Yoshida-san: Smoother Camera Options, Separate PVP Rules, and Long Term Goals for 2.0

[Orophin]

Hi Orophin,

Ah, I was referring to StarCraft II and their hyper-competitive Online Player vs. Player matches and rules sets. They made enhancements and different rules, units / attacks for their "PvE" (Story Mode, Player vs. AI / Bosses) compared to their "PvP" matches (where they have those Tens of Thousands of Dollars Major League Gaming Tournaments, etc.). In other words, they realized that there are things that work great for when a player plays in a controlled environment (Story Mode, against the Queen of Blades, etc.), but then had a separate rules set / unit roster for their Tournaments / PvP.

Sorry, when I see Blizzard lumped in with MMO talk, I just assume WoW is the first comparison. :P

[Alhanelem]

I don't like the way they handled starcraft at all.

If you play the single player then think you're ready to try playing some multiplayer games, you're in for a huge shock. Different rules just make it that much harder to get into it because what you thought you learned playing one mode means nothing in the other.

[Orophin]

I don't like the way they handled starcraft at all.

If you play the single player then think you're ready to try playing some multiplayer games, you're in for a huge shock. Different rules just make it that much harder to get into it because what you thought you learned playing one mode means nothing in the other.

There was a post in another thread suggesting that they give a separate set of coefficients for abilities during PvP. Maybe that could work. Of course the dev team probably have whatever they want implemented already, so we'll just have to wait and see what solution they've come up with.

[Xaimera]

I really hope they put the camera option slider back in 2.0 lol.
No dizziness please I beg of you ; ;

[Siegtaru]

Very nice post.

I heavily agree with you on your third point, concerning longevity of gear. Not to bring up the forbidden name of FFXI on these forums, but they somehow managed to make a lot of end game gear from previous expansions remain useable and worth keeping, even if only on a situational basis. There were many interesting and coveted pieces of gear from early in the game's life that people still wanted even after a few expansions down the road. They all had some unique stat(s) and benefits on them that made them irreplaceable in a sense.

I don't think it would be terribly difficult to achieve the same effect with select pieces of gear in ARR. Even the Relics as they are now; perhaps you'll eventually be able to obtain a better weapon in one aspect over the Relic, but that extra effect on it (such as the Holy/Flare enhancements on the WHM/BLM Relics respectively.) may make it irreplaceable in certain situations, when combined with its other also viable stats. By FFXIV 1.0 standards, that'd be a longshot, but maybe in ARR SE can work something out. Extend this quality to gear such as Darklight as well, and a few other interesting pieces of gear, and maybe we'll actually have decent sets of spoils from earlier content-based adventures and not feel forced to toss it because it's utterly useless.

[strallaalaa]

keeping old content alive with the materia system should be really easy, put timers on the best materia, that way we need to do them everytime the timers on your materia running out. add ways to 100% stack materia in the hardest content with like 1% drop rates, stuff like that will keep us farming them for the best stuff to stack.

[Alhanelem]

There was a post in another thread suggesting that they give a separate set of coefficients for abilities during PvP. Maybe that could work. Of course the dev team probably have whatever they want implemented already, so we'll just have to wait and see what solution they've come up with.

Generally the only special rule PvP usually needs is all damage/effect durations/resistances scaled by a percentage to go with the fact that in most MMORPGS, monsters have inflated hit points compared to players. This is designed to make PvP playable otherwise people just go around oneshotting each other.

[Zumi]

It mostly has to do with CC that needs to be changed in PvP. Like in PvE you can have a CC move that lasts like 1 min but in PvP it should last something like 6 seconds.

For example in PvE you can sleep someone for 1 min, but if you did that in PvP like in a arena type setting say its 5v5 if you can get a sleepga off then take out their whole team 1 by 1 because you were able to get it off that isn't quite fair.

[Alhanelem]

Well thats the sort of thing I'm talking about. Numbers need to be tweaked/scaled for PvP- but you don't need totally different rules. Fire should still be fire. Second wind should still be second wind, etc. Nothing should be functionally different for the most part. Otherwise you just make it harder for people to get on board with.

[Kiara]

PvP and PVE should be completly seperate, because I honestly feel they are impossible to balance.

Something that works great in PvE might be totally off balance in PvP. Like positioning for combos, it was a good thing kept it less tank and spank. Made you go into spots that put you in danger to get off a combo. But in PvP with people jumping and runing in circles around you obviously this would not work at all.

Everytime something gets changed in PvE because it was not working well in PvP... at least in my opinion it is a very bad move on the devs part. This is a final fantasy PvE > PvP, I hope the devs always keep this in mind.

No, No, No, No. PvP and PvE should be seperate, but not seperate rules. Everything you do in PvE should work exactly as the player expects when he or she plays PvP. If you treat them like different games it is very disjointing and a barrier to entry.

They are carefully desgining the spells and abilities of the game such that they shouldn't need seperate rules in the first place.

They should be different parts of the same game, not treated like two totally seperate games.

Well said Xatsh. I agree with all your points about separating PVE and PVP.

Alhanelem, I see what you're saying and I'm definitely not advocating something dramatic like having "brand new Weaponskills / Spells" that only exist in PVP matches, etc.

The problem I can see is the inevitable Nerfing / Tweaking / Changes that 100% of the Players will have to suffer, due to some "exploit" or "balance issues" in PVP Death Matches (a more limited audience).

Beyond the examples that Xatsh brought up, I can see scenarios like:

* PVP Problem: "White Mage doesn't have enough to do in PVP Death Matches / Protect is too powerful to run on 30:00 minute timer. Thus, let's nerf Protect, and make it last only 4:00 minutes, so that the White Mage has to stop and recast it more often in a PVP Match."

Result: All the players who don't play PVP now have to suffer with a nerfed, shorter Timer on Protect in the main game (PVE), for the sake of making PVP "more exciting / balanced."


* PVP Problem: "Some player finds an 'exploit' in a PVP Death Match, where they use 2 specific Weaponskills back-to-back, and it results in a near instant Win."
Result: "100% of the players in PVE suffer the nerf, as they change those 2 Weaponskills just to make PVP Matches more fair."


* PVP Problem: "Paladin's New AOE Buff covers too large of an area in PVP matches. It's unfair and too powerful being able to cover all his/her teammates."
Result: "Let's reduce the range of the AOE Buff to be 50% of what it once was. Now all Players suffer this 50% Reduction in Range, even in PVE for the sake of PVP."


I see a later post where you mention tweaking #'s (coefficients). "Yes," that's what I talking about in separating PVE and PVP mainly (besides possible Human vs. Human exploits that later the PVE game). It'd just be frustrating to see game-wide changes for *everyone* (and most players enjoy the PVE (vs. Bosses, AI), not the PVP Death Matching), made for the sake of trying to balance PVP games.