Results -9 to 0 of 285

Threaded View

  1. #11
    Player
    Tandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    142
    Character
    Tandy Thorne
    World
    Adamantoise
    Main Class
    Arcanist Lv 50
    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    -snip- I really do not get where this notion that, without Morale, everyone will be equal, is coming from. No. People who obtained Morale gear did so by participating in PvP (sans win trading), they're going to be far more skilled for that fact alone. People who are only just stepping foot in PvP because Frontlines looks fun are going to get destroyed either way. At least if Morale was there, they could complain that Morale gives others an advantage, which we could reply with "So go obtain some Morale gear yourself", by doing which they'd get skilled. Instead we literally just have to say "Play better", which comes off as far more insulting, nor does it encourage players to use Wolves' Den.

    With or without Morale, there is going to be a rift between existing PvPers and people trying out Frontlines. Morale provides an easy way to close the gap, even if it doesn't seem to at face value. If skill is the only deciding factor, then it's unfair because they have months worth of experience over you. If Morale is a factor, then it's unfair because they have Morale gear that you can go out and obtain as well, and learn how to PvP in the process.... With Morale there is very clearly something you can easily do to close the gap.

    Where to even begin...

    If you cant see the difference between morale (in game boost) vs personal skill (how you play/manage decisions) I can try to illustrate it.

    If we have 2 bards for instance, 1 in pvp gear and one not, and they each shoot at each other using the same skill, ungeared player does 500 dmg vs morale geared doing 1000 dmg (not even trying to use real numbers, just illustration purposes) it does not matter what the lesser geared player does....they are taking more damage period. No decisions/actions they take will mitigate that fact. Saying "Go spend 3 months gearing up and come back" is a huge turn off for many people, and honestly not something anyone wants to hear.

    If we have 2 equal geared bards, each doing 500 damage....then we get into where personal skill matters. Your personal actions and responses are what determines the outcome. If you lose, it literally is "Play More, Learn from your Mistakes". Next match you WILL do better. Its generally quantifiable advancement, the more you play the better you end up getting. Its not grinding gear to be superior.

    The mere fact you say "If skill is the only deciding factor, then it's unfair" is near mind blowing to me. What in life isnt about having skills? From work to play to leisure activities, skill plays a part in every aspect of your life. Someone is going to cook better than you, drive better than you, paint better than you etc and you will in turn be better at things than someone else. If you think playing a video game is unfair if its about skill, then what would you use to judge it???

    *Edit for new response -

    If morale is not a significant difference, then its pointless to care about it being removed. Either it makes a difference and gives an advantage or it doesn't. Pick a side.

    Also if I misunderstood your take on skill it was from this sentence -

    If skill is the only deciding factor, then it's unfair because they have months worth of experience over you.

    If I misread that I apologize.

    And as far as not having exact numbers goes, it doesnt matter for the point I was making....which is that more damage from a pvp stat is more damage. Thats not something up for debate. If you do more damage than another player with the same skill based purely on a pvp stat...no reaction or decision made in game can alter that fact. IT IS PURELY HIGHER DAMAGE PERIOD. I think that isnt unclear even with numbers I clearly stated are just to illustrate the point. I could have used 5 damage vs 6 damage and its the same thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    Do you think it's fair to pit new players against experienced players? Do you really think new players are going to be anything but frustrated by that vast gulf in skill?
    Im trying hard to put this in a way that cant be misunderstood, but anytime your new to something, I would hope you go into with a healthy realization your skills might not be as good as someone else. Some people catch on to something fast, some slow....but yes its fair to put new players in a 72 man pvp match with people who have more experience. The odds of one team being all newbies vs a team of all vets is probably not good. Its easiest to learn large scale pvp as a new player by PLAYING with the more experienced people on your team after all. Its not a 4 vs 4 match where each person has a huge part in the success or failure, its large scale 24 v 24 v 24 where its less focused on each person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    I guess that's why <insert Sports League here> pits the under 5s against the world champions so regularly.
    Since clearly your to the point your just wanting to argue I am done then. At this point I am not sure what you even want, them to keep morale in game and have tier frontlines for each skill bracket? If you honestly think this game has the population to support 72 man pvp matches for newbies, intermediates and max geared I hate to break it to you but they may as well remove all pvp cause it wont work.

    Real life sports and game pvp might have similarities, but team sports would go with arena team pvp which you dont send in the B team to fight the best.....not large scale pvp....which is more like a war....in which we obviously send in the lesser skilled privates to fight right along with the officers.

    Frontlines is going to be good entry pvp for the simple fact with 72 people you have less personal responsibility and more group responsibility. 4v4 pvp is a totally different ballgame compared to mass pvp. One mistake in arena can lose the match, one newbie screwing up with 23 others? not as big a deal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    By that logic, Crystal Tower would be a drama free environment.
    Players doing something in PVE scripted events does not equal a player vs player environment where nothing is scripted and its all human responses. You mess up a script you mess it up period. One reason why people do it so often in crystal tower is to piss others off. Its a lot harder to do that when if you mess up against real people, your team mates can try to pick up the slack because its not an instant wipe from a boss mob.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    Really? It wasn't clear that I want Wolves' Den to actually remain an event, rather than being completely obsolete and forgotten, by making it viable for training and obtaining gear before doing Frontlines? That I don't want beginners entering Frontlines, getting destroyed over and over for 30 minutes, and then never queuing again? That I want PvP to have a functioning community based around progression, rather than being "just for fun", because XIVs PvP is no where near popular enough to sustain that beyond the initial hype?
    Honestly, and I am being serious as someone who has played MMO's since Everquest 1 and done pvp in every one that has it....I have NEVER played a game where the arena pvp was considered the "training" pvp and the large scale pvp was skilled. Arena or 4v4 is usually the "ranked" or skilled pvp.....with tournaments and competitions and seasons/ladders and assorted benefits and bragging rights. Large scale pvp has always been about fun and enjoyment from my experience, but if you can tell me some games that have arena 4v4 as training and large scale as competitions I will gladly look into it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    What I'm suggesting is closer to;

    Wolves' Den (low bracket).
    Frontlines (mid bracket).
    Wolves' Den (high bracket).

    Rather than doing Wolves' Den for training, then Frontlines for competitive play. You start with Wolves' Den to get a feel for PvP and obtain i70, you do Frontlines for fun, but Morale and Wolves' Den remain there to create a stable community keeping the numbers up in both queues, and then if you want, you do the high bracket for competitive play.
    Honestly, that would never ever work. Wolves den will play totally different from large scale pvp. I am not being argumentative here, just stating a fact. Anyone who has done 4v4 and large scale pvp will tell you the same if they are honest. Everything is different, from strategies you use to how the fights are even won 4v4 is killing everyone ASAP, large scale is taking objectives. Its apples and oranges to compare the 2 to each other in anything but the simple fact they are both player vs player. Wolves den and Frontlines are totally separate beasts and they will attract somewhat different crowds. SE needs to see about adding tournaments and seasons to 4v4 to give incentive to play it.

    Also, if you gate frontlines behind doing 4v4, you will lose a LARGE amount of the population you would otherwise have. I know for myself and people I know, we all hate 4v4 these days (just too old to deal with the crap) but love mass scale pvp. If I had to go through wolves den to do frontlines? I wouldnt bother and I know we are not alone in that. Arena pvp is a huge turn off for a lot of people period.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nalien View Post
    Oh, I'm not suggesting out right locking Frontlines behind Wolves' Den. I'm suggesting keeping Morale so that people can be enticed into doing Wolves' Den, rather than it becoming a forgotten piece of content. The bonus it provides is manageable, but it should be enough to entice people into Wolves' Den. When it comes to gear people will do anything for stats (See: Novus).

    You should be able to jump into Frontlines with PvE gear and enjoy it. Morale does not prevent that, all Morale does is provide a reason to also use Wolves' Den to obtain such gear.
    And the problem with that becomes, if both are PvP and both use morale then both should give the means to buy the gear, and then no one would do wolves den because Frontlines would be an easier source of gear. And at this point, Frontlines very well might give marks to buy the gear even if morale isnt valid in it, just because we have no other real pvp system but ranks and marks.

    There needs to be changes to wolves den for the people who enjoy it I know, but it needs to be something to get people to play it FOR it alone, not using it as a carrot for other things. Having the gear be glamour-able got us in the mess of win trading after all. If it was strictly used in PVP and PVP only you wouldnt have had people going after it so hard.
    (1)
    Last edited by Tandy; 06-15-2014 at 11:48 PM.