Open world PvP Zone

[ThirdChild_ZKI]

Why can't you go and play some other PvE oriented game instead?

I wanted to highlight this, as it's a great counter to all the people that say "If you want PvP go play another game that's meant for it."

Imagine for a moment if the devs thought that way, and frequently redirected people that want a feature in game that wasn't previously there. XIV's hosuing system isn't the greatest, but imagine if they said "If you want a good housing system, go play another game"? Imagine if they said that with glamours? We'd have a pretty dry game if not for the devs being open to what the players want.

And like it or not, there are enough of us in this "PvE-focused" game that also enjoy PvP. More than you might think. Key word: ALSO. To redirect those players also impacts PvE, while actually offering them content to appeal to their requests hardly impacts it.

[AphraelAmarantha]

Why do people feel the need to add pvp into everything that's not meant to be pvp? There a lot of games out there specifically are built around pvp, why insist on adding it into games that are primarily pve focused?

Seconded.

#KeepPVPOutOfMyMMOs

[Squintina]

Just as long as there are no PVE quests in it.

I played another MMO on a PVE server, and it had "PVP zones". At first I didn't care, I would just skip those zones and let the PVPers have their fun with other PVPers....
Then a bunch of PVE quests (main and side quests) ended up in these PVP zones and jerks would come up and kill me while I was questing.

But if it's a zone that has literally only PVP content (and maybe A/Shunts since other players can still do A/S hunts in the regular maps, but no Hunting bill marks and these zones can't show up in treasure maps), and away from new player areas so new people can't accidentally walk into it while they're still learning the ins-and-outs of the game, then it doesn't seem like an unreasonable suggestion.

I would probably avoid it like the plague, but just because I don't want to enjoy it, doesn't mean others won't.

[uvuvwevwevweonyetenyevweugwemu]

Argument PvP isn't meant to be in the game is same like any fiction writers aren't meant to write their own story version or there shouldn't be any guides, farming or learning PF. Neither are speed kills or world first races. Those things are decided by the players, not the game. There are arcade/book games where the only thing you do is fit the video game goals/numbers and watch a bunch pretty cutscenes. FF14 is a players game the moment they decided to make it multiplayer game, this is consequence for any multiplayer. Only difference between PvP and PvE is who set your numbers. It's purely yours on PvP. Really winning/losing, dying/killing.. those are just numbers you can adjust to your comfort level.

This is also PvP btw, or NvN :

Hopscotch

[Shouko]

Snip.

Getting into semantics now. sure technically hopscotch can be considered a PvP situation but we're not talking about anything PvP, we're talking about killing your opponent's character with skills. Look at how many PvP only games released have a campaign or a PvE type setting, oh wait there aren't any because PvP shouldn't be mixed with PvE, not only do they have to balance skills for one side but then have to balance it for the other side without hindering the main side which is of course PvE, I don't know how well this is done as I don't PvP in MMO's anymore.

These days it's just people trying to abuse the system or cheat or min max things so they can bully another player. I don't care if honestly gets implemented or not, i'm just here debating for the sake of conversation, it's not like my opinion or any one person's opinion is going to matter.

[ThirdChild_ZKI]

Getting into semantics now. sure technically hopscotch can be considered a PvP situation but we're not talking about anything PvP, we're talking about killing your opponent's character with skills. Look at how many PvP only games released have a campaign or a PvE type setting, oh wait there aren't any because PvP shouldn't be mixed with PvE, not only do they have to balance skills for one side but then have to balance it for the other side without hindering the main side which is of course PvE, I don't know how well this is done as I don't PvP in MMO's anymore.

These days it's just people trying to abuse the system or cheat or min max things so they can bully another player. I don't care if honestly gets implemented or not, i'm just here debating for the sake of conversation, it's not like my opinion or any one person's opinion is going to matter.

As far as PvP only games with PvE campaigns, you just described nearly every first person shooter ever. Often times, the campaign serves as a means to learn the controls without being thrust right into active multiplayer battles right away. And it goes without saying that some games are known for both having a well written campaign, and highly enjoyable multiplayer.

As for having to balance things for both sides, I can't stress enough that they'd hit a decent balance point by the end of Heavensward, especially in standardizing cc skills (which everyone had back then) to 6 seconds at the most, with diminishing returns for each application (6, then 4, then 2, then 1, then immunity for 60 sec.). Many of the "useless" skills from PvE were highly useful in PvP, and examples like Miasma having one of its effects removed or Unleash being a bind in PvP and not in PvE show that balancing both was entirely possible, and already was being done.

Lastly, as far as "bullying another player" goes, some people feel the need to do that. I don't. I get no satisfaction from it, nor does it make me feel like a better player. Now, if provoked or attacked, I'll meet that with full force and won't feel the least bit bothered by it. But I'm sure there are many players that don't feel the need to actively hunt or grief other players, and it's wrong to just assume all players who'd be interested in open world PvP just want to bully others.

[Hyrist]

The point of this isn't about whether or not PvP wasn't meant to be in this game, but the point that objective-less PvP serves no purpose. And that's not 'our' perspective, it's the developers.

You can see the foundations of what SE is trying to build in every aspect of what it has for PvP and PVE content. For those citing the Dueling circle, you can see how popular that became by it's average activity. I'm sitting here right now, watching it be empty - and it serves as a michrochaem of what an open world PvP will be when the argument is 'what's a little harm with a bit of casual open world pvp?'

Of course the answer is 'nothing' but the addendum to that reply is 'It just doesn't have much value either.' It wasn't baked in from the start and there really isn't much more it offers compared to the much more efficient Frontlines - which has large zones allowing for freedom to take advantage of these zones to meet their various objectives, but their instance existence also assures there is going to be activity in them, provided the instance is filled (which is conditional for the zones themselves).

World PvP isn't my thing, so I am aware of my bias - but there is a lot of bias for those wanting to see this happen, and ignoring the calling signs of why it won't. SE will continue to expand on Frontlines to try to provide new and exciting takes on objective based PvP, because it believes in teamwork, not harassment. I'm welcome to be proven wrong - but by the actions of the developer, not the speculations of the hopeful.

Besides, there is a lot that can be improved upon in the existing PvP setup. I would like them to get that a little better at least before pushing for such a large undertaking as open world PvP and the balancing that will require. We've already seen how limited their development team is as far as capacity - that's aggravating enough as it is.

[Kisagami]

My server and guild is constantly using the dueling arena... many of my players don’t do larger PVP runs. They just like the 1 vs1 duels.

[ThirdChild_ZKI]

Slaughter was basically Secure without the non-player objectives. Team Deathmatch, basically. And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that a rather basic competitive multiplayer mode? It wasn't large amounts of players finding and taking out unsuspecting players. You knew what you queued for, the objective was quite clear. Why it was removed, other than being such an underplayed mode (thanks to being left for dead at level 50 all through Heavensward) is something you'd have to ask SE. If we wanted it back enough, that is, if enough player demand wanted to see Slaughter return as a mode, it's entirely possible. I know the PvP community has a real bad case of defeat when it comes to SE hearing us on anything, but they DO listen. Freelancer and the Dueling circle wouldn't exist otherwise. Those weren't their ideas. They were ours.

Let it also be noted that the rules for Secure, Seize, and Shatter clearly note in the descriptions of how to score, "as well as defeating other players". If they didn't wish to encourage gameplay that's only about killing another player, that would be the complete antithesis of Player versus Player gameplay that involves combat.

That said, the common issue here is people assume - and I understand there's experience behind this - that players are simply going to hunt and gank unsuspecting players. So let me ask these few questions:

• If a PvP zone is clearly marked and defined, with a notification upon trying to enter: how would it be possible for someone uninterested in PvP to "accidentally" wind up there?
• If there is no required PvE content within said area, how would it be an issue for any player uninterested in PvP?
• If a player can toggle a status to signal they do/do not wish to PvP within the area, how is it an issue to be attacked if/when you don't wish to be?
• If there's every accomodation made to ensure that someone who does not wish to PvP at all is in no way affected by, or impacted by such an area existing, then where lies the issue in allowing such an area to be added?

These questions continue to be dodged, for the sake of the "but I don't want to get ganked!" narrative. If there's absolutely no possibility of that happening, even if you're in the area and have your "Don't touch me" status on, then what's the issue?

[Alien_Gamer]

These questions continue to be dodged, for the sake of the "but I don't want to get ganked!" narrative. If there's absolutely no possibility of that happening, even if you're in the area and have your "Don't touch me" status on, then what's the issue?

Thats not the only question at play but things are starting to run around in circles in this thread. I apologize if i'm inferring too much into peoples posts but I think the main point most of the non-PvP players are trying to make is that we don't want PvP in the PvE maps but we don't have a problem with PvP players getting a new mode for a more free form style of combat and it seems most of the PvP players in this thread are in agreement that a new mode for that is fine. Simply put, I don't think there is any way you can convince someone that doesn't like PvP that bringing PvP into a PvE map will be a good thing for them or PvE in general. And conversely you will always see it as a good thing because you like PvP.

Personally, I'd be more inclined to let this thread die and open a new thread about new PvP modes instead of trying to fight for open world PvP...there may just be too much baggage with that term and this thread title for you to have the discussion you want to have.