Sandboxes and player categories

[Sir Texas Sir]

14 hours ago, Zoky said:

True that. Without casuals game will die. Just look at WildStar, they try to cater to hard core end game raiders and game died faster then you can say "stupid move". Same is true for every game ever.  For example in EVE (again i know) casuals had everything they needed to play in highsec. They never needed to leave if they didn't want to. But if they dared to leave to low sec of 0/wormhole they would be rewarded if they survived that is. I read somewhere that 80% of EVE population never left highsec, but at same time those 20% that dared managed to make more ISK then those 80%.  And another fun fact - statistically there is more PvP kills in highsec then anywhere else in EVE 

The Division did this too and there player base dropped big time and no one wanted to go into the Dark Zone cause it was nothing but PvP gankers with maxed out gear camping spawn points.  They still had to do some big changes to make it reasonable for the casual players to stay around. The problem is they waited way to long and it did major damage to the game population.  Now they gear things more for the middle not the top 1% elites like they did at start. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

5 hours ago, Bach said:

I think you are correct with one caveat.  They are hard core in the sense all they wish to do is PvP.  They are also very good PVPrs in their arena with everything known, predetermined and set pattern.  True OW PVPrs tend to wipe the floor with them when it's terrain, numbers and reading variables that matter over button mashing and gear.

easiest way to tell which is which is a simple question.  "What is a fair fight?"  If they say equal numbers then they are arena Pvp players.

This is what cracks me up when you see the guys complaining about fleets.  Well if your so hardcore and those fleets are so stupid than you shouldn't have a problem sinking them right?  Well what is the difference than one player with 2 AI ships vs 3 players?  If your solo your porb screwed unless they are all newbs or idiots.  We have beat ships very out number and majority of them was all players.

I get asked to Duel all the time and I refuse to. Other than a few times for testing and doing goofy things like bringing a gunboat to a 4/5th rate fight (small battles) to get the BR match up (that duels didn't allow off BR fights).  I pretty much have never done one.  The reason why I tell folks. It's not cause I'm some elite player and got something to prove, hell I'm a very average PvPer in battles. I'll be honest I suck at the 1 vs 1 fights, but where I shine is team work in a group helping each other out and feeding off each others strengths and weakness in battles.  That and I like the challenge of not knowing what will happen in that fight with a predetermined set rules and patterns you have in a duel.   There are a few great Duels I know that to be honest I can prob beat in a OW 1 vs 1 just from fighting side by side with them in OW fights.  I know their strengths and weakness and they love to make rules in Duels so you can't use them against them.

[jodgi]

5 hours ago, Bach said:

 "What is a fair fight?"

Answer your own test question, Bach.

[Kaos]

3 hours ago, Bach said:

Yes. You are qualified for OW PvP. 

Most wise generals agree with John Stienbeck's quote "If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck."  

If you are simulating a war and you aren't prepared for a 1 on 3 situation you have a totally unrealistic view of warfare. Soldiers don't wander across a battlefield with the expectation that some magical invisible computer God will force an enemy platoon to fight him one at a time. But arena pvp players do.  They tend to kill off war simulations and RvR, with demands for fair fights, faster than Econ or PVE players ever dream of doing so.  The Devs are absolutely correct in that the two Pvp mantras, OW vs. Arena,  cannot be in the same sandbox.

I think you are straw-manning arena players (basing your assumption off of modern arenas) while meaning casuals who actually might expect such scenarios from a sandbox because why would an arena pvper join a sandbox where most of the player base is not even interested in pvp?
Modern low to non-existent skill ceiling arenas are all tailored around casuals too for obvious reasons. Oldschool arenas with high skill ceiling did not cater to snowflakes and there were only 2 options: get good or gtfo and I think you can figure out why they died out and got replaced with class/counter/gear/rng/perk based mediocrity on the market nowadays.

5 hours ago, Bach said:

I think you are correct with one caveat.  They are hard core in the sense all they wish to do is PvP.  They are also very good PVPrs in their arena with everything known, predetermined and set pattern.  True OW PVPrs tend to wipe the floor with them when it's terrain, numbers and reading variables that matter over button mashing and gear.

easiest way to tell which is which is a simple question.  "What is a fair fight?"  If they say equal numbers then they are arena Pvp players.

I don't know any player who excelled during sea trials (which was arena) and struggled during OW, it was quite the opposite actually: OW demanders got wiped on the regular up to the point that a dev had to intervene and warn some of them for ganking others too much which was kind of an omen itself before the game reached EA. Maybe the reason pvpers joining arena is that this ow never had your specific blend of ''true OW pvpers'' and the few pvpers got bored of finding needle in the hay because stomping randoms is fun only for a limited time (personally) and the challenge is really not there while the dead time regarding pve fluff was an overwhelming drag.
Chasing pvers who make up the majority of population is not very hardcore in my book, it's on par with farming AI, just takes more time because they are not coded to fight back and you had to break Stienbeck's quote quite often and use ''sucky tactics'' by attacking them with weaker ships or while outnumbered to bait them into putting up some resistance to cut down the chase time.

[Duncan McFail]

On 5/10/2017 at 11:51 PM, victor said:

I find strange that still a lot of people think it is really possible to keep up a PVP sandbox MMO without a consistent PVE playerbase included in the PVP environment. Pure PVP community is actually possible solo in MOBAs and arena games. If you want to build up a solid MMO (even if sandbox and even PVP oriented) the experience of other games - EVE online is the best example of a success PVP oridented sandbox MMO - shows quite well than you need to make a game that allows PVPers and PVErs (both missioners and crafter/traders) to live together in the same map. Also Darkfall and Mortal online (which may be considered the top of the top for hardcore PVP) include viable PVE content. So the success or failure of NA depends on the fact that Devs will find a fair balance (in terms of risk vs rewards) for each of the categories (OS PVPers, RvR PVPers, Missioners, Traders/crafters) so that none of them will loose interest in the game and quit. The idea "PVE server for pure PVE and PVP server for pure PVP" is likely to raise a lot of problems (jn particular in underpopulated games like NA).

I don't think anyone here wants a pure pvp server. I know I don't personally. I just don't want pve'ers to have mechanics that protect them from me and my kin.

[Bach]

My comment stands.  

If you think all fights should be fair. Then you are probably an arena PvP player and have no bussiness in a war scenario sand box.  I would rather have a team of OW soldiers supported by Econ/PVE logistics specialists than a team made up of all the superstars of arena combat you could give me.

[Kaos]

1 hour ago, Bach said:

My comment stands.  

If you think all fights should be fair. Then you are probably an arena PvP player and have no bussiness in a war scenario sand box.  I would rather have a team of OW soldiers supported by Econ/PVE logistics specialists than a team made up of all the superstars of arena combat you could give me.

Who here actually thinks that? Your arena paranoia is getting on entertaining levels, did arena people make a conspiracy to join every war simulator sandbox that you ever played and killed it or why such hate? No sane person who desires only fair fights goes near a sandbox.

You can have your team of pve specialists in a sandbox and get wrecked repeatedly by organized ''superstars'' until they leave because there's not much challenge nor even meaning in farming pve specialists and logistics experts without proper rvr end game so that kind of answers Smithy's observation of why pvpers would join arena - to meet other pvpers who can realize more than 30% of combat mechanics potential and are able to provide some actual challenge in battles without needing to drag along an army of pve/eco slaves to work with them or use them as expendable cannon-fodder/waste time babysitting them because they cannot hold out on their own.
With new changes seasoned pvpers don't even need eco slaves, they just capture ships from enemies who spent time crafting them and have an unlimited supply until the usual victims decide to improve their play which might actually be a good incentive to increase their awareness and get better and it improves the game but I suspect that the heavy loss will just be the final nail in the coffin for OW because they wouldn't bother learning from mistakes/recovering/preparing/planning/organizing.

[Bach]

1 hour ago, Kaos said:

Who here actually thinks that? Your arena paranoia is getting on entertaining levels, did arena people make a conspiracy to join every war simulator sandbox that you ever played and killed it or why such hate? No sane person who desires only fair fights goes near a sandbox.

You can have your team of pve specialists in a sandbox and get wrecked repeatedly by organized ''superstars'' until they leave because there's not much challenge nor even meaning in farming pve specialists and logistics experts without proper rvr end game so that kind of answers Smithy's observation of why pvpers would join arena - to meet other pvpers who can realize more than 30% of combat mechanics potential and are able to provide some actual challenge in battles without needing to drag along an army of pve/eco slaves to work with them or use them as expendable cannon-fodder/waste time babysitting them because they cannot hold out on their own.
With new changes seasoned pvpers don't even need eco slaves, they just capture ships from enemies who spent time crafting them and have an unlimited supply until the usual victims decide to improve their play which might actually be a good incentive to increase their awareness and get better and it improves the game but I suspect that the heavy loss will just be the final nail in the coffin for OW because they wouldn't bother learning from mistakes/recovering/preparing/planning/organizing.

With any luck you'll be on an opposing team and you can show me just how that works out.?

[Sir Texas Sir]

5 hours ago, Hodo said:

The last few fights I was in on PVP1EU a player had a fleet ship with him, and both times I sank their fleet ship, and left the fight.   I dont have to win the fight, I just cost you WAY more than you cost me.

 

We would sail shot the AI's so they fall back behind.  Get them below 80%.  Than let the guys in the back of the group take them out since they prob will never catch up to the Player your chasing in time any way.  Keep on that player with your front guys until his repair is popped and use and than keep his sails down.  If he does escape 50% of the time he will leave and not keep fighting his AI.  That means he's now down the crew that was in those AI ships.   Before the return to friendly button was put into game we would all jump out as fast as we could.  75% of the time he was low on crew (used them in his AI or his AI is low) and he didn't repair.  Than tag him again and he is easy pickings.

I can see this way more now with the new testbed mechanics.   To me AI ships are nothing but crutches and was was part of the reason a lot of PvP2 players never got good.  They depended on there AI's to much in a fight.  That are they used them every time to run and escape.

[Kaos]

1 hour ago, Bach said:

With any luck you'll be on an opposing team and you can show me just how that works out.?

With any luck this OW experiment stops being a handhold carebear pve hugging box without sacrificing 90% playerbase and I will gladly reinstall and join the war but for now I'll pass and let pvers run the show : )

 

22 minutes ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

I can see this way more now with the new testbed mechanics.   To me AI ships are nothing but crutches and was was part of the reason a lot of PvP2 players never got good.  They depended on there AI's to much in a fight.  That are they used them every time to run and escape.

A little inside information - AI fleets were meant as a tool to bait people who usually sit in ports onto map to give them false sense of security and your experience reflects exactly that.

[Flakbait]

14 hours ago, Bach said:

 "What is a fair fight?" 

If you find yourself in a fair fight...  Your tactics suck.

[Grundgemunkey]

5 hours ago, Kaos said:

With any luck this OW experiment stops being a handhold carebear pve hugging box without sacrificing 90% playerbase and I will gladly reinstall and join the war but for now I'll pass and let pvers run the show : )

 

A little inside information - AI fleets were meant as a tool to bait people who usually sit in ports onto map to give them false sense of security and your experience reflects exactly that.

i have 3000+ hours in game ..i reached RA and have done plenty of rvr and pvp both won and lost ..yet theres guys on this forum such as you..your not the only one mind  who post as if they are the ultimate sea captain ,,with statements like  " because there's not much challenge nor even meaning in farming pve specialists and logistics experts" or " the usual victims decide to improve their play which might actually be a good incentive "  ,,,, I dont know who you are ... do you use a different name on the forum to ingame .. which server do you play on ... because I dont recognise you as a player ... if your as good as you make out to be im pretty sure I would have met you in game in the last 3000 hrs ive played ..

[jodgi]

14 hours ago, Grundgemunkey said:

 ..

Awkward...

[Raymond Woolstone]

On 12.5.2017 at 10:59 PM, Duncan McFail said:

I don't think anyone here wants a pure pvp server. I know I don't personally. I just don't want pve'ers to have mechanics that protect them from me and my kin.

pve must have sutch a protection mechanic. we pvers do NOT want to pvp, simple as that.

Edited May 20, 2017 by Raymond Woolstone

[Duncan McFail]

1 minute ago, Raymond Woolstone said:

well since that can be made whit a simple pvp on/off button on induvidual ships that is defualt set to off, it is clear that it is not the tech/coding that is the holding back factor.

whit sutch a button there would be no need for a seperate pve server as ships whit pvp set to off could never be targeted in ow by other players, thus leaving us traders/mission runners/pve raiders in peace while the rest of the server is lost in the eternal flames of nation war and drama.

That is a mechanic that protects PvEer's from me. Something I don't want. That button is already in game and it's marked "login to PvE server". If PvEer's want to play on the PvP server then they make themselves open for PvP whether they want it or not.

[Vernon Merrill]

I want the button that turns off the reloading of an enemy's cannons.  I shall name it the "Raymond Woolstone Memorial Button" and think of him fondly every time I switch it on. Although I'm sure that bastard Shelby and his sea-bots are already working on it.  

All in good fun mates.  

(Puts on his flame-retardent suit)

Edited May 20, 2017 by Sir Joseph Blaine