Focused Feedback: PvP Updates

[M3z]

13 hours ago, Alouu said:

This, except as a buff that lasts for ~10 seconds and is linked to landing a melee attack. That way it doesn't make just using fossilize and taunt any better, and only buffs the melee hit > more melee hits playstyle.

 

Edit: Also doing it this way allows it to limit the buff to aggressive play only, rather than also buffing evading.

I think this is a good change you are suggesting.

 

I also forgot to mention as well, if we were to do this change,I'd nerf taunt, give target taunt suppression after initial taunt(10 secs of taunt immunity after initial taunt duration runs out), remove stackable -range. Or at the very least make taunt so it's not a perma cage and at most you can have 60% uptime on a target.

 

I think we need to tweak melee to not be invulnerable (removal of barrier is good step in that direction), not have taunt be ridiculous and for them to actually be aggressive and threatening in an almost 0 CC environment. I'd also have different opinions on the balancing of melee if we were to ever re enable slows/revamp the mez system. The changes I'm suggesting are really just bandaids but something is better than nothing.

 

I wish I could post vids, it's so hard to get into melee against anyone moving around. Even jaunt puts you where the target was 1-2 seconds before. Also follow STOPS when you are like 10-15 feet away so that can screw you over big time when chasing. Manual following is of course an option(and really the best option), but in a jaunt meta world you often only have seconds to even get one attack off before your target jaunts into the skybox.

Edited November 15, 2020 by M3z

[America's Angel]

45 minutes ago, M3z said:

I think we need to tweak melee to not be invulnerable...

*Fightclub eye twitch*

 

I think the durability of some sets (regen, invuln, Elec, etc) are fine, and other weaker sets (Dark, Ice, etc) need bringing up. IMO, ranged should be balanced against ranged, and melee should be balanced against melee. This is a team game. Blasters don't need to be able to kill melee characters at range, Scrappers don't need to be able to catch and kill blasters in melee.

 

Agree with the rest of your post, though. Taunt 100% needs nerfing. I like that it forces enemies to get in close. But I dislike HOW close they have to get, and that it's perma. Way overpowered.

 

Also bigtime agree that melee attacks need their range increasing due to server tics. (Maybe to ~15ft like Knockout Blow? I can always land that fine.) It would need to be unenhanceable, though. (I always laugh when the alpha slot boosts my KO Blow range).

Edited November 15, 2020 by America's Angel

[M3z]

7 minutes ago, America's Angel said:

*Fightclub eye twitch*

 

I think the durability of some sets (regen, invuln, Elec, etc) are fine, and other weaker sets (Dark, Ice, etc) need bringing up. IMO, ranged should be balanced against ranged, and melee should be balanced against melee. This is a team game. Blasters don't need to be able to kill melee characters at range, Scrappers don't need to be able to catch and kill blasters in melee.

 

Agree with the rest of your post, though. Taunt 100% needs nerfing. I like that it forces enemies to get in close. But I dislike HOW close they have to get, and that it's perma. Way overpowered.

 

Also bigtime agree that melee attacks need their range increasing due to server tics. (Maybe to ~15ft like Knockout Blow? I can always land that fine.) It would need to be unenhanceable, though. (I always laugh when the alpha slot boosts my KO Blow range).

Ranged balanced against ranged and melee balanced against melee is myopic in terms growing the pvp population. It just adds another layer of unintuitive knowledge a player must have (on top of all the other nonsense a player must know to even be remotely competitive in even the most casual zone pvp). What the game SHOULD be balanced around is small teams and 1v1s, which is what it was balanced around pre i13, which while not perfect, allowed for 5x the amount of viable builds as available now. It should also go back to its PVE roots meaning, what makes your build strong in PVE should also apply to pvp (this is not happening anytime soon).

 

This would mean both melee and ranged should be threats to each other. I always link this vid I did a long time ago of what I envision melee to be! In the clips I'm going against rad/therms, fortunatas and other builds that were top tier builds at their time(much better than bs/sr!!) and beating them. It was a lot more interesting time in pvp. 

 

 

I love playing stalker in arena so I don't want to play a CoH where melee and range both play their own pvp meta games and don't interact.

 

[Troo]

On 11/13/2020 at 11:47 AM, Jimmy said:

Free Fire Zone (PvP) Helicopter Line

• All helicopters to and from PvP zones are now connected (including new helicopters in Siren's Call near the Hero Hospital and in Peregrine Island near the arena)
• You can also use it to travel between the connected PVE zones, but only those that match your current alignment

Siren's Call inaccessible from Sharkhead. Is this as intended?

Same with BB & RV.

 

 

Update: Was a vigilante.. so that's on me,

BUT

QoL could have a message indicating why entry is denied.

Also, the other PvE zones could still be accessible.

 

 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Troo

[Glacier Peak]

46 minutes ago, Troo said:

Siren's Call inaccessible from Sharkhead. Is this as intended?

Same with BB & RV.

 

 

Update: Was a vigilante.. so that's on me,

BUT

QoL could have a message indicating why entry is denied.

Also, the other PvE zones could still be accessible.

 

 

Isn't movement to and from PvE zones what the Black Helicopter Lines are for? 

 

I think they are intentionally separate from the Free Fire Zone Transport which you screenshotted.

[Iron Alex]

21 hours ago, America's Angel said:

*Fightclub eye twitch*

 

I think the durability of some sets (regen, invuln, Elec, etc) are fine, and other weaker sets (Dark, Ice, etc) need bringing up. IMO, ranged should be balanced against ranged, and melee should be balanced against melee. This is a team game. Blasters don't need to be able to kill melee characters at range, Scrappers don't need to be able to catch and kill blasters in melee.

 

Agree with the rest of your post, though. Taunt 100% needs nerfing. I like that it forces enemies to get in close. But I dislike HOW close they have to get, and that it's perma. Way overpowered.

 

Also bigtime agree that melee attacks need their range increasing due to server tics. (Maybe to ~15ft like Knockout Blow? I can always land that fine.) It would need to be unenhanceable, though. (I always laugh when the alpha slot boosts my KO Blow range).

Your comment is why some in this forum is making a distinction between arena and zone pvpers.. most zone pvpers like to solo.. and do their own thing.. i for one only team if its only needed.. where as arena pvp you always team.. so NO melee shouldnt just be balanced around melee and vise versa.. it should go back to the old way.. where if i hit your squishy with knock out blow,, you go to 20% that was the balance.. if you primarily arena pvp. please dont ruin the game for the pvpers that DO NOT ARENA..

[Glacier Peak]

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Free Fire Zone (PvP) Helicopter Line

• All helicopters to and from PvP zones are now connected (including new helicopters in Siren's Call near the Hero Hospital and in Peregrine Island near the arena)
• You can also use it to travel between the connected PVE zones, but only those that match your current alignment.

Here's what it looks like when I switched back to villain.

Oh cool

[America's Angel]

23 hours ago, M3z said:

Ranged balanced against ranged and melee balanced against melee is myopic in terms growing the pvp population. It just adds another layer of unintuitive knowledge a player must have (on top of all the other nonsense a player must know to even be remotely competitive in even the most casual zone pvp). What the game SHOULD be balanced around is small teams and 1v1s, which is what it was balanced around pre i13, which while not perfect, allowed for 5x the amount of viable builds as available now. It should also go back to its PVE roots meaning, what makes your build strong in PVE should also apply to pvp (this is not happening anytime soon).

 

This would mean both melee and ranged should be threats to each other. I always link this vid I did a long time ago of what I envision melee to be! In the clips I'm going against rad/therms, fortunatas and other builds that were top tier builds at their time(much better than bs/sr!!) and beating them. It was a lot more interesting time in pvp. 

 

 

I love playing stalker in arena so I don't want to play a CoH where melee and range both play their own pvp meta games and don't interact.

 

All valid points. Personally I'd love CoH PVP to be balanced around 1v1,  1v1 is what I like the most. But my two big concerns for balancing around it would be how the current 8v8 meta is affected, and how much it would change the PVP system as a whole. (Change stuff too much and it'll kill off PVP ala Issue 13.)

 

Worth talking about more post i27, though. My initial thoughts are we buff the underperforming melee sets (ice armour, dark armour, titan weapons, war mace, etc)  to match the top ones (regen, EA, Inv, Super Strength, Dark Melee, Psy Melee, etc).  Once that's done, then we can look at tweaking melee to make them balanced vs ranged. Maybe raising their damage, and reducing their durability is the answer? I don't know. But we'd need to buff the underperforming melee sets first IMO.

 

And if we could do this without touching ranged? All the better.

Edited November 16, 2020 by America's Angel

[Phoenix']

On 11/8/2020 at 6:05 AM, VileTerror said:

From a stance of PvP, I recall a thread recently where someone asked what it would take to get non-PvP'ers more interested and engaged in PvP.

Aside from some players saying "literally nothing," the biggest take-away I got from the thread was "things don't behave the same way in PvP as they do in the rest of the game."

Disabling something like Jump Pack for edge-case hardcore PvPers isn't likely to win over any new blood in to the PvP environment.

I dabble on occasion, but I sure don't like the leagues-of-legends-level of metagame that hardcore PvP entails.  Calling targets?  Having to use discord?  Those are massive barriers to entry.  The Zones should be the accessibility gateway, shouldn't they?  Wouldn't it be wiser to have the Zones behave more like the rest of the game, and if someone gets hooked, THEN you can bring them in to the depths of the mire that is arena culture?

 

As for me, I explained my personal issue in https://forums.homecomingservers.com/topic/23657-focused-feedback-pvp-updates/page/7/?tab=comments#comment-288316

Was there more to that I could elaborate on to further articulate my concern with this particular issue?

You are wrong.

Pvp zones will become more friendly to new pvpers with the new changes. 

We all started as zoners, arena came afterwards for many of us. 

 

[Neko]

Web grenades being available to directly purchase in RV is suppperr!! Time to spammy spam them on all of my ATs 🤩🤩🤩

[Glacier Peak]

32 minutes ago, Phoenix' said:

You are wrong.

Pvp zones will become more friendly to new pvpers with the new changes. 

We all started as zoners, arena came afterwards for many of us. 

 

In the past Arena was Issue 4 and Zones were Issue 6. Do you mean on Homecoming?

[Phoenix']

1 minute ago, Glacier Peak said:

In the past Arena was Issue 4 and Zones were Issue 6. Do you mean on Homecoming?

No I mean that most players started pvping in zones and not in arena.

All the arena teams that exist now were formed in a pvp zone.

Personally if zones were back in the day the way they are now I propably wouldn't even bother pvping at all. 

 

 

 

[Troo]

I and others totally get that there is an active group that are participating in regular arena PvP and the perspective they have on what works for them. There are some good ideas that can come from that.

 

To be honest, the current approach does come off as "this is what we like and we want to do it in zones". (maybe more than intended..)

 

It could be more inclusive of folks who aren't regulars but who are interested. Simple things could provide a more inclusive approach:

• New options are coming to Arena, come try em out.
• We're gonna try these change in one zone, come try em out.
• etc.

Comment: If folks are seeing more names in this thread than they see in game, that's a good thing.

 

I like:

Pocket D An entrance to Recluse's Victory has been added

Free Fire Zone (PvP) Helicopter Line PvP zones are now connected

New Arena Maps

Arena Maps

Powers Disabled in PvP All Incarnate powers apart from the Alpha slot are now disabled in Recluse's Victory

 

I don't like:

PvP Accolades

All PvP Zones (Bloody Bay, Siren's Call, Warburg, Recluse's Victory) The Siren's Call vendor still requires the zone event to unlock

PvP Powers Changes

 

As a whole there is a tinge of overreach in the PvP zone changes, in Arena things could be optional where this will not always be the case in zones.

Edited November 16, 2020 by Troo

[Iron Alex]

16 minutes ago, Troo said:

I and others totally get that there is an active group that are participating in regular arena PvP and the perspective they have on what works for them. There are some good ideas that can come from that.

 

To be honest, the current approach does come off as "this is what we like and we want to do it in zones". (maybe more than intended..)

 

It could be more inclusive of folks who aren't regulars but who are interested. Simple things could provide a more inclusive approach:

• New options are coming to Arena, come try em out.
• We're gonna try these change in one zone, come try em out.
• etc.

Comment: If folks are seeing more names in this thread than they see in game, that's a good thing.

 

I like:

Pocket D An entrance to Recluse's Victory has been added

Free Fire Zone (PvP) Helicopter Line PvP zones are now connected

New Arena Maps

Arena Maps

Powers Disabled in PvP All Incarnate powers apart from the Alpha slot are now disabled in Recluse's Victory

 

I don't like:

PvP Accolades

All PvP Zones (Bloody Bay, Siren's Call, Warburg, Recluse's Victory) The Siren's Call vendor still requires the zone event to unlock

PvP Powers Changes

 

As a whole there is a tinge of overreach in the PvP zone changes, in Arena things could be optional where this will not always be the case in zones.

yup If anything make a bigger arena map and or another zone to test out the changes.. 

 

Giving everyone accolades just makes everything lazy, same reason we got i13. To cater to people who will either never come into zones.. or come in die 2 times and never pvp again.

 

I personally only zone pvp.. arena pvp ganking might seem fun for some but not for me.  

 

these changes will not even the playing field of underperforming set, and will not make new players play  the game more.

 

whats going to happened is the experienced people will have access to all these temps and accolades without going out to earn them, and the new player is going to die and complain why their getting lit up on their scrapper...

 

the only fix to pvp is either pre i13 with toggle suppression .. or increase melee sets and set blasters back to 1600 hp cap.

[Neko]

Hopefully the changes will bring in more players to PvP! 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Neko

[Monos King]

7 hours ago, Iron Alex said:

whats going to happened is the experienced people will have access to all these temps and accolades without going out to earn them, and the new player is going to die and complain why their getting lit up on their scrapper...

This is total nonsense. Accolades are baseline; experienced PvPers definitely already have them. They are the ultimate min-maxers. It's inexperienced players and newer PvPers that wouldn't have accolades. Not to mention accolades do little to affect offensive ability, so no, people "complaining about being lit up on their Scrapper" wouldn't happen from this regardless. These changes help to level the playing field. 

7 hours ago, Iron Alex said:

To cater to people who will either never come into zones.. or come in die 2 times and never pvp again.

If they never pvp again, they don't benefit from the accolades. What is your reasoning here?

Edited November 17, 2020 by Monos King
Typo

[macskull]

4 hours ago, Iron Alex said:

Giving everyone accolades just makes everything lazy, same reason we got i13. To cater to people who will either never come into zones.. or come in die 2 times and never pvp again.

We got I13 because a developer who didn't PvP decided PvP needed to be completely retooled to their own whims despite the PvP community already having a list of things to look at, and then the feedback of the PvP community was more or less ignored. These changes, at the very least, are coming from the PvP community. Making accolade powers purchasable removes at least one of the barriers to entry for PvP.

4 hours ago, Iron Alex said:

I personally only zone pvp.. arena pvp ganking might seem fun for some but not for me.  

There's literally no such thing as "arena pvp ganking" since all player involved have to intentionally join an arena match.

 

[macskull]

4 minutes ago, Troo said:

  One of the concerns I had on the Accolades was similar.

It would be great to see some acknowledgement of a concern rather than it being dismissed as nonsense.

 

Renting accolades (that's basically what this is)

• This could definitely make them available to builds that don't have them. I see how this looks like it levels the playing field.
• Some folks just see that this will be used to avoid going and getting the accolades.

PvP Accolades

Alternately, a level playing field could be to remove accolades entirely. This is actually more inline with the definition of a level playing field.

1. What is your concern with the accolades?
2. While it is true that completely removing access to accolade powers is also a level playing field, you have two options:
   1. No one gets any accolade powers. This is A Bad Idea because it is essentially nerfing every build by 20% HP and things already die quickly enough as it is. Without the ability to meaningfully increase survivability due to diminishing returns on defense and resistance, HP is about the only thing you can make work for you.
   2. Everyone can get the accolade powers for a token amount of inf, or if even 10k is too much they can run missions in the lower-level PvP zones to get them for free. Everyone gets them, the playing field is still level. Yes, there's going to be a bit of a learning curve here as newer players enter PvP zones to discover their accolades don't work, but hopefully they should be smart enough to wonder why and find the PvP-specific versions.

[macskull]

5 minutes ago, Troo said:

Earned accolades will mean nothing in competitive formats.

Cost favors those with more funding.

Naming should be crystal clear for those unfamiliar with them.

Is there going to be an alert when entering the zones?

Renting them favors high end builds that are able to maximize other aspects and fill gaps with the accolades.

Siren's Call; one side has to win the zone for them to be available and only to that side? Seriously?..

If a player doesn't rent them.. I could go on but you get the idea.

 

If the cost was reduced for the lower zones, maybe less of an issue. Token amounts can be different for various players especially those still leveling and slotting.

 

That said, I see what you are saying as well.

 

Counterpoints:

1. If a player is participating in a competitive format, they will already have the accolades (at least the +HP passives). No one is showing up to competitive events without these and expecting to be taken seriously. If you bring a character that lacks the extra HP to an event, you will be a liability if it's a team event and you will be at a disadvantage if it's a solo event. They already mean nothing because it's a given every character will have them. The change just lowers that barrier slightly and makes it a bit more accessible since I won't have to grind out 3-5 hours' worth of extra PvE for a character that I don't PvE with.
2. The cost is a one-time 10k inf payment per power (so... less than 100k total) if you choose to buy them from the vendor. That's a few mob defeats at level 50.
3. In all fairness, the naming scheme for the PvE versions aren't at all crystal clear if you aren't already familiar with them, either.
4. Where is this "renting" thing coming from?
5. True but a player from either alignment can just go to Bloody Bay or Warburg if their alignment doesn't happen to have control of Siren's at the moment. I feel like these accolades being added as rewards for mission completion is to appease the very few players who would complain about any inf cost (I'm not saying these being mission rewards is a bad thing, since more ways to unlock them are good) even though it's trivial at worst.
6. Again with the renting thing. I'm still confused.
7. I see your point about "token" amounts of inf - and I'm pretty sure like I said in point #5 the mission reward accolade powers are the solution to this one. Getting the accolades as mission completion rewards requires no inf and is essentially zero-risk since there is little or no PvP activity in the lower-level PvP zones.

[Monos King]

25 minutes ago, Troo said:

Cost favors those with more funding.

You know what costs more than the 100k for those accolades? Enhancements. Enhancements leveling up, inventions going in, and for the affluent, procs and IOs right before. You should know this very well, stop making the costs out to be significant. It is silly. If you go into PvP, which is competitive, without enhancements you are doomed anyway. If you can get those, you can get the accolades, or you can earn them. When I started off, that didn't even matter to me to begin with, but when you start wondering "ok how do I become strong" you quickly figure out what options are available to you. 

35 minutes ago, Troo said:

Naming should be crystal clear for those unfamiliar with them.

This is not incorrect. But as mac notes, none of the accolades have informative names either. We had those initially for these PvP accolades, but they were boring and I doubt many liked them. For what it is worth, being fake accolades and all, I don't think they are deserving of cool names and could stand being reverted. But I don't feel very strongly about it.

38 minutes ago, Troo said:

Earned accolades will mean nothing in competitive formats.

It's a simple matter to just acquire the PvP ones, but I do hate forgetting to buy them and entering a match with no accolades. I know that shared cooldowns are now a thing. It's possible the badges that grant accolades could lock out players from purchasing corresponding PvP accolades, and clicks would be placed on shared cooldown for good measure. But I don't think any of that is necessary.

[M3z]

19 hours ago, America's Angel said:

All valid points. Personally I'd love CoH PVP to be balanced around 1v1,  1v1 is what I like the most. But my two big concerns for balancing around it would be how the current 8v8 meta is affected, and how much it would change the PVP system as a whole. (Change stuff too much and it'll kill off PVP ala Issue 13.)

 

Worth talking about more post i27, though. My initial thoughts are we buff the underperforming melee sets (ice armour, dark armour, titan weapons, war mace, etc)  to match the top ones (regen, EA, Inv, Super Strength, Dark Melee, Psy Melee, etc).  Once that's done, then we can look at tweaking melee to make them balanced vs ranged. Maybe raising their damage, and reducing their durability is the answer? I don't know. But we'd need to buff the underperforming melee sets first IMO.

 

And if we could do this without touching ranged? All the better.

I would never say "reduce the durability" of underperforming sets for melee or ranged or anything. I mean sets like dark armor are absolute trash in pvp and need to be buffed. But there are certain power combinations of "meta pvp builds" such as bio tanks that need to be addressed because they are literally unkillable even in coordinated team pvp scenarios. I'm also not saying ranged doesn't need to be adjusted too, because it definitely does and has the biggest advantage. I just think melee needs to be able to actually kill things in pvp and if that means a reduction in survivability in the overperforming sets like bio then yes let's do it.

 

 

Going off on a tangent here so this isn't entirely directed towards you, America's Angel:

I think the community just needs to decide whether we want to balance around this pvp that is in the remnants of i13 mechanics(essentially what we are doing right now) or if we want to spend the time and redo the mechanics so that sets function somewhat similarly to how they do in pve. This would mean revamps of mez mechanics, diminishing returns and a look at procs as well as unresisted damage/debuffs to match their similar effectiveness in pve which would lead to more build viability.

 

Why? Because the sets were originally designed around slows/mezzes, base damage and other mechanics, not around procs(which often makes up 60% of the damage of current meta attack chains!), 2-4 second mez durations and no real effective slows. If you don't add new mechanics you end up with a damage race(because there are no other influential mechanics to balance around), which essentially sums up this current meta. Either you're an emp, or your a build that can cram as many procs into your attack chain as possible (blasters).

[Iron Alex]

3 hours ago, macskull said:

We got I13 because a developer who didn't PvP decided PvP needed to be completely retooled to their own whims despite the PvP community already having a list of things to look at, and then the feedback of the PvP community was more or less ignored. These changes, at the very least, are coming from the PvP community. Making accolade powers purchasable removes at least one of the barriers to entry for PvP.

There's literally no such thing as "arena pvp ganking" since all player involved have to intentionally join an arena match.

 

What i meant by this is some arena matches dont actually end up as a 8v8 fight its usually just hunt the easiest player and rack up points.. so its just a gank fest against the weakest player on each team.. whilst zone is more evasive pvp.. yes there is team coordinated strikes.. but the weakest person can easily take them selves out of that situation.. but either way it irrelevant to the whole convo of this thread.. my point was there is a distinction between zone players and arena players who happen to play zone from time to time.. 

[Bopper]

19 minutes ago, Troo said:

Oh geez.. You just said it yourself, lower level folks have other things to spend resources on than accolade rentals. I've highlighted them in your quote. Thank you, you have made my point.

 

Bloody Bay is level 15-25

Siren's Call is level 20-30

Warburg is level 30-38

 

Folks who are actually in those level ranges might not have 100k for each time they want to PvP. That is a barrier to entry and negates the level playing field.

Why are you continually calling them rentals? They are one time purchases. 

 

[America's Angel]

4 hours ago, Troo said:

It would be great to see some acknowledgement of a concern rather than it being dismissed as nonsense.

Thank you for your feedback. It has been read.

Edited November 17, 2020 by America's Angel

[Monos King]

1 hour ago, Troo said:

Oh geez.. You just said it yourself, lower level folks have other things to spend resources on than accolade rentals. I've highlighted them in your quote. Thank you, you have made my point.

 

Bloody Bay is level 15-25

Siren's Call is level 20-30

Warburg is level 30-38

 

Folks who are actually in those level ranges might not have 100k for each time they want to PvP. That is a barrier to entry and negates the level playing field.

 

Now if someone is flippantly gonna say 'I'll send em money' that's great, you're a decent human but.. why not just reduce the prices?

 

The Vendor is only being used because it is less effort than other options. (that's my understanding)

You are being deliberately obtuse. Enhancements drop in game, are sellable, and easily obtainable. I mentioned them because any player that is able to obtain them, can also easily access the PvP accolades. Any player with any familiarity will be able to get enhancements, and if they aren't even capable of that then competitive PvP isn't something they are ready for. If need be, guides could be made to affording PvP accolades in the same way there are myriad guides on how to make money. But are you seriously suggesting enhancements, a universal expectation, are such a burden that they clash with the newly accessible accolades? If that were the case, then that is more of a discussion pertaining to enhancements. Except here are a few things.

1. Low levels are denied many accolades. There are many that require task forces they cannot enter to unlock. This is an improvement.
2. The effort to unlock accolades the normal way is significantly, significantly greater than the effort to earn 100k in game and acquire enhancements or PvP accolades, which are thrown at you through normal gameplay in spades. This is an improvement.
3. If price were actually such a barrier, then nothing changes for the worst. If this is such an issue that it affects many people, then a large amount of people will be in PvP without accolades and the people that had them before will still have them now. Except now, when those that don't have them want them, they can go into an in-zone store and procure the PvP accolades. Or run a mission. Improvement.
4. Accolades are not a need for PvP. More precisely, they aren't a right. They are expected in the highest level of competition because it is exactly that. More powerful players will always be more powerful. These changes are a considerate gesture because some players do have accolades, and so to make the elite more reachable, they are being made accessible to everyone.

What point are you getting at that you think I've made for you? That if the PvP accolades were made free, they would be less costly than how they are now? That much is obvious. Or are you trying to prove that they should be free to begin with? If that's the case, then the fact that characters need enhancements isn't getting you anywhere. This is a principle of the entire game. No one is getting hand outs, if you're interested in getting into PvP then there are still going to be some expenditures just like any other aspect of the game. The only thing that's changed now is that players that were previously unable to make that investment now can, and that it is a much smaller one when compared to that of the actualades. Here's something to realize. Players that aren't trying to get an edge on the next person are not PvPers, nor are they trying to be one. That is fine, I engage in very casual and zone PvP myself, but there are no PvP changes that are going to be made with that sort in mind.

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by Monos King