Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum

PVE Server and PVE zones - Preliminary announcement.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Macjimm said:

Old Question - unanswered: 

  •  three nations will have 2 spawns - main pvp and secondary pve.

Can the Devs elaborate on these spawns?  Explain: Does the character differ between spawns?  If so is a player limited to PvE or PvP character based on the initial choice? Or is it simply a different spawn location?

The game already has a choice of spawn points for new players. For Britain these are Kingston/Port Royal or West End. I cannot remember if you get your first outpost for nothing at your spawn point, but aside from that there is no real difference (except West End is a lot easier if you are starting off on your own). I started at West End but no longer have an outpost there.

The more important question is whether you can set a PvE Capital to teleport to. There are good reasons why PvE players might want to teleport to KPR - to sell ships, for instance. But for other PvE players might prefer to have a capital inside the PvE zone.

There doesn't appear to be any intention of having PvE only players, just PvE only areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you will have one character and you will choose where to start off in the game. Either you start like we have it right now - pvp zones which are either your capital or the bermuda shallows. And you will also be given the option to start in the PvE zone. But you will be playing one character that can do it all.

Try PvE - go PvP - come back to PvE-

Vice verca..

start off with PvP - hate it -> go to PvE. Maybe try PvP later again.

 

Assets will be wiped. All ships you have will be wiped. Thats for everybody. PvP and PvE. No remorse :P The reason behind this wipe has been explained and nobody can be secure. Noone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16/03/2017 at 11:01 PM, admin said:

Hello Captains. 

This is a preliminary announcement - official statement will be provided later both on steam and here.

  • PVE server will be closed down. All assets will be transferred to the redeemables on both PVP Global and PVP EU (new server names). Transferring players will be able to choose themselves and stay on the server of their liking. We understand that it is painful but with forthcoming wipe you are not losing anything.

 

Would you kindly tell me what is PvP Global compared to PvP EU, please?

I have been playing PvP One EU because I live in Italy (ex-Australia) and am playing in the Naval Action French nation as part of the Le Legion Etrangère clan. How will the change effect me? Should I be playing in the Global or EU?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be a long term mistake to completely separate the pve and pvp world or realms. because it takes away from player freedom and options.

why not have players be able to shift from pve to pvp when they want too?

why not have players be able to shift from pvp to pve when they want too?

by making pacific a pve zone that is completely separate from the Atlantic pvp zone, two different realms that one cannot experience when they so choose it really just sounds so limiting for players. why even have them on the same server then?

Again,  i point to EVE Online, the way they set up the server realm is an example of WHAT WORKS what makes almost everyone happy.

I can promise you that if EVE Online had a separate space for the care-bears and a separate space for the pvp'rs that game would be dead by now. What makes EVE so special and groundbreaking is how well they blended PVE and PVP into one seamless universe.

naval action can be just as balanced and fun if done right on the high seas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO there should not be 100% safe PVE zone on PVP server. This will simply be outta game and can only have negative effect on PVP mechanics.
Safe zones around capitals is all that is needed.  Further away from the capital more dangerous it is for the player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On March 22, 2017 at 5:26 AM, William Livingston Alden said:

nothing can be abused when u are flagged permanent as a PVE player what u cant change (is a permanent choice u set at the beginning and cant be undone). so u have three kind of players the bots, the PVP and the PVE players.

and you are not the speaker here man!

 

Your right, a PVE only ship sitting outside a port to spy on PVP players movements, or following a PVP players armada, without the fear of attack would never be abused.

Transporting resources on invulnerable ships would never be abused as well.

How you cannot see this I don't understand, unless your the type that would be abusing the system which is far more likely.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PcE zones on PvP/E servers are a good thing. It allows switching gameplay (PvE---> PvP --> PvP/E). Pure PvP fighters should be happy to get more potential opponents on the server (PvE-ers tempted to try PvP). Being on the same server favour PvE-PvP switching : no need to  earn gold and craft or buy ships again. That's good. Being able to play faster and more easily favours gameplay and game experience. 

Just make the PvE zones in the Gulf of Mexico more appealing with AI aggressiveness (bots attacking PvE-ers) and more (imaginary) islands and it'd be perfect.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LeBoiteux said:

PcE zones on PvP/E servers are a good thing. It allows switching gameplay (PvE---> PvP --> PvP/E). Pure PvP fighters should be happy to get more potential opponents on the server (PvE-ers tempted to try PvP). Being on the same server favour PvE-PvP switching : no need to  earn gold and craft or buy ships again. That's good. Being able to play faster and more easily favours gameplay and game experience. 

Just make the PvE zones in the Gulf of Mexico more appealing with AI aggressiveness (bots attacking PvE-ers) and more (imaginary) islands and it'd be perfect.

I think the issue with making AI aggressive is a lot of PVE only players just want to trade and craft, they really have no interest in fighting unless it's ganking solo AI ships.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Justme said:

I think the issue with making AI aggressive is a lot of PVE only players just want to trade and craft, they really have no interest in fighting unless it's ganking solo AI ships.

I for one won't speak for the others. I'd like AI aggressiveness. The only thing I know is that, when AI agressive was on, the only players I know who complained were PvP-ers who didn't want to be tagged by bots, which is understandable. See e. g. : 

AI aggressiveness in PvE zones would make it more realistic, more fun and would add a small danger while trading. If you want to avoid them, just sail away. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, koltes said:

IMHO there should not be 100% safe PVE zone on PVP server. This will simply be outta game and can only have negative effect on PVP mechanics.
Safe zones around capitals is all that is needed.  Further away from the capital more dangerous it is for the player. 

Exclusion zones around the nat capital ports is a dead zone for new players. I know of very few PvE (or PvP) players who liked the change to the Combat missions when they were suddenly no longer available in nat capital regions. Now you are advocating a situation which will only frustrate PvP rookies.

I also don't know where you get off calling any server a "PvP" server. Those distinctions are obviously going away. GameLabs does not want to foot the bill to keep a dedicated PvE server running.

What exactly are you afraid of? Being PvE inclined isn't some contagious disease that will 'infect' other players. People will either want to engage in PvP or they won't. One side of your mouth has argued that a sandbox game shouldn't impose mechanic based rules on players. Now the other side is arguing against any concessions for PvE players whose server is about to disappear. Seems you have a very narrow view of which players should be allowed to play NA the way they want.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My views on PVE and PVP convergence on single server.

 

Quote

 

What about an option (tickbox,toggle?) at the login where you can select PVP or PVE on server you are on. PVP option nothing changes we continue as PVP server had.

Choose PVE and you get some buff so other players cant engage you and you cant be caught up in any instance of players joining other side to get you,etc. of course then the argument will be about sailing around and "only" finding people who they cant attack. To which I think id rather see at least some other life on the seas but cant be engaged than see nothing... for an age...

so essentially PVE and PVP operate on the same map and server but are independent of each other combat wise at least.

This would require some sort of cooldown between switching mode to stop likely loophole, grey area carry on, say 24hrs cooldown if you want to switch between PVE and PVP.

And regards possible scouting or abuse of PVE "invulnerability"

An NPC ambush feature might solve it somewhat.

NPC would be aggressive and could launch an unforeseeable attack on player. Always possible but more so the slower one sailed and also if in enemy waters for instance. Maybe I wrongfully assume PVE players wouldn't mind the occasional random PVE attack? And might just make it not worthwhile for a PVP main scouting on PVE toon.

further to this make defeat of such an ambush quite a good yield to appeal to PVE player even?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

The only way to fight in the PVE zones will be to attack smugglers - which will from the patch create outlaw battle (FFA) - the mechanic that you can test on the testbed.

 

Does this mean Fleet battles vs NPC fleets will disappear for PVE players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wraith said:

I'm very sympathetic to the PvE players losing their server. But you have to understand that if implemented poorly, this integration literally could infect the PvP server in disastrous ways.

If PvE players under a handful of these proposals are invulnerable and can sail freely, affecting the economy and participating in the game outside of PvE while remaining invulnerable, then you will quickly have the situation where all trading/crafting/econ is done by players or their alts under PvE conditions.

This eliminates privateering and piracy. It also eliminates sheep dogging, or the protection of traders and econ by PvP warships. This is a big deal.

I don't trust the dev's given the hash they've made of other decisions to implement this in a non-game-breaking way.  So while I would very much like a situation where we have null-sec/high-sec and provide PvE-inclined players content while integrating them into a more well rounded world, realizing this must entail compromise and very careful thought.

@Angus McGregor I wanted to answer to you, but would just repeat what Wraith said.

PVE zone would either separate two player base making interaction impossible, or affect the rest of PVP. 

Instead of PVE zone capital area that is not so rich in resources and other bonuses (but still available to survive and provide), but is a great trading hub (providing that economy is player driven only and NPC goods are obsolete). This would bring people together in capitals. Also special sort of missions allowing safe leveling from and around capitals would bring high and low level players together. 

As much as I feel for PVE guys, they need to undersrand that this game is mean to be PVP. No... not just PVP. Right from the start majority of players (most of whom no longer play for these very reasons) wanter hardcore cut throat PVP. No restrictions whatsoever.

Having PVE guys playig on PVP server has ALREADY affected my game and the game for others who wants the freedom to act.

As far as I can see devs dont have any mechanics implemented to PROTECT PVP economy from PVE influence.

We also having a hard time to find PVP in the OW. I feel that now everyone will be just hiding in their PVE zone and do everything from there. Where am I supposed to be hunting then?

It wouldn't be a disaster to PVP player if regions would become more meaningful to clans so clans could claim regions for higher bonuses, production, larger docks etc. This would bring people out of the safe closeof PVE zone. Last time I've checked nothing like this is planned to clash players interests outside PVE zones.

Does this answers your question about my concerns?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Wraith said:

I'm very sympathetic to the PvE players losing their server. (1) But you have to understand that if implemented poorly, this integration literally could infect the PvP server in disastrous ways.

If PvE players under a handful of these proposals are invulnerable and can sail freely, affecting the economy and participating in the game outside of PvE while remaining invulnerable, (2) then you will quickly have the situation where all trading/crafting/econ is done by players or their alts under PvE conditions.

(2a) This eliminates privateering and piracy. It also eliminates sheep dogging, or the protection of traders and econ by PvP warships. This is a big deal.

I don't trust the dev's given the hash they've made of other decisions to implement this in a non-game-breaking way.  So while I would very much like a situation where we have null-sec/high-sec and provide PvE-inclined players content while integrating them into a more well rounded world, (3) realizing this must entail compromise and very careful thought.

1- I totally agree with you, if the merger is done poorly, this will probably cause so much more animosity and resentment, it will probably kill the game, which I know is not the developers' goal. They have already invested so much time and effort to just throw it all away.

2- I can see the possibility of "cheating the system" and having players take advantage of poorly set up "immunity" to transport goods from one zone to the other or within the same zone. However, if the economy is set up in a such a way no single nation can be self sufficient and/or no single zone can produce everything, therefore creating inter-dependence, then this will force players to transport goods between the two areas and create a consistent flow of goods. Some PvE'ers will even feel bold enough to come out of their "safe" zone and venture into the PvP arena.

The PvE protection should only exist within the PvE zone for PvE players (with or without smuggler flag). Once a PvE player elects to take a chance and the safe border is crossed, they are fair game. PvE players outside the safe area will no longer be immune to PvP attacks. Which in my opinion adds more players into the PvP zone.

As for PvP'ers whose play style is primarily to challenge fellow players, not granting them immunity within the PvE zone will circumvent the concern some players have about abusing the system. They will be targeted by other PvP'ers within the safe zone. Obviously, if PvE players are granted such immunity in their zone, then PvE'rs should not be allowed to join PvP battles against other PvP'ers to protect allies bringing them goods, they only thing they can do is sit there and helplessly watch a pirate chase down an allied trader!

As far as creating alts to "safely" transport goods from one zone to the other, I do not believe it will be a viable option. The reason is this: in the PvP zone, which is the larger one, no one will be safe from attack. A PvP player will have to make sure to catch up with any trader before it reaches the safe zone, just like everyone does it right now. You want to catch a prey before it makes it to the safety of it's shore batteries. It will be the exact same, you just need to catch up with it before it crosses into the safe zone.

By "forcing" or enticing PvE players to come out of their safe area to look elsewhere for goods they need, then:

2a- Privateering/Piracy will remain quite alive, who knows, maybe even more exciting. I'm not sure what "sheep dogging" is though, so I can't comment on it(excuse my ignorance). If what the moderators have indicated is what is going to be implemented, then more people will be in the 2/3 map that is open to all. PvP'ers can attack PvE'rs and other PvP'ers. The protection of traders by PvP warships will definitely be even more needed if the goods flowing one way or the other are crucial for the economies/crafting of either zone.

3- Again, I wholeheartedly agree with you, that's the way things will be acceptable to the majority of the players.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/17/2017 at 9:01 AM, admin said:

Hello Captains. 

This is a preliminary announcement - official statement will be provided later both on steam and here.

  • PVE server will be closed down. All assets will be transferred to the redeemables on both PVP Global and PVP EU (new server names). Transferring players will be able to choose themselves and stay on the server of their liking. We understand that it is painful but with forthcoming wipe you are not losing anything.

we know much differently now :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the heads up on "no redeemables at all", including cash. This is at least a good start. Two of our clan have made level 50 today in just a couple of hours and we still have masses of stock sat in port. I think if you were going to go onestep  further, I'd wipe rank and craft XP too. This way we'd all start equil when the new guys join, when it goes live. Keeps it all fair. Players with all that PvP experience will soon rank back and it will be an even playing field. BPs should be blanked too, for the same reason.

Still not sold on the PvP PvE merger though, but we can learn to love :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I consider the proposal the worse it looks to me.

Consider this hypothetical: A square map; 4 ports, one per corner.  Dull right?  Ok, spice it up a bit, change it to a circle.  Add more ports.  Vastly better, huh? Nope.  Utterly dull.

What makes the full map so much more interesting is all sorts of stuff is in the way.  Down in the gulf of Mexico all you have to do is point the ship, set it off and walk away, come back after it's grounded itself on the far shore, get it off the mud and sail a few minutes to your destination on the right or left.  Rinse and repeat.

BORING.

 

It doesn't need to be that way: Tag the game assets to what kind of purpose a virtual world has (Any PvP, PvE, noob fighter PvP, master fighter PvP, whatever) and simply display only identically tagged game assets to each player per his own tag. They could run n virtual worlds on any one machine, each sharing the same and each having their own private-to-that-tag game assets.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Jesters-Ink said:

Thanks for the heads up on "no redeemables at all", including cash. This is at least a good start. Two of our clan have made level 50 today in just a couple of hours and we still have masses of stock sat in port. I think if you were going to go onestep  further, I'd wipe rank and craft XP too. This way we'd all start equil when the new guys join, when it goes live. Keeps it all fair. Players with all that PvP experience will soon rank back and it will be an even playing field. BPs should be blanked too, for the same reason.

Still not sold on the PvP PvE merger though, but we can learn to love :D.

Wiping experience makes no sense at all.

1. Day two of launch ranks wont be 'equal' anymore anyway. New players will still continue to join. Do we wipe experience every time a new player joins?

After a couple of months any new player, would be joining what they are now??

2. As your a clanner the effect of a wipe would not be so bad.

Us casual are do as we like, and play when we can players. Those clanners who are gifted gold and ships by their sugar daddies that they then run around for have taken the easy route.

We casual/independents level up on a much harder path.

You would, in a single move devastate the player base more than any wipe or patch ever has.

The experience lvls of players has been guaranteed from the beginning, its the one core constant through these painful  trials that many have clung to.

You can always ask the DEVS to wipe your own account if you feel the need to. I am sure they would happliy oblige.

Edited by Honourable Bluetooth
Grammar spellcheck
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...