage with heavy fortification? 100% chance to halve sneak attack damage... I'm not expecting this to happen quickly but anyone who knows anything about marketing an mmo knows this would broaden the player base. more players more money. more money more content. more content more fun!

There's already a lot of players joining because the banner said "best combat in any mmo" and they're not canceling their subscription to WoW and paying for this game instead because there's nothing fulfilling about the PvP experience currently in game.
I would also like to note that this is the only suggestion up on the front page that would potentially increase revenue.

Then let them go back and play WOW, I for one would rather not have the crowd from WOW here if all they care about is instant gratification <-- a complex that not only exists in 12 year olds but now also exists in a much older less mature crowd who actually believe credit is money, when all it actually is, is debt!!!

Visty
03-16-2010, 01:15 PM
All you carebears are so obsessed with the idea that pvp has to have some kind of balancing... Groups are balanced. every class is viable and desireable. therefore in a castle siege system, it wouldn't matter how well classes do 1vs1 because it's not 1vs1... 1vs1 was never my idea... you can already duel.

When i started playing this game I was playing asheron's call and i got into the beta... I quit at level 3 and was told the cap was 5... i quit because the instance-based, end reward, with absolutely no grinding threw me off. and there was no pvp... so i went back to asheron's call.

And anyone who thinks i called them a carebear or whatever other words i've thrown out to the entire internet... it's like this... i put those shoes on my posts but you're the one who put them on. So I guess they fit, huh?

groups arent balanced cause ppl will make groups of 6 casters anyway, thats the way it works

also, see all the other posts

ppl shouldnt make suggestions for the game unless they understood its mechanic

Return_To_Forever
03-16-2010, 02:26 PM
Its still the basic arguments repeated here.

Fidelity - Fidelity for PVE can be kept intact and balance made just to PVP zones.

Afterthought systems - While planning and forethought is always valued, its not impossible to make things after the fact, and its not out of the question that those things can be enjoyable.

PVP balance effecting PVE - The PVP zones have already recieved changes that do not effect PVE, not sure why people think its impossible for one to be different than the other.

Group imbalance in the current system - Yes, the current system needs balance, classes sighted like the sorc needs a go to class that is its nemesis. So that a full party of sorcs would have a viable counter.

People who PVP are Smacktards, immature, Leet B-net kiddies, Wow Weetards who will corrupt the game - IMO they are already here, have always been, and are easily handled with somewhat good moderation that seems to already be in place. Also, there is the lil fact that not all PVPers are these stereo types.

At the end of the day, its all about preference, if you don't think you would enjoy PVP and don't think the Devs should spend time on it, that's perfectly fine IMO. Maybe there isn't enough support here for it, maybe the Devs just don't care about it, again all of this is fine.

But, none of that changes that it can be done, and that it would/does add to the game play options in this game, and it doesn't have to effect your current preferred game play.

KKDragonLord
03-16-2010, 02:29 PM
PvP might be a part of the new guild housing system they have planned.

Hendrik
03-16-2010, 02:34 PM
PvP might be a part of the new guild housing system they have planned.

HIGHLY doubtful.


Make people/Guilds PvP to earn a Guild House?

Not going to happen.

flynnjsw
03-16-2010, 02:41 PM
HIGHLY doubtful.


Make people/Guilds PvP to earn a Guild House?

Not going to happen.

I certainly hope not, PVP becoming a neccesity in this game for anything would be about the only reason I can see that would make me drop my sub.

As far as the topic itself, I am not a fan of PvP. It was what turned me off to MMO's back when my little brother tried to introduse me to UO back in the day. Now as far as PvP in DDO goes, as long as it always remains seperate from everything else, and has no lasting effects on characters or PvE, then meh...

Visty
03-16-2010, 03:00 PM
Its still the basic arguments repeated here.

Fidelity - Fidelity for PVE can be kept intact and balance made just to PVP zones.

Afterthought systems - While planning and forethought is always valued, its not impossible to make things after the fact, and its not out of the question that those things can be enjoyable.

PVP balance effecting PVE - The PVP zones have already recieved changes that do not effect PVE, not sure why people think its impossible for one to be different than the other.

Group imbalance in the current system - Yes, the current system needs balance, classes sighted like the sorc needs a go to class that is its nemesis. So that a full party of sorcs would have a viable counter.

People who PVP are Smacktards, immature, Leet B-net kiddies, Wow Weetards who will corrupt the game - IMO they are already here, have always been, and are easily handled with somewhat good moderation that seems to already be in place. Also, there is the lil fact that not all PVPers are these stereo types.

At the end of the day, its all about preference, if you don't think you would enjoy PVP and don't think the Devs should spend time on it, that's perfectly fine IMO. Maybe there isn't enough support here for it, maybe the Devs just don't care about it, again all of this is fine.

But, none of that changes that it can be done, and that it would/does add to the game play options in this game, and it doesn't have to effect your current preferred game play.
creating an entire new ruleset just for pvp is NOT a good move, even if you think it is

gavagai
03-16-2010, 03:10 PM
Its still the basic arguments repeated here.

Fidelity - Fidelity for PVE can be kept intact and balance made just to PVP zones.

Afterthought systems - While planning and forethought is always valued, its not impossible to make things after the fact, and its not out of the question that those things can be enjoyable.

PVP balance effecting PVE - The PVP zones have already recieved changes that do not effect PVE, not sure why people think its impossible for one to be different than the other.

Group imbalance in the current system - Yes, the current system needs balance, classes sighted like the sorc needs a go to class that is its nemesis. So that a full party of sorcs would have a viable counter.

People who PVP are Smacktards, immature, Leet B-net kiddies, Wow Weetards who will corrupt the game - IMO they are already here, have always been, and are easily handled with somewhat good moderation that seems to already be in place. Also, there is the lil fact that not all PVPers are these stereo types.

At the end of the day, its all about preference, if you don't think you would enjoy PVP and don't think the Devs should spend time on it, that's perfectly fine IMO. Maybe there isn't enough support here for it, maybe the Devs just don't care about it, again all of this is fine.

But, none of that changes that it can be done, and that it would/does add to the game play options in this game, and it doesn't have to effect your current preferred game play.

I agree people should avoid stereotyping PvP players and immature kids. PvP rouses more emotions than PvE, and yet there are still relatively few total whiners from the PvP world, which I think speaks lots to the PvP community here in DDO.

That said, the barriers are IMO pretty fundamental. Even if we had different rulesets for PvP and PvE, they would have to be so substantially different from one another that it would literally make each character play like two characters. Low AC melees like the Barbs, the Kensais, the KotCs and the Rogues are great in PvE but would be extremely underpowered in PvP, while high saves/high AC characters would be favored in PvP even though their DPS couldn't cut down an Orthon.

Most of my experience has been with Shadowbane (which was phenomenal for its balance, despite the complexity of class and character builds), so most of my points will come from there. Also keep in mind many of these issues aren't just problems for PvP, but for endgame content in general.

Problem in short: Most good characters for PvE won't be particularly good for PvP. DDO's PvP cannot accommodate all the different kinds of build and classes. With arbitrary game mechanics creating winners and losers, IMO PvP won't be popular but to a minority that actually roll those PvP builds and gear them out.

To-hit and the D20: Players can achieve much higher ACs than they can achieve to-hit scores, and due to the nature of the D20 high AC would be king. Games like Shadowbane had defense-cuts going up to 50% DEF cut, allowing a Warrior to cut an Aracroix scouts DEF from 2500 to 1250. Sunder, Imp. Sunder, and Destruction would not be enough to allow the Frenzied Berzerker to hit the Stalwart Defender with a standing AC of 77 except with glancing blows. While the Stalwart Defender could go through the Barb's measly 800 hps with ease. Without true challenge and strategy, melee PvP would be dull (as IMO it is now).

HP to DPS ratio: Most high level characters output vastly more damage than they can sustain. A high end barb tank in DDO sits on 800-1000 hps, which can be decimated in less then 3 seconds by a secondary DPS class. One empowered/maximized spell from a sorc is usually enough to wipe most players. In SB, a fully equipped Mino Polarm Fighter would do about as much damage as a FBIII -- but would have 10 times the HPs. As would the priests and mages. Without more HPs/less DPS, combat will remain a chaotic, instantaneous, and unskilled gankfest, and most PvP gear would skimp on damage numbers (we do enough) and focus on HP/AC/saves gear. None of this makes PvP.

Immunities and Fort: In part because of our low HP/DPS ratio, we have High Fort to keep us alive. Now many classes (Kensais and Rogues in particular) derive most of their benefit from crits and sneak attacks, which sucks for them. But if you eliminate the Fort, go up to previous section: DPS would go up exponentially, meaning more players dead.

Spells, SP, and AoE Effects: Its no secret that Spells and Arcane Archers dominate PvP. In PvE, the cost of a caster's power is cripplingly finite SP resources; and unlike in SB and other games, those resources don't magically come back without extremely expensive pots. But in PvP a caster can dump SP, making the Wizard's powerful but rarely used toys simply overbearing. If we reduce the power of the spells for burst PvP, we completely screw the casters for long-term PvP.

When you look at those issues all together, one thing comes together: PvP in DDO is fundamentally whimsical and scewed by game mechanics. Due to mechanics, many top PvE toons will be gimp at PvP, and vice versa. Which dissuades players from PvP toons, since you need good PvE to get gear and abilities. Giving groups awards and bonuses for PvP successes might be fun for those who insist on it, but IMO it will never make a PvP system that is as tactical, exciting, and challenging as i.e. the Banes that I'd regularly join on Shadowbane.

prowessss
03-16-2010, 03:15 PM
uhm I dont really know where to begin... I will again remind you all that this thread is not meant to be a debate on whether or not pvp should be a part of the game.

I have dropped my previous comments about spell changes due to heroic surge. Heroic surge is just what the doctor ordered. case closed on that issue unless we find in the future that heroic surge needs some tweeks.

White dots and carebears are terms from Asheron's Call... see, there was a radar system... and pvp-active characters would appear as a red dot... white dots are non-pvp characters. carebears are those who stand in town and emote to each other *drudge dance*

racist? lol...

regardless there's some great ideas being exchanged on this thread... Let's keep it that way and not reduce this thread to frivoless arguments.

Lorz
03-16-2010, 03:15 PM
I wanted to pipe in as well and add...WE DO NOT WANT PVP here.

If you havent noticed OP....the majority of players do not want PVP.

:) You can either play DDO or you can play some PVP game.

That is all.

prowessss
03-16-2010, 03:44 PM
I just want to say sorry if any of you felt insulted by me... I felt insulted... if you read the first couple pages you'll realize that I started off with very friendly intentions of just gathering pvp ideas... I was then told that I have no idea what i'm talking about, have poor understanding of game mechanics.. basically that i'm a noob. I felt insulted... I'm the OP, I don't have the luxory of thinking "oh he's talking about someone else" like you all have when i throw carebear around...

Ok BRASS TAX TIME

meat and potatos right here
The purpose of fortification is to negate criticals and sneak attack... this is frustrating for any rogues or kensais as they have absolutely no way to bypass this. What if improved sunder was given a d20+character level% reduction to fort? say I'm a level 20 kensai and I hit you with it and roll a 20... this means for the next couple seconds if I roll a 20 and confirm the critical, I have a 40% chance of it actually being a critical! and rogues are the same way... a level 20 rogue, rolling a 20 on their improved sunder, would have to get behind their target and not have its aggro to have a 40% chance to actually have a sneak attack on them. this doesn't seem like it would diminish the value of fortification... it would just give value back to sneak attack and criticals.

this seems fair to me as improved sunder costs a feat, has a save against, and under it's most extreme effectiveness still wouldn't negate fortification...

prowessss
03-16-2010, 03:47 PM
I wanted to pipe in as well and add...WE DO NOT WANT PVP here.

If you havent noticed OP....the majority of players do not want PVP.

:) You can either play DDO or you can play some PVP game.

That is all.

I can understand this post if the thread title was "WHO WANTS PVP IN THIS GAME?" but it isn't. It's called "Successfully Implimenting a PvP System."

the purpose of the thread is to gather neat pvp ideas and figure out exactly what it would take for the pvp system to be successful.

KKDragonLord
03-16-2010, 03:53 PM
I can understand this post if the thread title was "WHO WANTS PVP IN THIS GAME?" but it isn't. It's called "Successfully Implimenting a PvP System."

the purpose of the thread is to gather neat pvp ideas and figure out exactly what it would take for the pvp system to be successful.

You could ask Tolero to change the title to "Neat PvP Ideas" for you.

Fomori
03-16-2010, 04:05 PM
Even in Wargames Joshua eventually said the magical words...

"The only way to win is not to play."

OP should listen to the WOPR.

Visty
03-16-2010, 04:11 PM
I can understand this post if the thread title was "WHO WANTS PVP IN THIS GAME?" but it isn't. It's called "Successfully Implimenting a PvP System."

the purpose of the thread is to gather neat pvp ideas and figure out exactly what it would take for the pvp system to be successful.

if you start such a thread you have to start with a useful suggestion already. thats why its called the suggestion forum

to make pvp successfull you have to balance it
balancing pvp needs a totally differant ruleset from pve
si its creating a new game

not needed

gavagai
03-16-2010, 04:13 PM
The purpose of fortification is to negate criticals and sneak attack... this is frustrating for any rogues or kensais as they have absolutely no way to bypass this. What if improved sunder was given a d20+character level% reduction to fort? say I'm a level 20 kensai and I hit you with it and roll a 20... this means for the next couple seconds if I roll a 20 and confirm the critical, I have a 40% chance of it actually being a critical! and rogues are the same way... a level 20 rogue, rolling a 20 on their improved sunder, would have to get behind their target and not have its aggro to have a 40% chance to actually have a sneak attack on them. this doesn't seem like it would diminish the value of fortification... it would just give value back to sneak attack and criticals.

this seems fair to me as improved sunder costs a feat, has a save against, and under it's most extreme effectiveness still wouldn't negate fortification...

I don't think adding a little -fort% to sunder going to do much without a bigger overhaul.

The current game and EQ is designed around folks with small HP pools and fort doing massive damage. Removing fort is going to take melees from around 300 DPS (per second) to around 500-600DPS. The Barb with 800 HPs and -20 AC is down in a 1.2 seconds. No vorpal necessary. No tactics. And no cleric can heal that quick.

Even if rogues could sneak attack, they have fewer HPs than most battleclerics can dish out in 1.2 seconds without landing a stun.

And Sunder itself would need to be more powerful, like the DEF cuts in Shabowbane. %-based. Most 20th levelers run with around a +35-40 to-hit; most ACs for high AC characters start at 65. That's literally off the d20, even with a -4 Sunder (which needs to hit and fail a save before it takes affect).

With so few HPs and such high DPS, I can't imagine making a serious group- or individual- oriented PvP system that is accessible and fun.

Sutekx
03-16-2010, 04:49 PM
uhm I dont really know where to begin... I will again remind you all that this thread is not meant to be a debate on whether or not pvp should be a part of the game.

I have dropped my previous comments about spell changes due to heroic surge. Heroic surge is just what the doctor ordered. case closed on that issue unless we find in the future that heroic surge needs some tweeks.

White dots and carebears are terms from Asheron's Call... see, there was a radar system... and pvp-active characters would appear as a red dot... white dots are non-pvp characters. carebears are those who stand in town and emote to each other *drudge dance*

racist? lol...

regardless there's some great ideas being exchanged on this thread... Let's keep it that way and not reduce this thread to frivoless arguments.

Heroic Surge helped and nerfed some things, for those who don't have the gear to take spells from a beholder, I was once in the position way before surge and before gears, where a beholder flesh to stoned me, since I was the only caster that had stone to flesh spell, I was hosed and waited over 15 minutes for the save to take effect, I chalked it up to bad stating on con for my part at the time, which was fixed. Or worse, feeblemind which stuck to you like glue unless you were hit by a heal spell or restoration potion. But again, these were also fixed by gear before heroic surge. It is things that hit you up in the game to make you re-evaluate how you play the game and to better your character, much is the same, except now there might be less stress for those who aren't already laid back.

The racist comment I figured you would see the humor in it in order to lighten up the thread, since some were hostile to comments being made.

To me, PVP is a second thought, or something to do when I am bored, or just to see how long a toon can live, without having to pay repair bills from trying a quest to experiment with setups. But most of the time it is focused on favor farming and crafting, and crafting is a major part to me for end game with the exceptions of turn in item quests (scales, relics, taps, etc.)

Now to the topic of PVP ideas of the thread for contributing:

Things that were touched and discussed upon so far which does seem interesting. Changing the tavern brawling areas to be for certain levels. Like Wayward Lobster being for levels 1-5, etc. Which would be good since you are not stepping into a brawling area (for those who don't select people who are out there in the area to check other toons levels before stepping in) and getting nailed once you come in. And more maps for group PVP, and if it is possible by devs, to make a defend/assault style map for PVP group. While these are ideas that doesn't seem to alter the PVE and PVP mechanics at this point, but by applying options that are already a part of the game, seems more reasonable. But more of an after thought to other things that would be coming our way for PVE quests, and other content.

The PVP aspect of the game is an after thought but there is a small niche group that wants PVP. So there is the fact that you would setup PVP guilds, much like permadeath guilds, and setup rules of engagement for PVP that would be agreed upon among the PVP guilds. While the majority does not want PVP, there are ways to setup PVP that has been discussed. Much like permadeath, or role playing guilds, while they are not implemented in the game, they are implemented by the creativity of groups that come together to make it possible in a fashion that is enjoyable.

As for PVP it's been around since multi-noded BBSes before the internet was commericalized. Dialing up to a friend's LAN line on a 9600 baud modem playing DOOM - This in regards to the comment that was made "Then let them go back and play WOW, I for one would rather not have the crowd from WOW here if all they care about is instant gratification <-- a complex that not only exists in 12 year olds but now also exists in a much older less mature crowd who actually believe credit is money, when all it actually is, is debt!!! - Not all PVP enthusiast are coming from WoW or a much older "less mature" crowd, so that is a misconception, or sterotyping an entire group of people due to some bad apples in the bunch. No need to hike a leg on the game because someone is joining DDO from other MMOs, because in turn, Turbine is also making money off of these individuals for buying packs, etc. It is up to Turbine on the content that will be provided and others will either play the game or not, it is their choice.

It is interesting to see new players in the game that have come from other MMOs, some you can tell just by the names they use, and if they ask how the PVP is in this game compared to where they came from, just explain it, without being rude, that it is limited and tell them the options. Also try to intergrate them to the game from what they know, so they can have a better understanding of the game on how they relate things to previous experiences.

Sutekx
03-16-2010, 04:54 PM
Even in Wargames Joshua eventually said the magical words...

"The only way to win is not to play."

OP should listen to the WOPR.

Unforunately Joshua couldn't play tic tac toe for jack. Becuase he who goes first in tic tac toe, knowing how, will always win. But this is also coming from a computer who liked to play the game "Global Thermonulcear War" and couldn't tell reality from a game.

Sutekx
03-16-2010, 05:37 PM
State of the Game 2010 (http://www.ddo.com/ddogameinfo/developer-diaries/899-ddo-unlimited-state-of-the-game-2010-)
New Features
In addition to new content and items we are also working on some exciting new features for DDO. The team is currently busy working on some great additions to the guild system that will let guild members work together to earn valuable rewards and rival guilds compete for status on each server. One of the biggest rewards players will work towards is access to an all new guild housing system, which we are implementing in a cool and unique way. Suffice it to say, we think you will really want to be part of a guild that has earned access to this feature! I can’t say much more about it now, but look for more details in the coming weeks.

Food for thought.

Visty
03-16-2010, 05:42 PM
State of the Game 2010 (http://www.ddo.com/ddogameinfo/developer-diaries/899-ddo-unlimited-state-of-the-game-2010-)
New Features
In addition to new content and items we are also working on some exciting new features for DDO. The team is currently busy working on some great additions to the guild system that will let guild members work together to earn valuable rewards and rival guilds compete for status on each server. One of the biggest rewards players will work towards is access to an all new guild housing system, which we are implementing in a cool and unique way. Suffice it to say, we think you will really want to be part of a guild that has earned access to this feature! I can’t say much more about it now, but look for more details in the coming weeks.

Food for thought.

just another ******** move saying: be a in a good guild or be screwed over the new feature. oh wait, you can still buy it in the store even if you suck

Hendrik
03-16-2010, 06:00 PM
I certainly hope not, PVP becoming a neccesity in this game for anything would be about the only reason I can see that would make me drop my sub.

As far as the topic itself, I am not a fan of PvP. It was what turned me off to MMO's back when my little brother tried to introduse me to UO back in the day. Now as far as PvP in DDO goes, as long as it always remains seperate from everything else, and has no lasting effects on characters or PvE, then meh...


You and every other Vet/Founder.

It would be my first and last proclamation of 'Doom!" as I hit cancel.

Turbine is WAY smarter then that. They know how we feel about PvP. I would dare say prolly will do with 'credits' from Quests and Raids.

KKDragonLord
03-16-2010, 06:04 PM
State of the Game 2010 (http://www.ddo.com/ddogameinfo/developer-diaries/899-ddo-unlimited-state-of-the-game-2010-)

New Features
The guild system that will let guild members work together to earn valuable rewards and rival guilds compete for status on each server. One of the biggest rewards players will work towards is access to an all new guild housing system, which we are implementing in a cool and unique way.
Food for thought.

Re-reading it now i think PvP might be related to the "compete for status" thing (if et all) and completely unrelated to the whole "Guild Rewards & houses" thing.

But tbh, its probably more likely that this status thing relates to
A) percentage of quests completed by guild members or a similar success rating system,
B) a system which measures how helpful certain guilds are to new players, much like a Rep system but with strict limitations to prevent exploits.
or most likely C) none of the above.

prowessss
03-16-2010, 06:15 PM
lol i love this community...


Guys if this guild house thing forces guilds into a pvp that would encourage a tightening of the community and wouldn't screw anyone out of anything.

The pvp system i imagine would only be able to happen if team size gets opened up... so a ridiculous amount of players can be on each team... that way you really wouldnt need to fight if you dont want to because you could easily just join a guild and your presence would be enough and if you die you'd just be at a different spot hoping your team wins while you go quest somewhere... and come on how can you be screwed out of not having a guild house? last time i checked no one has a guild house.

broolthebeast
03-16-2010, 06:28 PM
you guys are really kinda looking to far into that. I seriouisly doubt they would use pvp as a basis for earning/upgrading guild housing.

For the new people that were not around when the Sub was released, this is what they did. Each raid had an token attached to it and every time you completed that raid everyone in the party got a token from the chest. You then turned those tokens in from the raid to the guy in the market.

This was a server wide unlock, that involved everyone turning in the raid tokens before the subteranne unlocked. The big barrier dropped right before the entire servers eye's when the last person turned in the last token needed to unlock the raid. Ie: on khyber Kirvan(blazer) was the last token turn in to unlock the sub.

Again, the people who have been around for a long time have stressed soooo much how they hate pvp and it doesnt belong here so I seriously SERIOUSLY doubt they would all of a sudden release a feature that REQUIRED pvp to unlock it or upgrade it.

Personally, I always thought pvp could be made better here, but I didnt want to sit here and slam my head into a wall because other people didnt have the same thoughts about it as me... And well with the reputation system in place all you have to do is mention pvp and get neg repped beyond belief. Then again welcome to the ddo community where if your opinion isnt shared by the large population you get belittled, made fun of and neg rep'ed.

gavagai
03-16-2010, 06:43 PM
The pvp system i imagine would only be able to happen if team size gets opened up... so a ridiculous amount of players can be on each team... that way you really wouldnt need to fight if you dont want to because you could easily just join a guild and your presence would be enough and if you die you'd just be at a different spot hoping your team wins while you go quest somewhere... and come on how can you be screwed out of not having a guild house? last time i checked no one has a guild house.

You can implement the games and rewards for PvP here like in other games, but they won't be very good. You can get hundreds of players to fight, but the fighting will be unsatisfying. It won't become nuanced and strategic like Shadowbane just because you add 50 more players to the chaos.

Most GvG games allow players of all levels to at least contribute to GvG or PvP. In DDO, there are dramatic imbalances of power, where players frequently 1 shot one another. There's no limit on how many players a Web can snag or a Wail can kill (with a DC of 40, mind you). There's no way a cleric can heal damage from even 1 600DPS attacker. There's only 1 way a character with a +24 to-hit can hit a level DoS with a 65 AC: roll a 1. And so on.

Even if you had 100 versus 100 mass warfare, the quality wouldn't be good. Once people realize the quality isn't good, they won't do that, and will focus on improving their characters.

Return_To_Forever
03-16-2010, 06:50 PM
you guys are really kinda looking to far into that. I seriouisly doubt they would use pvp as a basis for earning/upgrading guild housing.

For the new people that were not around when the Sub was released, this is what they did. Each raid had an token attached to it and every time you completed that raid everyone in the party got a token from the chest. You then turned those tokens in from the raid to the guy in the market.

This was a server wide unlock, that involved everyone turning in the raid tokens before the subteranne unlocked. The big barrier dropped right before the entire servers eye's when the last person turned in the last token needed to unlock the raid. Ie: on khyber Kirvan(blazer) was the last token turn in to unlock the sub.

Again, the people who have been around for a long time have stressed soooo much how they hate pvp and it doesnt belong here so I seriously SERIOUSLY doubt they would all of a sudden release a feature that REQUIRED pvp to unlock it or upgrade it.

Personally, I always thought pvp could be made better here, but I didnt want to sit here and slam my head into a wall because other people didnt have the same thoughts about it as me... And well with the reputation system in place all you have to do is mention pvp and get neg repped beyond belief. Then again welcome to the ddo community where if your opinion isnt shared by the large population you get belittled, made fun of and neg rep'ed.

+1

That is the first Rep I have given, but for me, I respect honesty. It shouldn't be about disagreeing and spouting out stereo types, and thinking that all of us Vets feel the same way.(Yes I'm a vet, and know many Vets who enjoy PVP) rep should be about people senselessly trolling, and being rude, or being helpful and honest, and adding to a conversation.

The PVP discussion isn't new among people who would love to see it here, we are the same people who would love to see crafting that really mattered and could be focused on, not that I want to mine ore all day, but someone might, and it opens up the games, game play options, which is only better for the game. We would love to see many things like Targets Targets, branding and select brands, assisting, heal agro and so on.

In general I'm not just for a better pvp system, but for better and more game play options and features in general.

Ninetoes
03-16-2010, 07:00 PM
you guys are really kinda looking to far into that. I seriouisly doubt they would use pvp as a basis for earning/upgrading guild housing.

For the new people that were not around when the Sub was released, this is what they did. Each raid had an token attached to it and every time you completed that raid everyone in the party got a token from the chest. You then turned those tokens in from the raid to the guy in the market.

This was a server wide unlock, that involved everyone turning in the raid tokens before the subteranne unlocked. The big barrier dropped right before the entire servers eye's when the last person turned in the last token needed to unlock the raid. Ie: on khyber Kirvan(blazer) was the last token turn in to unlock the sub.

Again, the people who have been around for a long time have stressed soooo much how they hate pvp and it doesnt belong here so I seriously SERIOUSLY doubt they would all of a sudden release a feature that REQUIRED pvp to unlock it or upgrade it.

Personally, I always thought pvp could be made better here, but I didnt want to sit here and slam my head into a wall because other people didnt have the same thoughts about it as me... And well with the reputation system in place all you have to do is mention pvp and get neg repped beyond belief. Then again welcome to the ddo community where if your opinion isnt shared by the large population you get belittled, made fun of and neg rep'ed.

+1. Guys, this is what happens when you just straight don't give a ++TRUNCATED++ about what other people think about you. He doesn't agree with the majority re: topic, however, is mature enough to know he's in the minority and smart enough to not care.

Kudos, and +whatever my weighted rep is worth to someone who has rep turned off :)

edit: er, when I can rep, that is. Moving on, nothing to see here.

KKDragonLord
03-16-2010, 07:35 PM
lol i love this community...

Guys if this guild house thing forces guilds into a pvp that would encourage a tightening of the community and wouldn't screw anyone out of anything.

The pvp system i imagine would only be able to happen if team size gets opened up... so a ridiculous amount of players can be on each team... that way you really wouldnt need to fight if you dont want to because you could easily just join a guild and your presence would be enough and if you die you'd just be at a different spot hoping your team wins while you go quest somewhere... and come on how can you be screwed out of not having a guild house? last time i checked no one has a guild house.

Uh..WHat?

You are not seriously saying that are you?
1st, earning and improving a guild house is certainly not going to be PvP related. Only this uninportant "guild status" thing would have a small probability to have any correlation to PvP.

2nd did you just seriously suppose that it would be ok if we were all "forced" to participate in PvP to have access to something that has been promised and expected by the community as a whole for 3 years?

Im not even questioning the "lack of ingenuity" of the suggestion in regards to the game mechanics
Its just patently absurd you would expect to make everyone else be subjected to your infatuation with PvP when its absolutely clear that this would be an outrageous proposition to inflict upon this game loyal fanbase (to say the least).

Yeah i too like this community, for the exact opposite reason that inspired your sarcastic opening comment, some of us might be "carebears" but at least we make sense.

Sutekx
03-17-2010, 01:25 AM
just another ******** move saying: be a in a good guild or be screwed over the new feature. oh wait, you can still buy it in the store even if you suck

Pretty much. F2P model makes money, therefore selling new guild options will make money. But at least unlike some other MMOs, at least they didn't limit the guilds limit of members (that I am aware of, but you can correct me on this, if there is a limit) Where you would have to level the guild up via guild quests, a starting guild in a game would be up to 50 members, then a level 2 guild would have 100, but the company that was selling the game via a online market, did not sell the option, but allow guilds to build up via guild experience by running countless quests over and over to ad nauseam.

Sutekx
03-17-2010, 01:28 AM
Re-reading it now i think PvP might be related to the "compete for status" thing (if et all) and completely unrelated to the whole "Guild Rewards & houses" thing.

But tbh, its probably more likely that this status thing relates to
A) percentage of quests completed by guild members or a similar success rating system,
B) a system which measures how helpful certain guilds are to new players, much like a Rep system but with strict limitations to prevent exploits.
or most likely C) none of the above.

I go post by post, so forgive me if I repeat myself. More or less it sounds like it will be quest completion based, like some other MMOs, but this is just theory until it comes out. I do hope they limit it with restrictions, because multiple toons in the same guild can farm it quickly if it is going that route.

Sutekx
03-17-2010, 01:31 AM
lol i love this community...


Guys if this guild house thing forces guilds into a pvp that would encourage a tightening of the community and wouldn't screw anyone out of anything.

The pvp system i imagine would only be able to happen if team size gets opened up... so a ridiculous amount of players can be on each team... that way you really wouldnt need to fight if you dont want to because you could easily just join a guild and your presence would be enough and if you die you'd just be at a different spot hoping your team wins while you go quest somewhere... and come on how can you be screwed out of not having a guild house? last time i checked no one has a guild house.

This would be update 4, so we would have to hear from those who have tested this via the beta test servers, but I don't think it will be about PVP, but more or less certain quest completions. But if it is PVP, it will be interesting to see how the community reacts to it. But I don't think it will be about PVP.

Sutekx
03-17-2010, 01:38 AM
You and every other Vet/Founder.

It would be my first and last proclamation of 'Doom!" as I hit cancel.

Turbine is WAY smarter then that. They know how we feel about PvP. I would dare say prolly will do with 'credits' from Quests and Raids.

Well backtracking guilds via MyDDO it shows which quests were recently completed, etc. So I would say it may be based on quest completions, not PVP.

Kyrn
03-17-2010, 01:59 AM
Always funny to read peoples reaction in this game to PVP. A lot who are so against it, have no solid reasons why not.

The truth is, PVP that matters for PVP, can be implemented without effecting how the PVE works. It can be implemented and balanced as an after thought, they have many examples and general MMO past exp to drawn from.

People like PVP/RVR for a lot of the same reasons, people like good DMs, its not a fight against the same mob, who spawns adds at 75, and starts AoEs at 50, and spawns more adds and chains you at 25, every time you fight them.

No, its a real enemy, who decides, oh they are doing this, so I will do this to counter it, and in turn you have to figure out what would be the right approach from there and so on.

Its all good, hopefully though the Devs are open to the ideas of PVP, it offers alot of playability in online games and would be a great addition to DDO. I mean hopefully they are open to everything that offers more game play options to this game.

And the truth is that it's easier to recreate an MMO with PvP focus from scratch than to attempt to balance an MMO which is already inherently unbalanced (in a good way, mostly).

1) A huge majority of skills, spells, abilities, and class builds are not suited for PvP.
2) It's not just about making the game PvP viable, it's also about adding incentive for PvP. Incentive not just in rewards, but also in penalty.
3) Calling your bluff: Which MMO has implemented and balanced PvP as an afterthought?

prowessss
03-17-2010, 03:43 AM
Uh..WHat?

You are not seriously saying that are you?
1st, earning and improving a guild house is certainly not going to be PvP related. Only this uninportant "guild status" thing would have a small probability to have any correlation to PvP.

2nd did you just seriously suppose that it would be ok if we were all "forced" to participate in PvP to have access to something that has been promised and expected by the community as a whole for 3 years?

Im not even questioning the "lack of ingenuity" of the suggestion in regards to the game mechanics
Its just patently absurd you would expect to make everyone else be subjected to your infatuation with PvP when its absolutely clear that this would be an outrageous proposition to inflict upon this game loyal fanbase (to say the least).

Yeah i too like this community, for the exact opposite reason that inspired your sarcastic opening comment, some of us might be "carebears" but at least we make sense.

I wasn't being sarcastic with my opening statement...

People keep mentioning game mechanics.. I seriously doubt anyone who keeps mentioning it has ever had anything to do with the creation of a video game... I'm not going to say I really know a lot about game mechanics because it's been about 6 years since i've been on any games' development team...

I've never been opposed to white dots. The only reason i would not like to see mandatory pvp is because i don't want to lose players...

I would like to address the issue of syncronicity between what players see and what the server sees... This is false. under most pings, there is no difference... sometimes, when there's a lot going on, you'll notice a delay on the combat numbers and what not... but if you pay close attention when it catches up, they're in the same order as they've actually happened... there's very little difference betweeen what the server sees and the player sees... just sometimes the DM is doing a lot of rolls... pvp in the bar... two rangers (as long as they're not multishotting) can tumble around each others shots pretty effectively... if there was an out of sync there'd be a lot of "hey i dodged that arrow, ***!" but there's not.

Borror0
03-17-2010, 05:02 AM
Guys if this guild house thing forces guilds into a pvp that would encourage a tightening of the community and wouldn't screw anyone out of anything.
It's a known fact (http://www.psychochild.org/?p=618) that games with active PvP have worse communities - not better ones.

William_the_Bat
03-17-2010, 06:53 AM
It's real simple, a lot of us have played other games, and had our PvE experience mashed because of changes for PvP. More importantly, a lot of us have played other games and had to deal with the worst element of PvP culture polluting our games with trash talk and whatnot.

I played Asheron's Call for 10 years. Yes, the PvP was good, though I never played on Darktide, I did go red on occasion and administer or take a beatdown. But PK -always- trumped PvE when it game to design decisions, and you -must- play it that way in a PvP oriented game, even when it's "PvP optional" like the server I played on (Morningthaw)

As for the over-the-top emotions caused by the mention of PvP, it's not because of the content nerfs, it's almost certainly because of the PvP trash talk and general unpleasant behavior that comes with a PvP crowd.

Look, I'm a carebear and proud. I ran a carebear allegiance (guild) on a carebear server and still had one of the largest allegiances in Asheron's Call. (Blood excepted, obviously) PK was always an afterthought and we attracted people in droves because we were polite and helpful, and had strict rules against cheating and trash talk. Once they put in general chat, most of my allegiance kept it turned off because of the constant PK trash talk. That was not the game we wanted to play.

A lot of the people currently playing DDO are in the same boat. They don't play PvP oriented games because of the community. We pride ourselves on having a mature, polite, and friendly community, and just the thought of doing something that would attract the stereotypical PvP trash talker makes people FREAK OUT.

Bandying the word "carebear" makes you seem like exactly the stereotypical trash talker a lot of people want to avoid, and your little lawyering about how you aren't really calling people that but they are applying it to themselves proves it in the eyes of many. You can talk all you want about how great the Darktide and PvP communities in AC are/were, but many of those of us who played AC did everything possible to avoid the trash talk and politics.

Hendrik
03-17-2010, 07:31 AM
Well backtracking guilds via MyDDO it shows which quests were recently completed, etc. So I would say it may be based on quest completions, not PVP.

Exactly.

We have had events where a server had to do Quests to unlock content. Same thing, just Guild based.

Seems reasonable to follow that once again.

NuclearCoffee
03-17-2010, 11:06 AM
The worst thing you could do to this game is to add PVP in any way, shape or form, beyond what is already there. Lots of peeps play this game because there is no PvP!!!. Lot of peeps will quit this game if PvP comes to DDO. DnD was meant to bring peeps together not put them against one another. Lack of PvP is why this game is a stand out, lack of PvP is why I'm a VIP. Yes I've played pvp mmos and I dont like them. Quit trying to change the game, go play something else. There plenty of PvP games out there.

Return_To_Forever
03-17-2010, 11:14 AM
It's a known fact (http://www.psychochild.org/?p=618) that games with active PvP have worse communities - not better ones.

I think I missed the known fact part from that blog.

Return_To_Forever
03-17-2010, 11:17 AM
The worst thing you could do to this game is to add PVP in any way, shape or form, beyond what is already there. Lots of peeps play this game because there is no PvP!!!. Lot of peeps will quit this game if PvP comes to DDO. DnD was meant to bring peeps together not put them against one another. Lack of PvP is why this game is a stand out, lack of PvP is why I'm a VIP. Yes I've played pvp mmos and I dont like them. Quit trying to change the game, go play something else. There plenty of PvP games out there.

There is already PVP.

gavagai
03-17-2010, 11:36 AM
People keep mentioning game mechanics.. I seriously doubt anyone who keeps mentioning it has ever had anything to do with the creation of a video game... I'm not going to say I really know a lot about game mechanics because it's been about 6 years since i've been on any games' development team...


I think I'm the one primarily harping on mechanics. And you're right, I never designed a game. But I think I learned a lot through my involvement with the forums of Shadowbane. The calibrations of classes and abilities are constantly in flux; and one tweak to a root spell, run speed, or access to a self-heal can cause classes to dominate. And in a PvP/GvG game, that kind of domination is not well accepted.

In DDO, the bias of the mechanics are not theoretical but pretty obvious. We know who dominates in PvP. We see how the mechanics play out. And it's not a big deal. A rogue only wins because his opponent was AFK.

As an olive branch, many of these mechanical issues aren't exclusive to PvP: there are many posts on whether we should keep the d20 combat system; about changing Fortification so Devs can make combat more diverse; what to do about insane stacking bonuses to AC and STR; about reducing the focus on DPS so alternative combat forms can become entertaining.

PvP just makes these things more obvious. The Monk's Touch of Death -- 500hps on a hit? Makes sense when fighting a 1,000,000hp boss, but completely misaligned for PvP when most players have less than 500hps. In the opposite direction: Fists of Light? Useless when your opponents are cranking out 400 damage per second. Ask why (probably) less than 1 in 100 level 20 players seriously PvP as a "challenge" rather than to kill time, and the answer is "look at the mechanics."

Sutekx
03-17-2010, 12:08 PM
Originally Posted by NuclearCoffee
The worst thing you could do to this game is to add PVP in any way, shape or form, beyond what is already there. Lots of peeps play this game because there is no PvP!!!. Lot of peeps will quit this game if PvP comes to DDO. DnD was meant to bring peeps together not put them against one another. Lack of PvP is why this game is a stand out, lack of PvP is why I'm a VIP. Yes I've played pvp mmos and I dont like them. Quit trying to change the game, go play something else. There plenty of PvP games out there.



There is already PVP.

It's the end of the world as we know it, like the seven seals being broken, except there is no cracker jack prize in the bottom of the box. ;)

To NuclearCoffee: Yes, there is two types of PVP in the game, one is via tavern brawls, other is by individual or party PVP by selecting the option to PVP via clicking on someone and selecting the PVP option. It can be accepted or rejected, if accepted you will be teleported to a PVP arena. The last time I tried the PVP option was when it bugged where once the match was over, whoever was the last person in the arena was stuck in the arena... that was awhile back though.

This is not a PVP based game, but PVE, with the attachment of a PVP option if one choses to do so. Most either don't know about it or do not care about it all together since the majority of the game's focus is on PVE. So are you going to quit now because you now have the knowledge that there is PVP in the game already and has been for some time? I highly doubt it, because it has not changed your experience on playing the game so far while it has been there.

If there would be any changes to PVP, more than likely you would never notice it. I doubt that the devs would start putting a serious focus on PVP anytime soon since the options are in the background, not brought to the forefront where it is in your face. Maybe that is one of the reasons the tavern brawls happen behind closed doors ... The first rule of Fight Club is that you do not talk about Fight Club. It sounds vaguely familar with PVP in DDO ... a taboo to speak of, and frowned upon by a majority of people as seen in this thread along with others buried in the forums.

I can understand the fear of the game dramatically shifting from team play, to rival play via PVP and I do doubt that will ever happen, like most who have played in PVP (turn based or real time) MMOs that there are certain elements we don't want to see because it caused undue stress amongst people and a lot of drama. I for one have been lucky not to run into drama while playing the game. Most people are laid back which is nice, there are some that will stress out when a quest or raid does go south but most will be just disappointed and frustrated (case in point, ran an Epic VoN 1 last night to find out there is a bug where a mephit turns up missing and that does not allow you to complete for end reward) but it was taken in stride and very well I might add all things considered. But that point was also expressed via the blog that Borror0 had posted, it is how the community as a whole acts and there are the wonderful options to squelch players and know not to join a party with someone you would have a conflict with.

Ashiel_Dragmire
03-17-2010, 12:27 PM
I've covered this 7 ways to Sunday before and at this point I just don't care to explain why again so I'm just going to say NO!

/notsigned

/nevergoingtosign

/willneverthinkaboutsigning

Is thinking about not signing similar to thinking about signing it, or am I looking into this too deeply?

I think PvP would be nice, but not at the cost of regular content.

Schmoe
03-17-2010, 12:31 PM
The best thing to do for PvP is ignore it totally. Everything you do to help PvP will hurt the game overall, the OPs suggestions are evidence of this.

I agree so hard, it hurts.

NuclearCoffee
03-18-2010, 02:51 PM
For those of you who don't like pvp, I'm sorry that I do, STOP GIVING ME NEGATIVE REP FOR IT! Gosh!
Hey get use to it more will follow I garanteee!!!! lolol

NuclearCoffee
03-18-2010, 02:54 PM
we already know how people who don't like PvP feel about this subject... Please no more posts from people who don't look for a PvP experience in their games.
Then quit trying to change our game!

Glockduck
03-18-2010, 02:56 PM
If you try to balance a PVE game for PVP. You will kill the PVE aspect of the game.

Look @ WOW. Every stupid change they have made was to balance for PVP.

DDO is PVE (Player vs Enviroment)

If you want a pvp experience, go play WOW.

Not trying to be rude, I just dont want this game screwed with just so peeps can beat each other up in a PVP pit.

Sutekx
03-18-2010, 06:14 PM
If you try to balance a PVE game for PVP. You will kill the PVE aspect of the game.

Look @ WOW. Every stupid change they have made was to balance for PVP.

DDO is PVE (Player vs Enviroment)

If you want a pvp experience, go play WOW.

Not trying to be rude, I just dont want this game screwed with just so peeps can beat each other up in a PVP pit.

Well if you noticed prowessss dropped the notion of nerfing spells for PVP content, other than that, only thing kicked around is for a thief with a "improved sunder" to try to get past heavy fort. Something I doubt the devs would put into the game. But there are other options that can be done, without altering the game!

One thing is, you can see someone sneaking or invisible in the PVP areas, which I do find quite funny. But I would definitely chalk that up for a rule for PVP guilds, "Ignore the sneaking thief, he/she is not there even though they are sitting on your chest with a short sword to your throat. And no heavy fort gear in the taverns! You can roll a d20 and if you get a 20, you are allowed to wear improved fort (or which ever) at this time"

People can still have a PVP experience in DDO, setup some PVP guilds, much like the permadeath guilds and roleplaying guilds - setup a list of rules and items allowed/not allowed into PVP arenas (PVP challenge option, not just tavern brawls) - PVP can be done in a way, other than being a background option, just not the same way you would think about it.

Sutekx
03-18-2010, 06:23 PM
Then quit trying to change our game!

What has been changed? Absolutely nothing. Has prowessss setup several pages of code to inject into the game's source, no. So nothing has been changed. Bouncing an idea, whether it can be feasible or not, a good or bad idea, does not mean that it is set in gold and hoses your life, has an affair with your wife, and kicks the family dog for good measure... that is ridiculous. It would be like the idea of Yoda being a unified world leader, doesn't mean its going to happen. If it did, Frank Oz would probably go insane by overloading himself with doing the voice of Yoda all the time.

BitkaCK2
03-18-2010, 06:36 PM
PvP is already successfully implemented in the game.
Carry on.

bitkaCK2

ProdigalGuru
03-18-2010, 06:39 PM
It should be pretty simple to hide player names while in Sneaking.

Dumluck
03-18-2010, 06:49 PM
Working on PvP in DDO is on the top of the DEVs "Do Not Do" list.

God I hope so! Pvp is pointless in d&d

prowessss
03-19-2010, 09:54 PM
My overall point i was trying to make with the opening post is the fact that it would take very little alteration for pvp to be a very balanced experience.


just take green steels out and allow me to gank people while they're in the orchard farming taps

lol that will work

KKDragonLord
03-19-2010, 09:57 PM
My overall point i was trying to make with the opening post is the fact that it would take very little alteration for pvp to be a very balanced experience.


just take green steels out and allow me to gank people while they're in the orchard farming taps

lol that will work

You never cease to amaze me :o

prowessss
03-19-2010, 10:02 PM
likewise