Open world PvP Zone

[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.

[Mirch]

Open world pvp give, pve boring and toxic :cuterage:

[Wintersandman]

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.

SE has done it before. That's what is sad. FFXI had exactly what people are asking for. Dueling Circle is not the same as PvP. Jobs were not designed to go 1v1. They are meant to co-exist with each other which is why each has varying roles and we as a PvP community would like something that isn't instanced.

We literally have dead zones. DEAD. There is no activity. I challenge anyone who is against an area/zone to go to the Isles of Umbra and count how many players they see in a week. I bet you more than 80% of the people who are against the idea haven't visited it in 2 years about when Pharos Sirius HM was released.

We already have PvP why can't we expand on it. Again I am tired of having an instanced zone which all feast and frontlines are.

[Squintina]

SE has done it before. That's what is sad. FFXI had exactly what people are asking for. Dueling Circle is not the same as PvP. Jobs were not designed to go 1v1. They are meant to co-exist with each other which is why each has varying roles and we as a PvP community would like something that isn't instanced.

We literally have dead zones. DEAD. There is no activity. I challenge anyone who is against an area/zone to go to the Isles of Umbra and count how many players they see in a week. I bet you more than 80% of the people who are against the idea haven't visited it in 2 years about when Pharos Sirius HM was released.

We already have PvP why can't we expand on it. Again I am tired of having an instanced zone which all feast and frontlines are.

Edit: I made a mistake, sorry
Flags are cool.
I think I still suffer from Wow-PVP-sickness...It clouded my reaction. The horrors it was....Dark times

Edit 2: And I'm not completely against all PVP. I definitely like the idea of a PVP zone.

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.

I just get a little scared of PVP in PVE zones, but I guess with a flag (that's off by default) it's fine, and as long as SE doesn't introduce bugs like being able to pvp someone else and an AOE attack can still attack a nearby PVE player.

Original post:
Whoa, hold up. It's one thing to ask for a new map in the global map that is purely for PVP (so you guys can do pvp without a queue), but leave the PVE zones alone.
It's not about whether existing players return, it's about when new players have to do story quests there and not have to be ganked. They may not come there often, but when they do, imagine how they'll feel being killed while doing a story quest. And while you may not go after low level people, others might, that's what happens in every MMO that has PVE zones with PVP in them.

PVP-only zone = good
PVE-zone with PVP = makes new people want to quit

[Wintersandman]

Whoa, hold up. It's one thing to ask for a new map in the global map that is purely for PVP (so you guys can do pvp without a queue), but leave the PVE zones alone.
It's not about whether existing players return, it's about when new players have to do story quests there and not have to be ganked. T

You didn't read any other post. I already stated you would have to flag yourself, toggle something, or etc to be engaged in PvP. I already stated multiple times I don't want to Force PvP on anyone. People are worried about Dev time. This would be any easy way to do that. IE Look at Ballista from FFXI. It was an Open World area that you HAD TO REGISTER TO PARTICPATE in the on-going PvP match.

If you're going to jump into a thread you should read the rest of it. Along with everyone else because there have been these points clarified multiple times.

"BUT THE NEW PLAYERS GETTING GANKED" Has been answered and counterpointed endlessly. No one is asking to go around ganking people.

[Guesswhat]

Open world PvP =/= Anarchy PvP. Why do so many people equate that? Even when it's clearly stated in this thread that it's not.

This is how it looks like if you just surface read this thread (and all other OW PvP threads):

PvP players: Willing to go the extra mile to compromise with PvE.
PvE players: PvP is cancer and should die!

Of course there is more to it...

I did see one other good argument against open world pvp though. If the system is exploitable, like being able to attack players with PvP flag -etc- set off, it would be very bad for the game. I can understand the concern perhaps, but the idea assumes it would work.

The other "good" argument is: "I will get ganked", which assumes some sort of PvP Anarchy.

[Hyrist]

The other "good" argument is: "I will get ganked", which assumes some sort of PvP Anarchy.

Again, I've already listed the reasons why you'll get instanced based over 'open world', but I'll go over the one you've overlooked again.

Having instance based insures activity for anything objective related. Without it, you're talking about roaming an empty zone when objectives cannot be completed if you're playing during in active times. For Frontlines - having enough people to actually participate in the core Objective mechanic is a prerequisite for the instance to exist in the first place - guaranteeing that objective based play and team play are the priorities. Short of that, yes, is Anarchy PvP, which really is the only innate value of open world.

So don't pretend you are compromising. Frontlines is the compromise already. Large zones with many modes and multiple objectives enticing groups to split and diverge as needed. Asking for continual compromises until you actually get exactly what you want isn't compromise.

And to correct another argument based off of fallacy - for those who don't remember - Slaughter was not objective-less Deathmatch. It was point-based deathmatch and the largest portions of points were off of NPC targets at specific locations that re-spawned regularly- which wasn't all that different from Shatter, except if you think of the ICE as capable of fighting back. I still prefer it to Shatter, honestly.

So, here are your list of reasons why not:
- Instancing Guarantees adequate participation in order for the event to occur - Open World does not. (This also prevents the need for a World Timer on events and allows people to do an event when there's enough people available - and not be limited to an arbitrary schedule.)

- Instancing Resets the map regularly so lingering map objectives (think PvP forts) do not become monopolized for long periods of time. - Open World frequently have favorites/dominating groups per player pool.

- Guaranteed participation assures that groups are (for the most part) balanced as far as warm bodies go (not class balance, this is more or less on the player base) This is better enforced in 4v4 in which the parties are actually forced to be balanced - we'll see how balanced something like Rival Wings becomes. Open World does not regulate this by default almost guaranteeing unbalanced participation. The only way to resolve that would to make it single-player queue only to evenly distribute forces,which would not go over well to any PvP community.

- With Open World the likelyhood of one on one combat would necessitate better balancing of classes for 1v1 combat - and SE can't even balance Teamplay here, let's be honest. But at least with focused objective play they have less factors to work against.



There is so much that can and does go wrong with Open World that a development team focused on making PvP accessible, fun and team-centric (Remember, they're looking to MOBAs and other E-Sports for inspiration, which is pointedly not Open World) is not going to look at Open World and think "Yeah, we can handle this workload." This is not including how notorious SE is right now with the breath and depth (or lack thereof) of PvP right now. This isn't as easy as programming an instance. You're asking a major undertaking that is severely divergent in both development and theme.

It doesn't bother me that you want it ,but you generally don't seem to get that the moment you ask for Open World, you're not asking for a compromise, you're asking something extra. The game would still be healthy if PvP did not exist. PvP would still be going on if it was just The Feast or the Fold, and they added decent rewards to that. But they added something large scale with decently large maps with varying objective styles - Frontlines. You're asking them to cross a line and created something constantly open - there is no compromise to that; just debating the rule-set within the thing you would be getting.




Given all of this, this is what I speculate they will do:
They will likely continue to add different types of Frontline content to continue to satisfy the objective desires contained in Open World play, while addressing Open World's faults - one of the key components of that is keeping it instanced. I simply don't see enough of a reason for them to cross the line to Open World PvP, when they have a multitude of readily available alternatives.

But don't feel alone in this frustration and disappointment - there's very little to be said of Open World PvE content either, which is another reason why I feel crossing that line for PvP isn't something they're going to support.

As far as my personal desire - I don't want it because I know they won't do it right. PvP needs to be built well from the ground up with a large development team behind it. While I do enjoy a bit of the PVP we have going now, I don't have the confidence that SE has the capacity, nor the motivation, to make that level of investment and make it right. I'd rather they not do it than to get something potentially more catastrophic than Diadem.

So let me turn the phrase. Look at our track record for PvP and other content in this game right now. Let's set aside the speculation of 'should' or 'will they'. Tell me honestly, in your assessment, can SE, with everything we seen, truly make a satisfactory Open World PvP? I'm sorry to say, I don't think so - and I'd rather them make a separate project (game) from the ground up to support that desire.

Until then, I'll sate myself with the upcoming Dissidia game and Frontlines.

[Alien_Gamer]

We already have PvP why can't we expand on it. Again I am tired of having an instanced zone which all feast and frontlines are.

That SE did it in FFXI is beside the point, this game is not FFXI. Its nice they did it there but that doesn't mean it could or should be done here, the same holds true for any other game. That any given map is dead doesn't change the fact that you want to remove it from PvE and make it into a PvP zone. Why not just ask for a new PvP map tailored to PvP instead of taking something away from PvE? If you dont want an instance mode then ask for a non-instanced mode for PvP.

So which is your goal, to get new modes/maps for PvP or to force PvP into a PvE map?

[Wintersandman]

That SE did it in FFXI is beside the point, this game is not FFXI. Its nice they did it there but that doesn't mean it could or should be done here, the same holds true for any other game. That any given map is dead doesn't change the fact that you want to remove it from PvE and make it into a PvP zone. Why not just ask for a new PvP map tailored to PvP instead of taking something away from PvE? If you dont want an instance mode then ask for a non-instanced mode for PvP.

So which is your goal, to get new modes/maps for PvP or to force PvP into a PvE map?

You missed the point entirely. It was an example of how PvE and PvP could co-exist in a manner that doesn't promote ganking and can be done in an open world Zone.

You don't have to take away from one to provide another aspect. Which is again the reason why I brought up FFXI. It was done in the past and can be done again.

Should is subjective based upon the interpreter.

The skill reduction from 3.0 - 4.0 is the most backwards thing SE could have done to enable co-existing of PvP in PvE environments.

My objective? Why does it have to be one or the other?