PvP Exp: Nerf and thoughts

[Coldbrand]

2nd should be 500,000 if they're doing this.

[Hyrist]

Or... just remove EXP from PvP all together.

Sure, if you want to remove any lower level interest from PvP. Which means they may as well return the level restriction back to 70.

Do you just not get the idea that SE has multiple objectives in making this choice. Here, let me spell them out for anyone who hasn't caught on to first year economics yet.

Premise: PvP Does not exist in isolation - it is part of the full game, a full game that is PvE centrist. No matter how much you try to pressure PvP as it's own thing, people will compare it and weight it against PvE progress, as the pressure to progress in PvE is constant. Trying to treat Exp as a completely separate game is bad design, even if its abilities are separate for balancing issues. Anyone who plays PvP, takes away from their PvE time to do so. Within the context of the MMO, SE has to balance time spent in PvP against the investment in PvE it wants its players continually within.

At Max-Level-Only PvP, this was offset by tomes. While it was a small amount, those who played PvP religiously still gained the tomes they needed to maintain at endgame. Now that PvP is available at level 30, those level 30 players need their compensation as well. As their progress is far more defined by their level, this means exp.

Which brings up the second point? Why is PvP at level 30 now? Well that's simple, to allow those who are interested in PvP to play earlier. Having the component of the game they want to play gated behind 70 levels of grind is tedious at best, especially considering the systems are so separate now as a PvP player won't really learn as much from PvE about PvP.

Third, as it's been established that this game is in complete isolated bubbles from one another we have the acknowledge the DPS queue issues which PvP Experience Points help solve and diversify.

This means players of all walks come to PvP, and give the new system a shot, which means more dedicated PvP players will try it out - and realize it's fun. Players who are having fun remain invested in the game and will likely participate in content outside PvP more too, meaning more sustained subscriptions.

By infusing Exp into PvP, it has provided more engagement into the game all around. However, if that's not worthwhile, the game as a whole will start to suffer the same problems as before. Hopefully by 4.1 they'll get their reward structure for this straight and maintain the above goals by doing so.

TL;DR

1. PvP Starts at 30 now, those who are coming to the game to PvP need to have a form of compensation for the time invested that goes directly towards character progress- because PvP is not the central function of the game, PvE is.
2. DPS Queues in PvE are horrid and need as many alternatives as you can get.
3. PvP needs a stream of constant new blood in order to remain relevant, therefore giving incentives for PvE players to try out PvP at all times and phases and with different jobs will insure there PvP is given the best shot it can.


So no, nerfing Exp at all from the baseline established at 4.0 is bad. At all times should PvP provide better exp than waiting in DPS Queue. Winning should be comparable exp to dungeons, time investment wise. This was the opposite direction of where it needed to go.

[pastperfect]

Except you're forgetting the part that even if it worked EXACTLY that way and it was all try hards a third of the players every game receive nothing, how the hell is that any fun? The rewards for winning should be for gear, glamours, items, not experience.

PVP already has mount and glamour rewards for winning.

100 Seal Rock wins = Commander Coat set, good luck getting that though since no one plays SR.
100 wins in Shatter = White ADS
200 wins in Frontline (any) = Red ADS
100 Wins in Frontline (any) = GC Horse
200 Wins in Feast = Mini airship segway

[Mandudez]

No, I think people are upset that the RNG of whether you get a team that gives a @#$@ or not determines how much character XP your time is worth.
PvP currency and PvP XP? sure, makes sense
Participation rewards (tomes, character XP, etc.)? Not so much

How many people would DF dungeons if the amount of XP you received was determined by how many wipes your party received (no deaths = full xp, 1+deaths = half xp) and/ore how long it took to complete the dungeon?

Do you have any idea how many matches are heavily swayed by just 1-2 people? It's insane how many matches that are won by simply guiding people to attack at the same spot or playing smart and going for assists rather than trying to be greedy and get fevers every match.

[Maeka]

Better way to do it:

"If you lose by 50% or more, you get nerfed XP"

Example #1: A game ends with 1600/1500/1200. -- All 3 teams get full XP.
Example #2: A game ends with 1600/1500/850. -- All 3 teams get full XP.
Example #3: A game ends with 1600/1500/799 -- 3rd place team gets nerfed XP.

Because seriously, if you do less than half of the winning team... you weren't even trying whatsoever.

Do you have any idea how many matches are heavily swayed by just 1-2 people? It's insane how many matches that are won by simply guiding people to attack at the same spot or playing smart and going for assists rather than trying to be greedy and get fevers every match.

It is rare, especially in the 72 player matches, that one or two people can sway a match that big. One player can step up and be a man and lead everybody to victory, sure. But 1-2 players aren't going to cause a team to lose.

Now, I say this, as I actually solely won a match myself by capturing all 3 main nodes on the map (absolutely nobody was defending them, lol.) this happens so very rarely that it isn't really even worth talking about.

[Zumi]

2nd place shouldn't get the same as 3rd place.

[Rilasha]

Yes, 2/3 of the whole match is punished for losing and this doesn't stop AFKers from AFKing... While the motivation for winning is all great, it doesn't obviously stop the problem that was coming up.

I would suggest an exp gain of 1-5x (scaled accordingly to level, so level 30 is 1x and 69 is 5x) the total of damage dealt/healing done or something. It includes damage to ice if you want to play that game solely as well. Overhealing might be an issue though, but people would be incentivised to play healers and actually heal people. That makes it along the lines of what we saw originally, while preventing any AFKers from getting exp since they do no damage or heal.

I'm okay with a bonus on 1st place still though, but punishing people who do a lot on losing teams isn't great.

[Hyrist]

Not getting into the opinion debate further as I've stated my peace. I'll just be fact checking from here on out.

Speaking of which, need to fact-check myself. While Frontline is as said, a net nerf. Feast has received a net buff to rewards. Victoring earning around the ballpark of 350k with a win @68 with losses around 110K (Which is less than 50k less from previously.) With quick matches in Feast and the chances of Win/Loss a lot cleaner. This ends up being the more worthwhile PvP method, exp wise.

[odeimouto]

SE nerfed it for a good reason. It's like a 24 man raid run, players slack because they know they can. And I'm not talking about people who actively AFK because most of the time they get kicked in some way or the other. I'm talking about players who might throw out a heal every 30 sec, DD doing subpar player damage and ice damage, players aimlessly running around and most of all players avoiding fights. This is especially true for 72 man games. Same issues were also common in Seal Rock when players were farming tomes. They were just chilling next to nodes rather than actively trying to capture nodes or gaining points through kills.

Just compare all of these issues to a dungeon run, if you play poorly the dungeon is obviously going to take a longer time. The issue here is that players can get away with playing poorly, the timer is set and it's going to end within 20 min regardless if you play good or not. DF is a gamble when it comes to getting a good party.

No new blood is ever going to stay in PvP with Shatter being the only mode running in Frontlines which is basically a PvE mode. This mode is not a good mode if people want to PvP. And if you think increasing the EXP is somehow going to make new blood stay, good luck with that. They are definitely staying for a short while until they hit 70, after that no.

[Hyrist]

That's a very cynical way of looking at it, and it reveals a very negative bias towards potential players. Anyways, there's no sense arguing against what amounts to elitism. "We should discourage players because they're terrible"

I'd hate to say it, you're not discouraging the behavior this way. Players who are going to be lazy, are going to be lazy regardless of the reward structure involved. You don't punish the majority of players for the bad actions of the scant few. People who wish to learn, which is the majority, are going to learn the mechanics of their job and the game regardless of what level they're going to start at.

Let me put this into perspective - Final Fantasy XI's punishing game mechanics and terrible reward structure benefited efficient play, but it never, ever got rid of those who took the path of least resistance and preformed poorly. All it did was bleed the player base to a small dedicated niche. That's not the aims of this game's developers, nor of the game mode itself.