Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: discussion : revamp border kingdoms and remove pvp servers

  1. #1

    Default discussion : revamp border kingdoms and remove pvp servers

    first off i open this thread to debate this idea so just dont go all out flaming, and post what you think about open world pvp, pvp servers and how border kingdoms should work.

    on pvp servers:
    pvp servers my perpective having played in rp-pvp aquilonia untill its extinction and around 3 months on fury, (a bit more actualy but i wont count having had pvp2 sins in tortage for this matter :P)

    i found world pvp when its consensual(even if it doesnt start like that) to be best pvp content in aoc where you can use terrain and tactics to fight other players.

    i find all guards and criminal system a nuisance wich rewards cowards running to them, and people relogging to lowbies to make oposite team murderes to gimp them exploiting guards.

    most obnoxious thing in pvp servers its the high amount of players there, that should not be there, they just do pve content abhor pvp, flame you and petition you when you kill them and invariably run to guards and rage insult you after the guards kill you.

    another thing is the pack mentality where players invariably seek to flock to biggest guilds to have peacefull zerg alliances wich strangulate open world pvp.

    overall i think most of time open world pvp can be described has unconsensual harrassment of pve'rs trying to pve, wich as exciting as it is isnt fun for both sides.

    on border kingdoms
    only one is used cimmerian end with popular shrines of bori where players go do pve for pvp xp and 80% of the time after they notice they need to pvp to continue doing their pve activity they leave zone.
    realy love the pyre mechanics im great fan of it.

    that pretty much what i experienced and think of it.

    what if:
    there was no pvp servers!
    we would be all bunched up together and we had 3 zones exclusively for pvp with actual pvp content inside those zones.

    .player would join 1 of 3 sides and fight for battlekeeps

    .groups of 6 wouldnt get disbanded and would get randomly added to one of the 3 sides trying to balance out sides, something like 36 players max on each side and excedent turned to disbanded duets, and if too many leave one side algorithm should swap 6man groups to teams with less people

    .only the 3 teams can fight or defend battlekeep and claim towers

    .solo players or duets can enter zone but cant compete for
    battlekeeps only harrass them, outside of the 3 teams

    .shrines of bori capture points be capturable by the 3 teams and instead of altars have towers with a balista on top(no more sacrificing pve materials delete that pve nonsense)

    .players would drop unbound items from personal inventory, have some pvp materials needed for battlekeep fights dropable upon death

    .pyre system expanded to all 3 zones for ungrouped solo players and duets to sacrifice body parts from the harrassment they do to teams.

    .all battlekeeps with t1 lvl (maybe reduce size a little to have only inner walls, no outerwalls)

    .all of team players get as prime objective capture towers and battlekeeps for asure pvp xp gain only when there is an oposite team fighting them and walls are being rebuild or destroyed

    .inside the keep a vendor selling his reconstruction services in exchange for pvp points gained by maintaining controll of bk&towers by team or destroying them

    .special vendors to hire npc merceneries lvl80 epic mobs to man the walls in exchange for pvp points

    .all players entering get quest to kill players from oposite teams and sacrifice 10 body parts in pyres.

    .players be allowed to use kithai pets in zone

    .rangers not allowed to use track, disable tracking

    .everyone entering have all aa's available+pvpt2 set as an option

    .make joining pvp more visible instead of having to move to hug cities add it as sign up to pvp minigames tab and add all that pvp tab to be underneath minimap with clear tag "pvp"

    just debate and add your ideas no flaming plz, try be constructive on reason why maintain pvp servers if your against this
    Last edited by noite80; 3rd July 2013 at 14:54.
    FORUM PVP LVL 10

  2. #2

    Default

    Well man, but i like pvp everywhere, you see someone you kill it.

    This is the true pvp for me, when someone attack me, when i don't want to, and i try to own him, this is the real pvp.

    So only three pvp zone, 70% people don't like pvp. (even more).

    We will see no people, no reward for people btw.

    the truth is the pvp is a minority, very very minority now.

    The game will become full PVE.

    edit : Oh and remember, quest and everything, will make something happen, the care to die, and want clean the quest very fast.

    That mean :

    - Giant bus against some noob who try pvp.

    - Alliance and all other thing, to conquer the zone, and make other people can't pvp.

    and all other thing we all know will happen.

    Remember bori ? One guild and some alliance, make every other can't bori.

    Everyone who wanted bori, join the awesome guild, so the guild grow and grow and be so strong than everyone else.

    This is what will happen. The game will fail, because of the people who play it bad.
    Last edited by Harmonium; 3rd July 2013 at 14:21.

  3. #3

    Default

    I've already stated in a fairly long post what i would want for PvP. Open-world is the place where i had the most fun PvP wise during my AoC experrience. It's spontaneous, challenging, always diffrent and awesome fun.

    I have countless examples of questing cessions with lowbies that ended up in great small sized fights ( 2 vs 3, etc.) only thing that makes questing on an alt bearable in my opinion. I enjoy being attacked, i enjoy attacking. I enjoy questing with a friend needing protection from gankers and i enjoy helping a friend catch the few reflexes that will allow you to succesfully run away if attacked. If that part of the game disappeared it would be a huge turn down for me since for those not playing in big guilds recruiting with a wallstreet mind set, these activities participate a lot in guild cohesion.

    Guards and criminal system is awefully done that's true. It's too eaily exploitable and doesn't efficiently protect those it should protect. Petty ganking has never been a problem for me. There are loads of tactics to avoid being ganked and when it's not enough i've always played in guilds with players who gave a **** and came to help rather than continue their twelveth pug mini of the day.
    Today, grinding is the norm. Having players willing to give up a rewarding xp/token wise activity for something that isn't has shrinked. Not to mention that petty gankers rarely move around in big groupes and are thus easily avoided by simply playing with friends.

    Seeking big guild isn't a problem either i find depending on what you enjoy. I'm not a huge fan of mass PvP. What i enjoy the most is small size pvp where team-play matters a lot and where each player really has a hand in the fight and isn't expendable. Indeed you'll eventually get outnumbered too much but if that bothers you too much... join zerg guilds. If it doesn't bother you, there's still some awesome hunting session that can be done, but it's a diffrent fighting style.

    That said, the thing that bothers me the most in your suggestions is the three factions factors. Because that's pug. Even if partial pug it's still pug. I don't want to have to pug. I don't want to have a presetted objective and rely on pugs to achieve it. It takes all the challenge and guild rivalry out of open-world and that's no good. It's great to have a guild to beat and not an open-world version of mini-games where you could have groupes of the same guild on diffrent sides.

    Basicly i'd be all for new PvP objectives. But guild based without drasticly balancing numbers and with a disadvantage linked to domination. Dominate if you want but have small though noticeable down sides to it. I'd like to add aswell that as strange as it might sound, the ability to outnumber your opponent is a balancing tool.
    Vali~The Mental Mushroom
    Vehl~The Pink Flamingo
    Vahlie~Redhead's bane
    Tisane~Kettle of Xotli
    Nvah~ . . .

  4. #4

    Default

    not everyone wants to pvp at 80

    not everyone wants to grind 80 lvls till they pvp

    i think u noted many of the issues the pvp server has, and nonetheless pvp servers is the anwser: from white sands to kesh

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by barbaricwildcat2 View Post
    not everyone wants to pvp at 80

    not everyone wants to grind 80 lvls till they pvp

    i think u noted many of the issues the pvp server has, and nonetheless pvp servers is the anwser: from white sands to kesh
    Sadly many friends i had in this game stopped playing when they removed pvp on white sands. Ye it was bit silly but i had great fun lvling when there were pvp everywhere, now lvling new char is big pain...

  6. #6

    Default

    first off, reguarding lowbie pvp.
    all classes arent fully realized at low lvl's, gear and aa' gap is beyond ridiculous at low stages, a lvl59 rogue with already maxed out aa protection+decissive+pressing strikes is unbelievably over powered, also mages do a lot more damage given no gear is available with decent protection.
    its no wonder when i bother logging a lowbie on fury i often find pvp6 rangers&sins bravely standing iddle on eiglophian mountains waiting to farm extremely unexperienced players in minigames and overall dodge open world pvp apart from a few duels near rez pad with guards...
    personaly long ago back when rangers were actualy fun to play and had combos i gained pvp4 exclusively doing open world pvp.

    what i realized was what i stated already open world pvp is best described for most cases as harrassment of pver's trying to pve.

    there used to be a lively community of players that didnt quest and just roamed around looking for a fight so i had great times in aquilonia in f.o.d. where most of time it was actual fights and not stalking next noob victim.

    its only at lvl80 with access to all class abilities and aa's that you realize and learn to master a class in pvp, bellow that all classes are a pale shadow of their potencial.

    further more personaly back when i reach lvl80 and was pvp4 o ranger i had to relearn to pvp the pvp4 in pvp5 max pvp lvl universe didnt mean nothing, its my honest perspective that real pvp and real mastery of any class only is feasible and real at lvl80.

    often i saw players reaching lvl80 with unbelievable kd with high pvp lvl and invariably they were terrible pvp'ers wich got destroied.

    i can understand why players choose to stay low lvl, its easy pvp and for most part your oponents are easier victims.
    i just dont find it appealing or fair pvp in any sense of it, already did that 2 times on sin in tortage, on hox with extreme success and on ranger as well.

    reguarding the excitment of questing knowing that you can get pvp'ed at any moment, i agree its fun, but its fun when you feel like its fun, if you just want to get the rewards from questing in kithai or lvling up to 80 any obnoxious stalker will simply be a nuisance, and for majority of players who choose to do pve they want pve to be pve only.
    the prospect of having instances like already proposed with pvp enabled similar to epic mode, working like pvp servers open instances but with double rewards from questing could be best solution, wich would promote consensuality in pvp'ing while pve'ing.
    in the sense that a player wanting the chalenge and excitment of doing his quests in a ffa open world instance would be rewarded for the time he spend in such hostile environment.

    the biggest issue like i mentioned is the misguided players in pvp servers who seek to do pve and abhor pvp, but also the rage kids who just stalk people around prefering easy victims and harrass them into quitting game, this part being undeniably true in open pvp tortage, i farmed literaly thousands of kills on players who couldnt even land a single combo on me.

    isnt it time almost 5 years to adjust game to maintaing the very enjoyable ffa open world pvp and add some systems to it?

    what i think would be optimal at this point is to creat viable pvp system on border kingdoms to have more siege like large scale pvp wich solo players and bigger groups can enjoy without having zerg guild alliances be a part of it in any way.
    this should be endgame lvl80 pvp content.
    tsw already has something similar wich obviously they based on aoc, its time to sip in what is nice about what was implement in tsw and import part of it to aoc.

    .3 war zones semi-faction based
    .6 man groups able to join a side randomly selected by algorithm
    balancing the 2-3 teams in the zone to always have as close as possible equal numbers.
    .enable solo players and duets to enter zone to work as bandits/marauders atacking whoever they want
    .allow inside duets/solo players to form groups and upon 6 man group made instantly forcefully incorporate them into a side
    .adjust prowess/pvp xp in abundand amounts to encourage all aoc players to want to fight each other.

    wouldnt this be better content then shrines of bori pve node farming?
    wouldnt this be better pvp content then current sieges or open world harrassment of pver's?

    discuss.
    debate.
    tell me your experience and what you think.
    Last edited by noite80; 4th July 2013 at 13:47.
    FORUM PVP LVL 10

  7. #7

    Default

    Me i will tell you one thing noite.

    Don't waste you'r intelligence on thing will never happen.

    How many time yet do you have ask for lot of thing and get nothing in return ?

    so...

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vehl View Post
    That said, the thing that bothers me the most in your suggestions is the three factions factors. Because that's pug. Even if partial pug it's still pug. I don't want to have to pug. I don't want to have a presetted objective and rely on pugs to achieve it. It takes all the challenge and guild rivalry out of open-world and that's no good. It's great to have a guild to beat and not an open-world version of mini-games where you could have groupes of the same guild on diffrent sides.

    Basicly i'd be all for new PvP objectives. But guild based without drasticly balancing numbers and with a disadvantage linked to domination. Dominate if you want but have small though noticeable down sides to it. I'd like to add aswell that as strange as it might sound, the ability to outnumber your opponent is a balancing tool.
    reason why to have 3 sides is 3 is for at least 2 of the border kingdoms have 3 battlekeeps.
    what i saw in tsw with players joining a faction side partialy worked in the 3 open pvp areas.
    problem was one of the faction always ended up having more people and zerged out oposite factions and basicaly ran around gaining massive xp gain while doing nothing.
    if algorithm previligies neglecting guild tags to always balance out 2-3 sides to have balanced numbers i think that woiuld bypass guild zergs of any sort, and have balanced teams oposing each other with most likely groups of same guild on oposite sides fighting each other.
    important as well would be to have it "unchained" with everyone joining have all aa's available+option given to wear pvp t2 set similar to tsw.

    its about unguilded chaos pvp with semi sign ups allowed and incorporating solo players + duets.
    like that 1 6man group could focus obtaining control of a tower or focus defending walls of battle keep while another was outside bk walls for example or trying to atack a bk of oposide side.

    its not about guild content its about raw world pvp battle objectives transforming sieges/borderkingdoms into a war pvp hostile place.

    its about joining a mercenery side defending or pillaging a city(battlekeep) wich you dont give a rats ass about.

    guild vs guild content should be in my opinion more about covert espionage, open world objectives domination and thievery/sabotations to oposite guild cities.
    somewhat a paralel to old world greek cities wars and renaissance italian rivalries.
    like you mentioned have certain open world places conquerable by guilds would be fun.
    but also going with a raid of your guild to oposite guild city and be able to use ladders or stealth to enter and pillage it would be far better guild vs guild content.
    FORUM PVP LVL 10

  9. #9

    Default

    While the OP may not be the answer, it COULD be on the right path. The intention of the OP is to find a way for PVP to thrive or at least exist in the current state of the game.

    The key to this working though would be having PVP areas that are populated. They need to have reasons to get people to go there other than just to open PVP. Guild Objectives, PVP quests, something that pulls them in, just not PVE to PVP. It has to be directly related to PVP only (I'm looking at you Bori).

    The border regions and the soon to be defunct crafting/guild city zones are a great option for zones to do this with.

    By creating a way to combine all server populations and offer an open world area, I think people would be surprised at how much PVP would actually happen in this kind of setting. There are many people on the PVE servers who want to PVP, but left the PVP servers because the population was just too low.

    Lets face it, the game that all of the hard core PVP'ers keep wishing for is gone. We either come up with a way to exist in it's current state (a combined population) or we continue to struggle to find PVP.

    The last advantage of a unified combined server would be active Mini's. If all players were on the same server, Minis would happen ALL OF THE TIME. That would be a benefit in my book.

    I know this is not the answer to an open world PVP setting, but I would like to see a larger server population than what we currently have. I like the thrill of the possibility of PVP when questing or traveling about, but it happens so rarely, or is the source of high level lowbie ganking due to boredom (which lets face it, ultimately kills the population) the current PVP system clearly isn't working.
    Last edited by Kellaxe; 7th July 2013 at 14:03.

  10. #10

    Default

    what about the possibility to flag ourselves for pvp or not in openworld!?
    Why i play AoC:
    Barb for Lore;
    HoX for challenge;
    BS for fun;
    Ranger to annoy;

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •