Abolish 3 way PVP

Title pretty much says it all. I get that it's a cool idea....But it's not fun when your GC is on the receiving end of 2 v 1.

I've had amazingly fun PVP matches where no GCs teamed up, but they are few and far between.

Abolish 1 v 1 v 1 and GC requirements. Red v Blue would make everyone happier.

Side bar: Anyone else feeling like Yoshi saying that he likes to PVP meaning 'I like to PVP in X game, why would I create some here?'

I have yet to try the 3 way PvP here in FFXIV but I think it's something that will more than likely stick. In other games with 3 way faction warfare there will always be a time where 1 side feels (and very well may be) it is getting the shaft by the other two.

Examples of games I myself played in recent memory being Planetside 1/2 and also The Secret World had heavy emphasis on 3 way battles. Honestly though even if it were just 2 sides here in FFXIV you would still have a bunch of bandwagon players jumping over to the winning faction. In 3 way battles the powerhouse has a chance of bullying too much and having the other 2 sides team up for their demise.

When players take actual strategy into consideration and not just trying to be on the easy win side opens up opportunities for awesome interplay between them. Takes players though. Not something SE can just fix.

Personally, I don't want it abolished. I love the hectic and crazy battles. There will always be times when you're getting teamed up on but that's the fun part in it, especially if you're team is good, then dealing with both of the other teams on you isn't that bad.

But I would also like some 1v1 team pvp.

3 way pvp is far more fun & even if there are times where two GC's gang up against 1... usually turning the tide is far better in this system than 1 faction completely dominating over another without aid in a 1v1 scenario.

More team v team options would be nice in the future though if they fixed pvp's glaring issues.

Not sure if srs...

It will more than likely not get abolished. There are 3 main nations, therefore 3 way pvp. You cant just up and merc for any nation you want. That doesn't make sense. In FFXI the pvp was always nation against nation, the exception being the one where you could duel with another player.

The whole war of the three city states against each other makes no sense. It feels very forced. Would be okay if it is training. But otherwise something like this would kill an alliance.

The whole 1vs1vs1 ist just imbalanced. Even worse in Slaughter than Secure. And guilds can just have groups in 2 of the GCs and coordinate over team speak, as one example.

Let them wintrade 1vs1, who cares. But not 2vs1 with the 1 as involuntary victim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinRethiel

The whole war of the three city states against each other makes no sense. It feels very forced. Would be okay if it is training. But otherwise something like this would kill an alliance.

The whole 1vs1vs1 ist just imbalanced. Even worse in Slaughter than Secure. And guilds can just have groups in 2 of the GCs and coordinate over team speak, as one example.

Let them wintrade 1vs1, who cares. But not 2vs1 with the 1 as involuntary victim.

---

The problem there is not the 3 way faction but players being lame and taking the paths of least resistance.

The problem that I've seen is people do just feed off the ones getting shafted. Team A us winning and pushing out Team C but Team B decides to try and go along with Team A. Why? It makes no sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wulfyn

In FFXI the pvp was always nation against nation, the exception being the one where you could duel with another player.

---

Not true. Even in the public nation-based matches, XI placed people on the teams that needed players. You could play for other nations all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinRethiel

The whole 1vs1vs1 ist just imbalanced. Even worse in Slaughter than Secure. And guilds can just have groups in 2 of the GCs and coordinate over team speak, as one example.

---

Indeed--they did it in Dark Age of Camelot, and look how badly it worked there.

72 Man Secure mode was GC vs GC vs GC but not nearly as imbalanced as 24 man Secure mode... it actually worked really well, and it's too bad it's gone and will never be back so long as we have this GC Restriction keeping so many people out since a match can't form without 24 people queueing up in the lowest pop GC and even then excluding players who can't fit into one of the 3 parties of 8 that would have formed for their GC even if there could have been room elsewhere.

72 man Secure, it had 3 conflict points like at the points of an equilateral triangle if you were to draw it in the circle of the map. At each point was a 1x1 fight between 2 GC's... Adder/Maelstrom at one, Maelstrom/Flames at another, Flames/Adder at the third. And that left one team from each GC to compete at mid, and in between mid spawns to supplement other teams where needed which made for an interesting, unpredictable dynamic. But 24 man secure basically takes out those 3 balanced points of the triangle and leaves the 1x1x1 teams in the middle, where if 2 parties are fighting then the third can get the objectives that provide major points and win. Had a secure mode match like that recently, Flames and Maelstrom were going at it and I talked most of my team into backing off so they'd be fighting each other when the drones/node popped, we went from being barely in third place to way in first with no way to lose after getting the main node. What it takes to win 24 man secure has not much to do with what that mode of battle was designed for in my opinion, I feel like it was designed around 72 man and 24 man is a stopgap for when there aren't enough players for 72... which now is always the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conradus

Indeed--they did it in Dark Age of Camelot, and look how badly it worked there.

---

Not sure if ment sarcastic, but if yes, you can't compare open world PvP to a battleground. It was a different style. People mention a lot of thing, when they talk about the pro (and contras) od DAoC, but while 3 fractions is one of the plus sides, there are many other points and the composition at the end is what it made good in their eyes, not a single thing on its own.

Big problem in FF PvP is, that slaughter killed every other mode, because people like to "pwn" with their personal LBs.

1v1v1 is plenty balanced, it's other things that people are already talking about that messes pvp up. I enjoy 1v1v1 it's really exciting and can tend to be different every time.
I really miss the days of 72 man and even 48 man secure.

3 way PvP isn't bad for Secure, but it's truly awful in Slaughter. Slaughter does an amazing job of highlighting EVERYTHING that is wrong with PvP, which is pretty terrible right from the core concept/foundation. Just on a basic level, for example, how you play caster in PvP is pretty much nothing like you would in PvE (huge focus on crowd control, which is probably the LEAST fun aspect of PvP ... who wants to sit there bound/slept, exactly?). For a mode that's supposed to be for casuals to just "drop in, play, and have fun" the way it's designed is pretty maddening. If Yoshida thinks casual casters want to get interrupted nonstop, have their targets run away so they can't finish their cast, have their targets run circles around them to interrupt their cast, and blitz them down in 2-3 GCDs because hey, melee can spike down a caster super fast, I think he may need to reconsider how awful the dev team is at designing PvP that actual human beings want to play. Maybe try to cleave a little closer to WoW instead of going straight garbador up in this piece.

I think Secure was great for 3 way PvP, I think it'd be fine to stay so long as they fix the gosh darn (lol) queue times!!! >:O xD That is all they have to do, and stop the whole "Alliance A has 6 healers while B and C have 0". It is early in it's life, but PvP could do with a lot of QoL, I don't mean "Please put role restrictions on the FL" I mean "If there is a lot of this role, even them out between the 3, IF". I also would like to farm the PvP gear without having to be on the game and have no life... lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hiruke

3 way PvP isn't bad for Secure, but it's truly awful in Slaughter. Slaughter does an amazing job of highlighting EVERYTHING that is wrong with PvP, which is pretty terrible right from the core concept/foundation.

---

I agree with this. 48-72-man Slaughter is basically a giant crowd control abuse with everyone pushed into a small arena where the 1st GC to over-extend is likely to get targeted right off the bat; and the team that plays the best PvE (against nodes) actually benefits the most.

However, I don't agree with the idea that casters are the victim in that situation. Sleep and Bind-ga is still ridiculous; with their pitiful diminishing returns which resets after what feels like about a minute anyway (the recast on purify is laughable in light of this), and 7 seconds still being enough time to be ousted from any node killing/ eat several Cometeors. In large groups like that, casters have the luxury to hide within their numbers and do damage from afar, unlike the melee who in the same situation, wait for the 1st thing careless enough to over-extend, or be that person themself, and then you have them having to run to nodes to DPS it where they're nice AoE bait. And then both casters have the tools to eventually dominate with Cometeor spam that to this day, the devs likely don't see as an issue for whatever reason. If anything, Slaughter is a personal gift of love from the devs to casters for how vulnerable they were in Secure without having to actually fix any mechanics.


As for 2v1 scenarios, I think people tend to focus on the times that they are focused on by the other 2 factions, not realizing that it happens to everyone else at different points in time. You take away the 3rd faction, and there becomes a whole lot less "unknown" variables and the match becomes fairly linear. I'm not saying that is a bad thing, but you do have to have a bit of strategy when you decide which enemy GC players needs to be taken out 1st/ saved for last.

Having said that, I still find it very possible for the devs to include 1 nation vs 1 nation matches. FFXI did it. The odd nation out got auto-sorted into the 2 teams. Why can't we have both 3-way conflicts and 1 nation vs 1 nation with the third nation being mercs for both sides in those scenarios? There's something for everyone that way.

I believe if devs tried a bit, they would find a way to implement 2 side PVP. The biggest problem here is the lore. There must be reason to have 2 sides/ factions whatever and a reason for characters to switch the sides as they please.

Just training. The PvP makes no sense in any way. Lore-wise it is totally stupid, that the alliance is fighting "to the death" for this "something". It would kill the alliance.

Quote:

---

As for 2v1 scenarios, I think people tend to focus on the times that they are focused on by the other 2 factions, not realizing that it happens to everyone else at different points in time. You take away the 3rd faction, and there becomes a whole lot less "unknown" variables and the match becomes fairly linear. I'm not saying that is a bad thing, but you do have to have a bit of strategy when you decide which enemy GC players needs to be taken out 1st/ saved for last.

---

The problem is, even without purpose it's stupid. If teams join up to gank the third one by purpose or just by accident, the problem is the same. And of course, it is an opportunity, certain people WILL abuse. There are always people who every weakness of a system they can find.

Like most everyone has said, the 3-way design isn't a problem,

the problem is 72-player Slaughter doesn't augment well with 3-way gameplay. 72 Slaughter needs a different map or different Drone spawning/buff/point-rewards behavior. Such fixes have been being requested since Slaughter was implemented (we're getting the new map, thankfully).

edit: personally I think instead of a single node that all factions DPS-race for kill claim it would be better replaced by 3 small drones, 1 spawning on each factions panel, and your team has to defend yours while DPSing down the other 2 teams'. If your node stays alive for 45 seconds, 90 seconds, 3 minutes, you get the additive buffs.

I really don't know why the drones exist at all. At least in such a way. They give way too much points for a simple last hit. And it is last hit.

Got one time, when flames did not attack the mid core at all, but one paladin came in at 2% or so and took the last hit. Full points to griffindor... I mean flames.

Really? Just last hit? Something which mainly got to do with sheer luck?

Quote:

---

edit: personally I think instead of a single node that all factions DPS-race for kill claim it would be better replaced by 3 small drones, 1 spawning on each factions panel, and your team has to defend yours while DPSing down the other 2 teams'. If your node stays alive for 45 seconds, 90 seconds, 3 minutes, you get the additive buffs

---

Sounds way more interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinRethiel

I really don't know why the drones exist at all. At least in such a way. They give way too much points for a simple last hit. And it is last hit.

---

The credit goes to whichever team does the most damage. In 2.3 with secure, it used to be whoever did the last hit on the drones got the credit, but this was quickly patched and changed to most damage.

The drones/nodes are important as they dictate the pace of the game for both secure and slaughter. Without them in slaughter, a legit strat would be for 2 of the 3 teams to run away if the 3rd is dominating. There would be nothing motivating them back. It could devolve into a slow match where people run for their lives dragging out the game in no mans land, but this doesn't happen because the node/drones force people to stay in the middle and thus that's where the action is.

In 72-man secure, the drones prevent prolongued 16 v 8's from happening. B team gets to assist A/C between drone pops, but if they completely ignore drones in the middle, they are losing out on a lot of potential points. The big node is worth so much that there is a lot of strategy around it. You have to head up at the right time, you have to play it safe and ensure your team is alive, you need to save your LB and cooldowns.