Jump To Lightspeed Archive
Thread: Just a comment about all the crying about PvP or No PvP or PvE..whatever
Starson
Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:36 pm
#40
meeuki wrote:
i mean look, i'm probably going to get load killed at one point or another while i play this game. i'll probably get worked afk. am i going to take those isolated incidents and use it as a rallying point for which to support taking content away from players? no. so why are other people doing it? why so bitter when death is essentially meaningless? ive read tons of posts from players saying "I SPENT 3 HOURS ON MY MASTER MISSION ONLY TO FAIL IT AT THE END AND START OVER!"
but the master mission doesn't even work like that. you pick it up and it stays in your datapad forever, until you complete it, even if you die. you spawn at endor and it takes 1 minute to go back.
A little off topic, but just so you know, if you get blowed up your equipment takes a hit, as well as your chassis. I know a lot of people don't notice this. Remember that nice 600 kps engine you had, wonder why it only run's at 500 kps now a day's, 'cause ya die'd 10 times. ( the above figures are just a example) I am not sure how much of a hit, but I think I read 10% somewhere, please correct me if I am wrong.
Spinnthrift
Mon Nov 15, 2004 2:47 pm
#41
Nell2ThaIzzay wrote:
You talk about the movies to justify 2-3 shot kills in space PvP...
Well the storm troopers were getting killed with like 1 shot too. Should ground PvP be 1 shot kill?
The point I'm trying to make is... just because it's in the movie, you can't always copy it exactly into the game. I will not PvP in space until they fix the 1 - 2 shot kills. That's not really skill, that's who can get the jump on who first.
And I won't even argue with the rest of your stuff, because I play PvE, so you're just going to think that I'm stupid, and can't really play the game because I take a risk against mobs instead of players (PvE doesn't equal an automatic win, btw, unless you're a master commando fighting durnis)
/sighs... ok. here's some examples.
Standard PvE template... not all perfect but will do.
NS Elder - one of the tougher creatures in the game.
Rifleman/Ranger or CM. Conceal till bleed. Stand, Eat Parwann Nutricake, Strafe 2, loot.
Swordsman/stacker/novice medic. Intim/headhit 3, warcry when mind gets hit too hard.
There's your PvE.
How about some more. Commando + buff + composite vs 30 Stormtroopers. Commando plays flame tag. Idea is to set every stormie alight before the first one dies. Good game - used to play this a lot in my commando days (and that was *after* the nerf)
Maybe you've not noticed the solo group issue? Rancor and Janta/Mokk missions getting nerfed because you know what - players farm these like they were going out of fashion. 199 difficulty missions and an elite profession novice can take them. (Yes - I know my PvE thank you very much - I ground out Swordsman on NS because I was utterly bored of fighting Janta's over and over and over to level.
Yes - now I'm being down on PvE... there is no challenge there. Maybe *my* template can't kill x/y or z creature, but I know a man who can/does... and what he can't kill I do. Us grouped together and hey - let's empty the Corvette. Two people going into a fresh Corvette and leaving only 5 sbd's that we couldn't be bothered to kill (because they don't even drop credits) says PvE = win.
I blame armour and buffs and food and weapons. I blame templates. Space has these not. I like it. Finally I can have a character on the ground that does something other than farm Janta for cash (I'm now ranger and loving every minute of it, I like the gratitude I get when I send a tell to a CH and say "Hey, I've found this rare baby, I left it alive... do you want it?" I know I'm not prepared to spend every hour of every day grinding cash so I can have the uber weapons and uber armour and best template. I don't knock a reduction in PvP damage - if anything it makes my little fragile A-Wing that amount tougher.
What I have said and will say all along is that PvE has it's content and due to a minority of whiners - the best non master battleground for PvP SWG has had in the time it's been running has been removed. I have always advocated allowing PvE'ers the opportunity to Master without facing opposition, however - I also think that the reward should be different. The is a far greater risk to myself and ship when I have someone who can knock me out of the sky in a hit or two and can jostle for my six.
You don't PvP? Good for you - play when the field is good for you. I'm not forcing you to PvP. I know the risks, I enjoy that element. For me - at least a spark of something Star Wars has flashed back into this game. Yeah - I know the movie doesn't have to be like the game, or visa versa... but it feels good when it does. When was the last time you felt fear when a stormie came knocking at your door?
Slarus
Mon Nov 15, 2004 8:11 pm
#42
Without PvP in this game we'd all be wondering what the blazes was going on with the license.
If PvP was not originally in SWG and not introduced to this point, you would have either:
Never bought the game and played it
or
Never complained about PvP.
No game boards for an MMO that has NO PvP EVER begs for it, unless the devs introduce it in testing or talk about it as a future feature. City of heroes for one NEVER talked about PvP until talk started about City of Villians, those who were diehard PvPers didnt play or didnt complain. And even now they dont complain it SHOULD exsist, they TALK about it being consensual and done right.
Slarus
Tue Nov 16, 2004 9:32 am
#43
Somehow I doubt that in this case. Whenever you have two well-definedopposing sides in a conflict, players are going to wonder why they can only fight computer-controlled versions of their enemies. You are right that many PvPers wouldn't have wasted their money on this game if they had been told there would be no PvP whatsoever, but I am certain that those who did still buy the game would definitely complain about it whether they were warned in advance or not.
There is more indication for it then against it that no one would discuss PvP if SWG had NO PvP from the beginning.
This game is not exactly like the other MMORPGs available due to itsbig-name licensing and all the fans that it attracts. With those other games, there is no pre-conceived notion of how the world/universe is supposed to work whereas you would be hard pressed to find more than a handful of players here that did not come in with some idea of what to expect (even without reading any of the developer documents/postings).
Well this is just unfounded speculation, while SWG isnt like other MMOs, CoH isnt like other MMOs, neither is Lineagy or UO. Few MMOs are close to each other, the name Star Wars doesnt mean the MMO breaks all the trends we see, in fact as far as these board are concerned it follows trends to a T. As I said in MMOs with no PvP, few to none complain about including PvP, but in MMOs with some, but not open PvP we see folks complain about PvP details like damage and the limited scope of encountering PvP opponents (Sound familar). In full PvP topics tend to largely center on griefing, and the inability to work PvE storylines due to heavy PvP. Pre-concieved, maybe a bit but I really think the eveidence in the industry shows people would have flocked to the game even with ZERO PvP, plus the actual game issues are more likely to be fixed. SWG should have started with no PvP gotten the game working profession wise and then introduced PvP, the PvPers like to think they are a huge portion of the population but the numbers would hardly have been affected by the absense of pure PvPers, casual PvPers would play as well as diehard PvEers and that is a huge majority.
slave138
Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:16 pm
#44
Slarus wrote:
There is more indication for it then against it that no one would discuss PvP if SWG had NO PvP from the beginning.
There is no indication at all. Has there ever been an MMORPG based on an already existing franchise- especially one as big as Star Wars? What you are saying is similar to saying "Big Macs should sell incredibly well in India because they do everywhere else" without taking into consideration that McDonalds has never tried to sell hamburgers where a large portion of the population worships cows. Just because there are indicators in other games does not mean those would hold true in a game like this where the conflicts and background are all well known by the majority of players.
Well this is just unfounded speculation, while SWG isnt like other MMOs, CoH isnt like other MMOs, neither is Lineagy or UO. Few MMOs are close to each other, the name Star Wars doesnt mean the MMO breaks all the trends we see, in fact as far as these board are concerned it follows trends to a T. As I said in MMOs with no PvP, few to none complain about including PvP, but in MMOs with some, but not open PvP we see folks complain about PvP details like damage and the limited scope of encountering PvP opponents (Sound familar). In full PvP topics tend to largely center on griefing, and the inability to work PvE storylines due to heavy PvP. Pre-concieved, maybe a bit but I really think the eveidence in the industry shows people would have flocked to the game even with ZERO PvP, plus the actual game issues are more likely to be fixed. SWG should have started with no PvP gotten the game working profession wise and then introduced PvP, the PvPers like to think they are a huge portion of the population but the numbers would hardly have been affected by the absense of pure PvPers, casual PvPers would play as well as diehard PvEers and that is a huge majority.
My speculation is not unfounded. The thing that seperates Star Wars from all of the games you mentioned is that in those games, the developers could create whatever history, conflicts, etc... to match their target audience's playstyle preferences. Star Wars does not have that luxury. The conflicts are not only well known, but also well documented. It's not like the Devs can just re-write the general themes of Star Wars without outcry from the fans (and probably Lucas). The trends on the general complaints in a partial-PvP game are the only trend you can compare.
Of course in a game that allows PvP, you will have complaints if the damage numbers seem to skewed and if PvP does not offer some reward or benefit, you will also have people complaining that there is no one involved. No big surprises there. Hell, you get some of the same types of complaints in PvE-only games too when one character-type is too powerful or anotheris so gimped that no one plays it (leading to complaints from the few players who need the help of whatever type is gimped).
The only way they could have done Star Wars with no PvP to start (without complaints)would have been if they had forced all players to either be neutral or a single faction (probably rebel). You say they should have gotten the professions working first, then added in PvP, but you don't seem to realize that part of getting the combat professions to work involves how they function in PvP. People would have flocked to the game even if it had no PvP? Yeah, probably... and they would probably start to demand some kind of PvP not long after. A galactic civil war can get pretty boring if there is only one side to the conflict and from a role-playing viewpoint, it makes no sense for an Imp to ignore a rebel or vice-versa.
I also think your concept of the number of people who are opposed to PvP in SWG is a little off, too. I'll be the first to admit there are very few people who are interested in hardcore PvP play and I'd be willing to bet the number is similar to the hardcore no-PvPers. My perception is that thevast majority are closer to the middle in that they would like to PvP occassionally but would prefer to be left alone while they are improving their skills or playing out a storyline. Ialso believe the numbers of people who would engage in PvP would increase exponentially if they ever got a decent system going where there was abenefit forparticipating in PvP. Right now, the numbers are skewed by a terrible system withno real reward.If and/or when they fix PvP, I predict you will see a lot more people getting involved.
For the record, I'm oneof those in the middle. I rarely PvP (as a wookiee creature handler I stand very little chance of surviving), and when I did, I was disappointed by a system where the only reward was a pittance of Faction Points that were significantly less than the number I lost everytime I died. When you consider I could make 2-4 times as many points and a credit payoutwith better odds of succeeding just doing faction destroy missions, it was a no-brainer that I would choose not to PvP. The benefits simply aren't worth the risk.
Slarus
Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:12 pm
#45
There is no indication at all. Has there ever been an MMORPG based on an already existing franchise- especially one as big as Star Wars? What you are saying is similar to saying "Big Macs should sell incredibly well in India because they do everywhere else" without taking into consideration that McDonalds has never tried to sell hamburgers where a large portion of the population worships cows. Just because there are indicators in other games does not mean those would hold true in a game like this where the conflicts and background are all well known by the majority of players.
You'd be right ecept we easily know that in India they dont eat beef, but what we dont know is IF the Star Wars title has any impact on the game vs the trends we see in other MMOs. Hindu's dont worship cows btw, they believe all life is sacred and part of a great circle. But since we had no Star Wars MMO nor do we have any MMOs based on movies yet that could be a factor but we cant know for sure, so all you can do is go with the FACTS of the trends, sorry it doesnt fit your world view but it is the logical way to go. Your just completely guessing if you believe Star Wars has an impact on PvP it has ZERO basis in fact.
My speculation is not unfounded. The thing that seperates Star Wars from all of the games you mentioned is that in those games, the developers could create whatever history, conflicts, etc... to match their target audience's playstyle preferences. Star Wars does not have that luxury. The conflicts are not only well known, but also well documented. It's not like the Devs can just re-write the general themes of Star Wars without outcry from the fans (and probably Lucas). The trends on the general complaints in a partial-PvP game are the only trend you can compare.
It is you havent been able to prove any tangible proof, I have MMO history as proof, and while the name Star Wars MAY impact that data WE DONT KNOW, so the model you go by is the exsisting model it is called deductive reasoning. Your theories are not supported by any remote fact as none exsists except this game, maybe when Matrix comes out we can draw Movie/MMO comparisions but we simpley cannot reasonable follow a pretend model when we have current ones in the MMO industry.
Of course in a game that allows PvP, you will have complaints if the damage numbers seem to skewed and if PvP does not offer some reward or benefit, you will also have people complaining that there is no one involved. No big surprises there. Hell, you get some of the same types of complaints in PvE-only games too when one character-type is too powerful or anotheris so gimped that no one plays it (leading to complaints from the few players who need the help of whatever type is gimped).
The only way they could have done Star Wars with no PvP to start (without complaints)would have been if they had forced all players to either be neutral or a single faction (probably rebel). You say they should have gotten the professions working first, then added in PvP, but you don't seem to realize that part of getting the combat professions to work involves how they function in PvP. People would have flocked to the game even if it had no PvP? Yeah, probably... and they would probably start to demand some kind of PvP not long after. A galactic civil war can get pretty boring if there is only one side to the conflict and from a role-playing viewpoint, it makes no sense for an Imp to ignore a rebel or vice-versa.
This is not true, why cant you have Rebels take on Impiral NPCs and visa versa? Answer YOU CAN. Your assuption is that the GCW cannot possiblity exsist without PvP and that is very much false, you can have strict PvE GCW, you may not enjoy it but it can work. In fact most of the GCW is already PvE.
I also think your concept of the number of people who are opposed to PvP in SWG is a little off, too. I'll be the first to admit there are very few people who are interested in hardcore PvP play and I'd be willing to bet the number is similar to the hardcore no-PvPers. My perception is that thevast majority are closer to the middle in that they would like to PvP occassionally but would prefer to be left alone while they are improving their skills or playing out a storyline. Ialso believe the numbers of people who would engage in PvP would increase exponentially if they ever got a decent system going where there was abenefit forparticipating in PvP. Right now, the numbers are skewed by a terrible system withno real reward.If and/or when they fix PvP, I predict you will see a lot more people getting involved.
Again if you take all MMOs into account the most popular MMO have consensual or no PvP, if you can provide real eveidence other wise then PvE is more popular, look at subscribtion numbers of all PvE games vs all PvP games, they are 2 or 3 times as high in the PvE games, this indicates a trend.
For the record, I'm oneof those in the middle. I rarely PvP (as a wookiee creature handler I stand very little chance of surviving), and when I did, I was disappointed by a system where the only reward was a pittance of Faction Points that were significantly less than the number I lost everytime I died. When you consider I could make 2-4 times as many points and a credit payoutwith better odds of succeeding just doing faction destroy missions, it was a no-brainer that I would choose not to PvP. The benefits simply aren't worth the risk.
You are clear not middle of the road as you use every PvP hardcore talking point and BS thoery and change or dent facts to suit this thoery. You are in fact a hardcore PvP supporter, period dont deny what you are.
Nell2ThaIzzay
Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:33 pm
#46
Well first off, if this is in debate, I can talk from experience about the City of Heroes boards. I left this game to go play City of Heroes when it came out, and I was very active on the boards at the time. The message board community for City of Heroes was actually VERY happy to see no PvP in the game. There were only a couple incidents in the entire time that I was on those boards that someone brought up wanting PvP. But the overwhelming majority (about 99%) of people on those message boards did not want PvP. When talks of City of Villians was coming up, the people were very skeptical over how the PvP in that would be run. The COH crowd is very cautious over PvP in that game, and they want it implemented absolutley right, or else not at all.
City of Heroes isn't directly based on an already existing universe (I.E. X-Men, or Batman, or something), however, it gives players an oppourtunity to make characters that they have always imagined in those universes. Kinda like how this game gives you an oppourtunity to create a character in a living Star Wars universe, City of Heroes allows people to create characters in a living comic book universe. And many people in that game do base their characters on already existing comic book characters (you don't know how many versions of Logan, Wolverine, Weapon X, and Hulk I have seen in that game).
Now, onto something else I'd like to respond to:
I also think your concept of the number of people who are opposed to PvP in SWG is a little off, too. I'll be the first to admit there are very few people who are interested in hardcore PvP play and I'd be willing to bet the number is similar to the hardcore no-PvPers. My perception is that thevast majority are closer to the middle in that they would like to PvP occassionally but would prefer to be left alone while they are improving their skills or playing out a storyline. Ialso believe the numbers of people who would engage in PvP would increase exponentially if they ever got a decent system going where there was abenefit forparticipating in PvP. Right now, the numbers are skewed by a terrible system withno real reward.If and/or when they fix PvP, I predict you will see a lot more people getting involved.
I would say I'd agree with that. I am not anti-PvP by any means. I am anti-being forced to PvP. I am the kind of person that wants to be left alone while I advance in my skills (after all, this is an RPG, not an FPS, you shouldn't have to PvP to advance). I would however like to PvP at some point. I know I don't have the best PvP'ing template (Droid Engineer, Creature Handler, Trickshot), but I would like to try it out. And I talked with a buddy in game about it who is solely a combat class, and he said that I could probably hold my own with that template (seeing as I'd have a lot of pets in droids and creatures to distract my target). But right now, I don't want to PvP because the system is completely whack. Last time I was a PvP'er, I stood no chance, because people just spammed Knockdown on me, and all of my faction points that I put into having soldiers along side me were wasted. We do need a better PvP system. Then I'd love to take part in it.
And I agree there should be PvP perks. Greater risk should equal greater reward. And role-playing in the Star Wars universe can very well be PvP'ing. I'm lucky tho, since I don't really want to PvP right now, I've role played why I won't PvP. Everything that I do from PvE, PvP, and guild hunts, is all some form of role play for me, something my character would do anyways. So I don't have to worry that I'm not role playing right for not PvP'ing.
Anyways, I don't know where this is going anymore. So I'm gonna stop. I'm hungry, and want something to eat.
Slarus
Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:44 pm
#47
Well first off, if this is in debate, I can talk from experience about the City of Heroes boards. I left this game to go play City of Heroes when it came out, and I was very active on the boards at the time. The message board community for City of Heroes was actually VERY happy to see no PvP in the game. There were only a couple incidents in the entire time that I was on those boards that someone brought up wanting PvP. But the overwhelming majority (about 99%) of people on those message boards did not want PvP. When talks of City of Villians was coming up, the people were very skeptical over how the PvP in that would be run. The COH crowd is very cautious over PvP in that game, and they want it implemented absolutley right, or else not at all.
Spot on this indicates a factual trend, is it 100% true, well hard to tell but there is no other real data to go by other then what is out there right now.
I would say I'd agree with that. I am not anti-PvP by any means. I am anti-being forced to PvP. I am the kind of person that wants to be left alone while I advance in my skills (after all, this is an RPG, not an FPS, you shouldn't have to PvP to advance). I would however like to PvP at some point. I know I don't have the best PvP'ing template (Droid Engineer, Creature Handler, Trickshot), but I would like to try it out. And I talked with a buddy in game about it who is solely a combat class, and he said that I could probably hold my own with that template (seeing as I'd have a lot of pets in droids and creatures to distract my target). But right now, I don't want to PvP because the system is completely whack. Last time I was a PvP'er, I stood no chance, because people just spammed Knockdown on me, and all of my faction points that I put into having soldiers along side me were wasted. We do need a better PvP system. Then I'd love to take part in it.
I'm not anti-PvP at all, I am for fair treatment give PvP zones to PvPers, give EVERYONE the ability to complete Master and not be forced to be subjected to PvP. Since no mission REQUIRES PvP targets there is no reason to have the master mission in a PvP zone.
And I agree there should be PvP perks. Greater risk should equal greater reward. And role-playing in the Star Wars universe can very well be PvP'ing. I'm lucky tho, since I don't really want to PvP right now, I've role played why I won't PvP. Everything that I do from PvE, PvP, and guild hunts, is all some form of role play for me, something my character would do anyways. So I don't have to worry that I'm not role playing right for not PvP'ing.
No one deserves special treatment, here is an idea that gives no special perk:
Kill counter
Red for PC kills (PvP)
Orange for NPC kills (PvE)
Allow starship terminals to display top 10/100 for PvP and PvE tallies for Day, Week, Month, Year and lifetime, and allow the counter to be wearable like a title or incerted into your bio. PvPers get the stats they want, PvEers get the stats they want, if you dont care dont use the counter. It give bragging rights that you can show and prove, but it doesnt give special reward to a small portion of the population who CHOOSE to PvP being given entitlements above those who just hate doing PvP for whatever reason.
I want some recognition and I want PvP in Kessel but I dont want PvP only reward or titles or loot, SWG just isnt a PvP based game, it is all based on PvE, PvP is a optional feature that YOU CAN use but dont have to to achieve ANY goals or loots or titles.
a1davida1
Tue Nov 16, 2004 3:35 pm
#48
I could see loot that could only be used in other pvp being fair.. or prestige points given for pvp kills since they are after all kills but for the most part i agree with you.
No one deserves special treatment, here is an idea that gives no special perk: Unless they introduce pvp based missions you should get no perk or bonus for killing a random member of the opposing fation other then the satisfaction of doing it and your pvp rating
Kill counter Wonderful idea .. simply wonderful
Red for PC kills (PvP)
Orange for NPC kills (PvE)
Allow starship terminals to display top 10/100 for PvP and PvE tallies for Day, Week, Month, Year and lifetime, and allow the counter to be wearable like a title or incerted into your bio. PvPers get the stats they want, PvEers get the stats they want, if you dont care dont use the counter. It give bragging rights that you can show and prove, but it doesnt give special reward to a small portion of the population who CHOOSE to PvP being given entitlements above those who just hate doing PvP for whatever reason. There should be no rewards for pvp unless its for a pvp mission.. like bh type mission.
I want some recognition and I want PvP in Kessel but I dont want PvP only reward or titles or loot, SWG just isnt a PvP based game, it is all based on PvE, PvP is a optional feature that YOU CAN use but dont have to to achieve ANY goals or loots or titles. PvP of swg is like.. paint of a car...... not the core of it and the game will run without it .. however MANY people wouldnt drive a car with no paint.. or play swg without pvp.
Slarus
Tue Nov 16, 2004 4:01 pm
#49
Unless they introduce pvp based missions you should get no perk or bonus for killing a random member of the opposing fation other then the satisfaction of doing it and your pvp rating
Wont happen
There should be no rewards for pvp unless its for a pvp mission.. like bh type mission.
The highly debated, highly broken BH hunt is not a shinning start in support of PvP missions and once again there is no reward or advancment associated with these, it is just creds and annoyance on both sides.
PvP of swg is like.. paint of a car...... not the core of it and the game will run without it .. however MANY people wouldnt drive a car with no paint.. or play swg without pvp. I could see loot that could only be used in other pvp being fair.. or prestige points given for pvp kills since they are after all kills but for the most part i agree with you.
We'll never really know, as SWG always had some PvP in it. If it had No PvP then went to PvP the point could be proven once and for all, but I am confident seeing other MMOs that is could be done without PvP, even the GCW could be done and SWG would have strong subscriber numbers based also on other MMO examples, The Star Wars title alone would attract even die hard PvPers who also happen to be HUGE Star Wars fans even if the game was 100% PvE and ZERO PvP.
slave138
Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:29 pm
#50
Slarus wrote:
You'd be right ecept we easily know that in India they dont eat beef, but what we dont know is IF the Star Wars title has any impact on the game vs the trends we see in other MMOs. Hindu's dont worship cows btw, they believe all life is sacred and part of a great circle. But since we had no Star Wars MMO nor do we have any MMOs based on movies yet that could be a factor but we cant know for sure, so all you can do is go with the FACTS of the trends, sorry it doesnt fit your world view but it is the logical way to go. Your just completely guessing if you believe Star Wars has an impact on PvP it has ZERO basis in fact.
It was meant as an example not as a direct parallel. The point is, you can reference these other games all you like but none of them had a built-in fanbase, a predetermined expectation, or specific storyline they needed to adhere to. It's not a matter of just being based on a movie - although that does play a major part of it - with Star Wars, you have more than twenty years worth of stories, games (including pen-and-paper RPGs, flight sims, FPS, and a myriad of others), movies and for the fans, expectations to live up to. The 'facts' of your trends do not necessarily apply in this case because they do not account for this important factor. Your guesses in this case are no more valid than my own.
It is you havent been able to prove any tangible proof, I have MMO history as proof, and while the name Star Wars MAY impact that data WE DONT KNOW, so the model you go by is the exsisting model it is called deductive reasoning. Your theories are not supported by any remote fact as none exsists except this game, maybe when Matrix comes out we can draw Movie/MMO comparisions but we simpley cannot reasonable follow a pretend model when we have current ones in the MMO industry.
Nor can we make base assumptions about this game when there are no others which to compare it to. You're right, we don't know how much the franchise would affect the players' conceptions and expectations and your deductive guesses do not account for that and are therefore little more than a theory not much different than my own.
This is not true, why cant you have Rebels take on Impiral NPCs and visa versa? Answer YOU CAN. Your assuption is that the GCW cannot possiblity exsist without PvP and that is very much false, you can have strict PvE GCW, you may not enjoy it but it can work. In fact most of the GCW is already PvE.
From a role-playing standpoint, this idea is not just ridiculous but stupid. Explain to me why a rebel would not be able to attack one Imperial but can attack the one right next to him? While you're at it, why would the Imperial stand by while you're gunning down his people? Sure, it could have been done, but the results would not have made sense - which is the primary reason why I keep saying this game is not as free to interpretation as the others. With the ones you cite, they can work it into the storylines and background how players interact with NPCs and each other and with a little skill, it would make sense.
Again if you take all MMOs into account the most popular MMO have consensual or no PvP, if you can provide real eveidence other wise then PvE is more popular, look at subscribtion numbers of all PvE games vs all PvP games, they are 2 or 3 times as high in the PvE games, this indicates a trend.
This game does have consensual PvP... I merely said it is so pointless and broken right now you are not likely to get a very good sample of the numbers of people who are interested in PvPing *some* of the time. I haven't done anything overt in over a year except for the couple times when an NPC stormtrooper 'outed' me in either Mos Espa or Mos Entha(I can never keep track of which is which) and those times all I did was run to a recruiter to go covert again and then waited it out in a remote area. There is just no point to PvPing right now.
You are clear not middle of the road as you use every PvP hardcore talking point and BS thoery and change or dent facts to suit this thoery. You are in fact a hardcore PvP supporter, period dont deny what you are.
How dare you to tell *me* what my playstyle is?! I may support many of the PvP crowd's arguments - that's because many of them have some merits (in much the same way that many of the non-PvP crowd's arguements against Master Missions in Kessel had merits). At least most of them realize a compromise is needed whereas you are as thick-skulled and pompous as you can be - thinking your opinions and *theories* are the only ones that are valid. I can count my participation in PvP since launch on one hand. If that's 'hardcore PvP', I call your other "deductive reasoning" into question... You seem have the close-minded perspective that someone cannot agree with something unless they want to be part of it.
slave138
Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:45 pm
#51
PvP deserves some kind of reward other than lip service - the lack of rewards are why no one bothers with it. You gain no skill, no money, and no loot in PvP right now so they need to come up with something to workas a reward system. Hell, even strict-PvP rewards would be better than what they offer now. Let them earn something that can only be used against other players- if they can't use it for an advantage against the PvE elements of the game,the non-PvP players should have nothing to complain about (but I have no fear you (Slarus) will anyways...)
Slarus wrote:
No one deserves special treatment, here is an idea that gives no special perk:
Kill counter
Red for PC kills (PvP)
Orange for NPC kills (PvE)
Allow starship terminals to display top 10/100 for PvP and PvE tallies for Day, Week, Month, Year and lifetime, and allow the counter to be wearable like a title or incerted into your bio. PvPers get the stats they want, PvEers get the stats they want, if you dont care dont use the counter. It give bragging rights that you can show and prove, but it doesnt give special reward to a small portion of the population who CHOOSE to PvP being given entitlements above those who just hate doing PvP for whatever reason.
I want some recognition and I want PvP in Kessel but I dont want PvP only reward or titles or loot, SWG just isnt a PvP based game, it is all based on PvE, PvP is a optional feature that YOU CAN use but dont have to to achieve ANY goals or loots or titles.
Slarus
Tue Nov 16, 2004 5:47 pm
#52
It was meant as an example not as a direct parallel. The point is, you can reference these other games all you like but none of them had a built-in fanbase, a predetermined expectation, or specific storyline they needed to adhere to. It's not a matter of just being based on a movie - although that does play a major part of it - with Star Wars, you have more than twenty years worth of stories, games (including pen-and-paper RPGs, flight sims, FPS, and a myriad of others), movies and for the fans, expectations to live up to. The 'facts' of your trends do not necessarily apply in this case because they do not account for this important factor. Your guesses in this case are no more valid than my own.
But the same can be said about EQ (Built in Fantasy base), City of Heroes (Built in superhero base), sorry you cant accpet it but this is what we have this is what SOE has too. The game is PvE based like ALL other MMOs, so SOE did thier homework, they did not go the open PvP because the statistics show they are not popular.
Nor can we make base assumptions about this game when there are no others which to compare it to. You're right, we don't know how much the franchise would affect the players' conceptions and expectations and your deductive guesses do not account for that and are therefore little more than a theory not much different than my own.
I'm not making assumptions, I am basing it on the information on MMOs that is availible, your assuming that one element (Star Wars) makes this totally unrelated to EVERY MMO before it. Look at the market I know SOE did that is why the game is PvE and PvP is consensual.
From a role-playing standpoint, this idea is not just ridiculous but stupid. Explain to me why a rebel would not be able to attack one Imperial but can attack the one right next to him? While you're at it, why would the Imperial stand by while you're gunning down his people? Sure, it could have been done, but the results would not have made sense - which is the primary reason why I keep saying this game is not as free to interpretation as the others. With the ones you cite, they can work it into the storylines and background how players interact with NPCs and each other and with a little skill, it would make sense.
From a basis of what we have right now, you'd be right. But the reality is a Rebel CAN stand next an Imperial and that is the way it was from as far back as I started my interest in SWG in 2001 with Star Wars gamer magazine, and the kicker is that one can be Overt and still not be able to attack each other, so the Default game is Covert, you have to do an extra step to go Overt, so from the get go you Dont have to PvP, plus you can be a faction and stay PvE it is not rediculous, the only way you'd even consider it is because PvP already exsists, IF the game had ZERO PvP we would not be talking about PvP, there is more proof then not to this. Dont accept it, live in ignorance that EVERY wants PvP and SWG would never work without PvP, nevermind PvP is ALREADY a joke and so few actually do it, it is as good as dead. But facts are it is NOT IMPOSSIBLE to have the GCW with no PvP.
This game does have consensual PvP... I merely said it is so pointless and broken right now you are not likely to get a very good sample of the numbers of people who are interested in PvPing *some* of the time. I haven't done anything overt in over a year except for the couple times when an NPC stormtrooper 'outed' me in either Mos Espa or Mos Entha(I can never keep track of which is which) and those times all I did was run to a recruiter to go covert again and then waited it out in a remote area. There is just no point to PvPing right now.
Again I stated that because subscribtion rates and retension is higher on game with No PvP or consensual PvP by a factor of 2 times, the data is out there, tacking Star Wars on an MMO is debatable if it has a considerable effect on these trends, but I would put in SWG would have strong subscribtions with no PvP, BECAUSE it's Star Wars, can you prove that wrong? Nope because you cant prove people want PvP because it's Star Wars either, but it CAN be proved that PvE MMOs are more popular then PvP MMOs.
How dare you to tell *me* what my playstyle is?! I may support many of the PvP crowd's arguments - that's because many of them have some merits (in much the same way that many of the non-PvP crowd's arguements against Master Missions in Kessel had merits). At least most of them realize a compromise is needed whereas you are as thick-skulled and pompous as you can be - thinking your opinions and *theories* are the only ones that are valid. I can count my participation in PvP since launch on one hand. If that's 'hardcore PvP', I call your other "deductive reasoning" into question... You seem have the close-minded perspective that someone cannot agree with something unless they want to be part of it.
You can say your not a hardcore PvPer, but since you fight for ego boosting, PvP only no coverts and Master mission being PvP required you are clearly a PvPer. I can say I am president of SOE doesn't make it true.
If you join a faction you SHOULD be subject to PvP -- you're picking sides in a war, not joining a social club...
People who support this idea are not casual PvPers, as any casual gamer realizes that covert operatives are perfectly valid, only hardcore PvPers who want special content call for this, and ONLY AFTER this stupid assuption of Master Pilot being a PvP entitlement, not ONE post pre-JTL called for this.