pvp PvP System

[Supermega]

@Hades You're right, and I agree on all points.

[Atmosph3rik]

@Hades

 

It is Landmark in space.

 

It's whatever I want it to be.

 

It can be whatever you want it to be too.

[Felonu]

We all have different ideas of what things like emergent, and player-driven mean.  It seems like these differences have become the core argument of this thread.  I don't think this gets resolved by us trying to convince each other at this point.  I stopped posting here a couple pages ago I think because I said all I wanted to say about my opinions of how the PvP can be handled, but it seems like the discussion hasn't moved at all. 

 

We'll all have to see what NQ decides these things mean to them, and their vision.   It could end up being a lopsided newbie gank-fest that isn't any fun to try to start for new players, a builder only game where the PvP never gets implemented enough to keep PvP players interested, or an anarchic mess where everywhere outside of the Ark-zone is at such violent war that noone ever feels safe enough to spend time trying to build anything.  If any of these things happen I believe the game won't be even close to as successful as it could be, and I don't want it to turn out like any of these thing.

[MookMcMook]

28 minutes ago, Felonu said:

We all have different ideas of what things like emergent, and player-driven mean.  It seems like these differences have become the core argument of this thread.  I don't think this gets resolved by us trying to convince each other at this point.  I stopped posting here a couple pages ago I think because I said all I wanted to say about my opinions of how the PvP can be handled, but it seems like the discussion hasn't moved at all. 

 

We'll all have to see what NQ decides these things mean to them, and their vision.   It could end up being a lopsided newbie gank-fest that isn't any fun to try to start for new players, a builder only game where the PvP never gets implemented enough to keep PvP players interested, or an anarchic mess where everywhere outside of the Ark-zone is at such violent war that noone ever feels safe enough to spend time trying to build anything.  If any of these things happen I believe the game won't be even close to as successful as it could be, and I don't want it to turn out like any of these thing.

Agreed. Hence why I introduced some ideas about language. Of course that does not stop some reverting to "slogans" a sort of written shouting equivalent of communication! But then that's politics for you - not actual subject discussion via argument dialectic.

 

Of course it's unrealistic to not expect this reaction: There's ALWAYS a war between players due to the faulty designs of PvP systems in most previous mmorpgs.

 

You have players TRAINED to want things they won't find very fun (care-bears) and PvP'ers who go nuts when there's the faintest sniff of "Real Integrated MMO PvP" via simulation, like a shark sniffing a drop of blood 40km away in the ocean currents!

 

All this makes me more confident that NQ have to first get the world-building grounded successfully first, then gradually iterate the simulation systems such as combat and trade that we can refer to EVE as a rough blueprint (not an exact one) for.

 

I can't WAIT to board another ship and overun the defenders and capture it, like something out of Patrick O'Brien's Aubrey and Maturin series eg Master & Commander, claiming other ships as a great "prize". *licks lips* I'm just hoping the tech can deliver and introduce such HIGHER INTERACTIVE COMBAT that previous mmos.

 

@Atmosph3rik Although I know what you mean about Landmark in Space, ie the Next (lol!) big voxel mmo with that kind of gameplay that they'll LOVE; the slogan is far from perfect: SOE/Daybreak never had the server tech NQ has, never knew how to store the data of VoxelFarm, faked the AI in the demos and generally did not have a coherent vision of game design for EQN at all, then strung early backers along in a corporate funding strategy bid... Fairly low behaviour tbh, even if understandable given their predicaments.

 

As someone said, NQ's vision is an emergent player-driven simulation game ontop of the sandbox stuff. Though PvP players should ply some patients for the next few years and carefully bide their time.

[Lethys]

18 minutes ago, MookMcMook said:

Though PvP players should ply some patients for the next few years and carefully bide their time

Yeah, THAT will work Out well lmao

[Atmosph3rik]

@MookMcMook Yeah it's an awful slogan.  I probably wouldn't use it in public.

 

It is easy for me to forget why it might sound awful though because to me Landmark was pretty incredible.  I would still be building stuff in Landmark now if it was still going.  But from the beginning Landmark was missing half the game.  Plus a whole list of other problems I won't even get into.

 

What we're all here for I think, is the MMO part.  That's what made Landmark more interesting then your average 3d sculpting program.

 

What I hope Dual Universe is going to be is a game that is fun for lots of different types of players.

 

Not just builders, or pvpers, or explorers, or survivalists, or anything else.

 

And personally my preference is that people be able to enjoy the parts of the game they enjoy without the other parts being crammed down their throat.

 

That's what player driven means to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Lethys]

5 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

 

And personally my preference is that people be able to enjoy the parts of the game they enjoy without the other parts being crammed down their throat.

 

I get your points and i agree (Du parts, never cared for landmark) though unfortunately that won't happen, as such a game doesn't exist as MMO. 

 

I don't like building and scripting, still i have to live with that as it is crammed down my throat. Which is fine, because i knew that from the start

[Atmosph3rik]

17 minutes ago, Lethys said:

 

I get your points and i agree (Du parts, never cared for landmark) though unfortunately that won't happen, as such a game doesn't exist as MMO. 

 

I don't like building and scripting, still i have to live with that as it is crammed down my throat. Which is fine, because i knew that from the start

 

See I don't think it is being crammed down your throat.

 

As long as doing those things aren't required to enjoy the game.  You might not have the best scripts or the pointiest spaceships, unless you buy them.  But that's fine right?

 

And if i'm not in the mood for PVP I definitely can't go wherever I want, or do whatever I want.  But as long as I can hang out in a safezone then that's fine too.  Right?

 

The only thing in this thread I have issue with is this idea that if people don't like PVP they should just git gud and defend themselves, or pay someone else too.  Or go hide underground or something.

 

You can do that if you want.  But that's an activity.  Part of PVP.

 

If i'm not in the mood for PVP.  THAT is what the Arcship Safezones are for. 

 

 

[Zamarus]

1 minute ago, Atmosph3rik said:

 

See I don't think it is being crammed down your throat.

 

As long as doing those things aren't required to enjoy the game.  You might not have the bests scripts or the pointiest spaceships, unless you buy them.  But that's fine right?

 

I honestly dont know how you can say that about building and not PvP, both are available to do whatever with, neither is crammed down your throat.

[Atmosph3rik]

3 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

I honestly dont know how you can say that about building and not PvP, both are available to do whatever with, neither is crammed down your throat.

That IS what I said...

 

Both should be available to enjoy.  And neither should be or are planned to be crammed down anyone's throat.

 

As long as you get that, then I think we're on the same page here.

[Zamarus]

Just now, Atmosph3rik said:

That IS what I said...

Alright, because that's not the picture i get from earlier in the discussion. Building and PvP will happen all around us unhindered, are you okay with that? Just checking here.

[MookMcMook]

48 minutes ago, Lethys said:

Yeah, THAT will work Out well lmao

"ply some patients" =/= ply some patience. Did you notice that word play? Is that what is making you "lmao"? I hope so.

[MookMcMook]

30 minutes ago, Lethys said:

 

I get your points and i agree (Du parts, never cared for landmark) though unfortunately that won't happen, as such a game doesn't exist as MMO. 

 

I don't like building and scripting, still i have to live with that as it is crammed down my throat. Which is fine, because i knew that from the start

I'm fairly confident we can build our cake and blow it up... (in time).

[MookMcMook]

43 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

@MookMcMook Yeah it's an awful slogan.  I probably wouldn't use it in public.

 

It is easy for me to forget why it might sound awful though because to me Landmark was pretty incredible.  I would still be building stuff in Landmark now if it was still going.  But from the beginning Landmark was missing half the game.  Plus a whole list of other problems I won't even get into.

 

What we're all here for I think, is the MMO part.  That's what made Landmark more interesting then your average 3d sculpting program.

 

What I hope Dual Universe is going to be is a game that is fun for lots of different types of players.

 

Not just builders, or pvpers, or explorers, or survivalists, or anything else.

 

And personally my preference is that people be able to enjoy the parts of the game they enjoy without the other parts being crammed down their throat.

 

That's what player driven means to me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I really like everything said here. Especially the glimpse of passion some players will have for building who have tasted the voxel game play, which I have not.

[Atmosph3rik]

11 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

Building and PvP will happen all around us unhindered, are you okay with that? Just checking here.

 

No of coarse not.  Come on now.  Are we even having the same discussion?

 

That's what the Safezones are for.

 

Hindering PVP.

 

Not cramming things down people's throats means that you'll have to accept being hindered a little bit.

 

If I can accept being hindered, then you should be able to also.

[Captain Jack]

2 hours ago, Hades said:

Seems like you’re just throwing things out and hoping they stick.

 

It also seems like you’re using a shortsighted view.  Simply from your fear of PvP and conflict.  

2 hours ago, Hades said:

I told myself I was done with this thread, but it honestly seems like some of you don’t know what you backed.

 

 

You're using "seems like" as a way to discredit the value of other's input. It's insulting no matter how you try to disguise it. I have no beef with you personally, but the behavior is unbecoming.

 

2 hours ago, Zamarus said:

Taking shit like this out of context is why we have all these care-bear concerns on the forums.

Spoken as if care-bear concerns aren't welcome on the game's official forum.

 

3 hours ago, Hades said:

 

This isn’t landmark in space, and I do think some people think it is... which is a problem, and it will be rectified quickly upon release haha.

As for the topic, that last bit pretty much says it all.

[Zamarus]

19 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

That's what the Safezones are for.

Good, then i see where you stand excuse me. Because i recalled you arguing the same as Felonou, if not i apologize.

What they argued was for offensive PvP to be costly and/or yield little. Which i thought was absurd, if you understand the safezone and potential future safezones i think we agree for the most part.

[Lethys]

34 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

As long as doing those things aren't required to enjoy the game.  You might not have the best scripts or the pointiest spaceships, unless you buy them.  But that's fine right?

 

34 minutes ago, Atmosph3rik said:

The only thing in this thread I have issue with is this idea that if people don't like PVP they should just git gud and defend themselves, or pay someone else too.  Or go hide underground or something.

Huh? It's fine If i have to buy nice ships but it's not ok if someone has to pay for protection?

When I want to fly better ships or some fancy stuff then either I Git gud (which i won't) or buy those ships. There's no alternative here and I definitely don't want NQ to change smth in the game (make it easier for example) just because I suck in doing it. 

That's just the game ad it is and i love it for that. 

 

I don't mind all that stuff that I'm not interested in, I knew what Du is about from the start. 

[Zamarus]

1 minute ago, Captain Jack said:

Spoken as if care-bear concerns aren't welcome on the game's official forum.

The implication was people were bringing up pointless or invalid concerns

[0something0]

The big problem is that destruction is so much easier then construction or protection. You(an individual or group) have to spend countless hours building and pay mercs(which I suspect will be costly due to the high demand) or guard it yourself 24/7, which may not be possible, while all it takes is a few people to just log in and open fire to destroy.

 And it seems like some people here are fine with this. I won't say any names but the real problem it seems like is the community's attitude towards the issue which potentially stems from NQ's *marketing* of DU as a "do-whatever-you-want" MMO (at least before the website change).

[Felonu]

7 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

Good, then i see where you stand excuse me. Because i recalled you arguing the same as Felonou, if not i apologize.

What they argued was for offensive PvP to be costly and/or yield little. Which i thought was absurd, if you understand the safezone and potential future safezones i think we agree for the most part.

That is a misrepresentation of what I said.  I don't think I ever talked about wanting anything specific.  I kept saying that it would be up to NQ and their vision.  I only said I didn't want the extreme the other way.  I also said that having PvP be expensive would reduce the amount of things like griefing.  I never argued for or against anything except especially inexpensive PvP.

 

-Added for clarification-

And what I mean by especially inexpensive is a small ship with a gun on it only takes an hour of farming mats to build, and is able to take out a city.

Edited January 29, 2018 by Felonu
Clarification

[Zamarus]

Just now, Felonu said:

That is a misrepresentation of what I said.  I don't think I ever talked about wanting anything specific.  I kept saying that it would be up to NQ and their vision.  I only said I didn't want the extreme the other way.  I also said that having PvP be expensive would reduce the amount of things like griefing.  I never argued for or against anything except especially inexpensive PvP.

I don't see how that is a misrepresentation, you literally advocated for expensive PvPing, that NQ should balance it so that killing people would yield little.

[Felonu]

2 minutes ago, Zamarus said:

I don't see how that is a misrepresentation, you literally advocated for expensive PvPing, that NQ should balance it so that killing people would yield little.

I explained what I said in the paragraph you quoted... I always said these are things NQ CAN do to adjust balance.  I didn't say they should do anything but not make it extremely cheap.  What I think NQ should do would be off topic since the OP was asking if a thing would be possible.  I was explaining a way for it to be possible.  I think, or at least attempted to always say that the balance would have to be decided by NQ.  I might have expressed general opinions that you took to mean that I want it to be expensive, but I don't.  I want it to be balanced.

[Hades]

@Felonu

 

That’s pretty interesting because NQ has a pretty straightforward definition of Player driven and emergent gameplay.  Literally 4th bullet point of the Kickstarter.  This isn’t even considering the videos and other avenues of communication they have given on the topic.

 

“Emergent gameplay: economy, trade, territories, politics and warfare are all player-driven. Both PvP and non-PvP will be possible.”

 

Notice that they explicitly mention PvP and non-PvP as both being player driven. This is solidified in dev diaries and blogs if you sift through them.

[Hades]

3 hours ago, Atmosph3rik said:

@Hades

 

It is Landmark in space.

 

It's whatever I want it to be.

 

It can be whatever you want it to be too.

No, it’s definitely not landmark in space... and thank all for that... or we’d have a dead game in a year.  Landmark did building really well, but there wasn’t enough of a game there.  They realized this and tried implementing PvE combat and mobs IIRC?  Didn’t work obviously.  They also tried implementing non-emergent PvP arenas or something as well right?

 

DU isn’t just building, and that’s what many must realize.  If you keep saying it’s Landmark in space, people will believe it. And that’s a misrepresentation of the game.