Raising PvP Zone -level enforcement- NON RV

[Kataklysm]

10 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Well, part of it can be seen in the PvP zone populations.

 

Edit: Another part can be seen by perusing some of the earlier PvP suggestion threads. Though some of the responses can be emphatic. Including my own.

 what I'm saying is I haven't seen that as a major group of the feedback coming back from the temporal characters so far. in fact a lot of people I know who previously had no interest are actually jumping on board. Just because there are people who won't come to PvP with this change, doesn't mean there aren't people who will.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Terius

[Faultline]

The thread is going off topic, Temporal Warriors discussion goes here:

 

[Doc_Scorpion]

1 minute ago, Terius said:

What are you backing this claim up with.

The same thing your claim about underused features is backed with, decades of experience in MMO's.
 

 

2 minutes ago, Terius said:

Just because there are people who won't come to PvP with this change, doesn't mean there aren't people who will.

Nothing I said can possibly be interpreted as meaning the aren't people who will try PvP due to new features.

[Rudra]

23 minutes ago, Terius said:

 what I'm saying is I haven't seen that as a major group of the feedback coming back from the temporal characters so far. in fact a lot of people I know who previously had no interest are actually jumping on board. Just because there are people who won't come to PvP with this change, doesn't mean there aren't people who will.

Agreed. And that was part of a previous response I had.

 

Edit: There will always be people willing to try something if there is an incentive like instant fully developed character. I don't think anyone is arguing that.

 

Edit again: I think my comments may be drifting into argument against this thread, and that is not my intent. So I apologize for the derailment.

Edited July 24, 2022 by Rudra

[America's Angel]

45 minutes ago, Faultline said:

You cannot combine votes from different sources since the same people could be voting on multiple (and likely are). Post links to this thread instead.

Good catch. Revised to remove duplicates:

• #1 = 5 (~13%)
• #2 = 17 (~43.5%)
• #3 = 17 (~43.5%)

All places where people can vote already have a link to this thread. Had a quick check of the different accounts, none of them appear to be alt accounts. (Always a risk when polling for changes.)

[Faultline]

2 minutes ago, Troo said:

Wait what.. How are you checking different accounts? How are you checking alts?

Can others folks see who voted for what? I can't.

 

Click on the vote count. Votes are public.

[Troo]

I think I've said all I want in this thread. Thanks @Terius.

 

I close with, if pvp zone levels were changed and there is no appreciable increase in pvp numbers (as has been the case with other changes), then it would have been for naught while continuing to degrade the PvE use of the zones. There should be an agreement with these type of changes that if they don't work out for increasing numbers then they'll be rolled back rather than piling on.

[Kataklysm]

3 hours ago, Troo said:

I think I've said all I want in this thread. Thanks @Terius.

 

I close with, if pvp zone levels were changed and there is no appreciable increase in pvp numbers (as has been the case with other changes), then it would have been for naught while continuing to degrade the PvE use of the zones. There should be an agreement with these type of changes that if they don't work out for increasing numbers then they'll be rolled back rather than piling on.

I think it's fair to say sometimes testing is the best way to find out when you're on the fence. I assume if opinions change, what is a 30 second+30 minute mapserver would be the same in reverse. and I'm not even against alternative options being worked from this change/test. Say, bb and sc somewhere between 25-38 decided through feedback/ testing, and WB to 50. ect.

Either way I think anything proposed generally needs proper aging through testing before a final version is implemented. This is no exception and I don't claim to know the ideal configuration, just that the current level configuration among other things isn't desirable where it is for PvP. I think middle-grounds can be reached through community interaction. 

Over all the conversation on here has been very educational as well, thanks for your contribution. Part of identifying issues is articulating different perspectives of a changes effect.

[Kataklysm]

4 hours ago, Doc_Scorpion said:

"Nothing I said can possibly be interpreted as meaning the aren't people who will try PvP due to new features."

"It's actively avoided by the vast majority of people because it's an activity they simply aren't interested in."

I'm curious where this metric is gathered from I suppose is my quandary here. PvP servers or PvE servers both? because many MMO's have VERY alive and well PvP communities some of which I'm a part of. Who exactly are you speaking on that is the vast majority of people who simply aren't interested in it and actively avoid it. And where are they the vast majority. That is my question. because regarding this post's suggestion I'm drawing my feedback directly from the PvE and PvP community here within HC over the years about PvP zones and PVP.

an interesting metric to share regarding PvP. Current- PvP community speaking, there are 150+ people in the fight club discord alone.
HC PvP discord somewhere around 800+ my point to get back on it being, options are good, and room to stretch and practice level 50 zone PvP is good for growing it. Right now PvP zones feel sort of like they're bleeding out and stranded. Changing enforced PvP zone levels is not the stitches to close the wound, that being everything wrong with PvP zones, but it could be a butterfly patch that can help get it to the hospital, and those stitches. Like I phrased it initially, Baby steps

Edited July 24, 2022 by Terius

[Kataklysm]

On 7/24/2022 at 1:37 AM, America's Angel said:

Good catch. Revised to remove duplicates:

• #1 = 5 (~13%)
• #2 = 17 (~43.5%)
• #3 = 17 (~43.5%)

All places where people can vote already have a link to this thread. Had a quick check of the different accounts, none of them appear to be alt accounts. (Always a risk when polling for changes.)

where are you getting 17 from #3 from? I only count 14 from the three places it's posted.
Edit, found it.

Edited July 29, 2022 by Terius

[Moka]

My question is: Do people actually use Bloody Bay, Siren's Call, and Warburg for anything but for the temporary powers for PVE sake? I don't see why they shouldn't have more stake to them. I feel like there's an unspoken rule you'll be blacklisted from the community for currently treating those zones as PVP zones if you spot another player. I always get paranoid I'll be seen as a griefer if I fight someone in those zones, and I feel like at least hitting 50 means those people will have access to their incarnate powers, which means if someone REALLY isn't feeling a fight, they can pop barrier/melee and run if they're that scared for their survival. 

 

I see no reason why these zones shouldn't be brought up to Recluse's Victory and be seen as actual PVP zones. 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Moka

[golstat2003]

Try bumping up one, as others suggested and see what happens. That would be a good test to see if this would be worthwhile for all the zones.

 

And I kind of agree I don't see a large increase in pvp if you do this, since a lvl 15 is still a level 15 to a level 50 IO/Incarnated out Pvper.

 

I would test the change in one zone first to see if it's worth the development time to do it correctly.

[TomatoPhalanges]

7 hours ago, Moka said:

My question is: Do people actually use Bloody Bay, Siren's Call, and Warburg for anything but for the temporary powers for PVE sake? I don't see why they shouldn't have more stake to them. I feel like there's an unspoken rule you'll be blacklisted from the community for currently treating those zones as PVP zones if you spot another player. I always get paranoid I'll be seen as a griefer if I fight someone in those zones, and I feel like at least hitting 50 means those people will have access to their incarnate powers, which means if someone REALLY isn't feeling a fight, they can pop barrier/melee and run if they're that scared for their survival. 

 

I see no reason why these zones shouldn't be brought up to Recluse's Victory and be seen as actual PVP zones. 

 

The only other thing is badges, and there's PVP badges too, so maybe the badgers wouldn't mind too much 😇

I voted B because I like the idea of having two different build environments at least, even if Bloody Bay isn't a great zone in general.

 

Also, current background, I am not a PVPer currently but with the new Temporal Warrior system, intend to dabble a bit more actively.

 

EDIT: As for thoughts on badges being removed, I say don't. The PVP category of badges exists for a reason. If badgers don't want to engage with PVP, that's no different than choosing not to engage with particularly hard TF/Trial/whatever content on PVE's side. Which also should have badges, imo, but that's another discussion entirely.

Edited July 27, 2022 by TomatoPhalanges
Additional thoughts regarding badges.

[Moka]

1 hour ago, TomatoPhalanges said:

 

The only other thing is badges, and there's PVP badges too, so maybe the badgers wouldn't mind too much 😇

I voted B because I like the idea of having two different build environments at least, even if Bloody Bay isn't a great zone in general.

 

Also, current background, I am not a PVPer currently but with the new Temporal Warrior system, intend to dabble a bit more actively.

 

EDIT: As for thoughts on badges being removed, I say don't. The PVP category of badges exists for a reason. If badgers don't want to engage with PVP, that's no different than choosing not to engage with particularly hard TF/Trial/whatever content on PVE's side. Which also should have badges, imo, but that's another discussion entirely.

Agreed.

[FenrisAhroun]

Well it's about damn time this has been brought up! I absolutely loathe the disparity between the archetype in the lower level zones, it's heavily melee tilted. It's just recycled GameStop level spaghetti coding trash! I want to like it, I try to like it, but I end up hating myself more and more each time I try it.  

 

I want to bring my friends in and help them build up their characters (most would choose heroes, the poor schumcks) so I can absolutely own them.

[Kataklysm]

On 7/27/2022 at 10:41 PM, FenrisAhroun said:

Well it's about damn time this has been brought up! I absolutely loathe the disparity between the archetype in the lower level zones, it's heavily melee tilted. It's just recycled GameStop level spaghetti coding trash! I want to like it, I try to like it, but I end up hating myself more and more each time I try it.  

 

I want to bring my friends in and help them build up their characters (most would choose heroes, the poor schumcks) so I can absolutely own them.

You're not the first person I've heard complain about archetype disparity in PvP zones, trust me I hear you there.

The goal here again is to make the zone PvP experience more universal, so you get whooped in with your buddies in WB for example, get your feet set a bit, then you can jump into RV with more educated players, -and- a better understanding of how your build works at 50 in a zone. All without having to literally jump directly into the only hot PvP zone to learn how level 50's behave under zone DR

[NeuralFiber]

Feel like putting everything to 50 would make the most sense overall.

[Completist]

On 7/22/2022 at 9:42 PM, Terius said:

Removing the minimum entry level from PvP zones is already committed,

Are you saying that the devs are removing entry requirements in PvP zones? I suggested this a couple weeks ago and ... didn't get the best reaction. But if so, that's rad. I am a PvE player, I want access to the badges and temps, but also happy to try those zones out at a lower level. Hunting BP masks in Bloody Bay, for example, is kind of cool and the potential of running into an enemy player gives it an interesting danger.  The response above about it being a faux pas to attack someone unless you're in RV is baffling to me, heck yeah I'm going to start something if I happen to meet up with someone in one of those three ghost towns. 

 

Raising every zone would create worse character disparities in those zones. As an example let's say someone gets out of their DFB grind at level 20 and decides to go to Siren's Call. They are a little interested in PvP so they have a defensive build and fully slot out their powers. With the caps as-is they're a handful of powers behind and don't have all the juicy set bonuses that the 50 does, Exed down to 30, but they know the risks, and maybe the fight lasts a little while (maybe they bring a friend.) Instead, SKed up to 50, they are now 30 levels worth of powers (plus epics) behind. Unless the EX system jacks their SOs up to ridiculous levels (which in my experience it does not) they'll be way farther behind. 

 

Reading this thread I get the feeling that "zone PvP is terrible and only Arena Versus is good" which suggests changing the zones isn't going to change that. Changing them to fit that mindset (removing badges and mobs) seems pretty drastic.

And sorry if I'm misreading it and you actually mean to lock all pvp to level 50 only, which would be even crazier.

[Kataklysm]

57 minutes ago, Completist said:

Are you saying that the devs are removing entry requirements in PvP zones? I suggested this a couple weeks ago and ... didn't get the best reaction. But if so, that's rad. I am a PvE player, I want access to the badges and temps, but also happy to try those zones out at a lower level. Hunting BP masks in Bloody Bay, for example, is kind of cool and the potential of running into an enemy player gives it an interesting danger.  The response above about it being a faux pas to attack someone unless you're in RV is baffling to me, heck yeah I'm going to start something if I happen to meet up with someone in one of those three ghost towns. 

 

Raising every zone would create worse character disparities in those zones. As an example let's say someone gets out of their DFB grind at level 20 and decides to go to Siren's Call. They are a little interested in PvP so they have a defensive build and fully slot out their powers. With the caps as-is they're a handful of powers behind and don't have all the juicy set bonuses that the 50 does, Exed down to 30, but they know the risks, and maybe the fight lasts a little while (maybe they bring a friend.) Instead, SKed up to 50, they are now 30 levels worth of powers (plus epics) behind. Unless the EX system jacks their SOs up to ridiculous levels (which in my experience it does not) they'll be way farther behind. 

 

Reading this thread I get the feeling that "zone PvP is terrible and only Arena Versus is good" which suggests changing the zones isn't going to change that. Changing them to fit that mindset (removing badges and mobs) seems pretty drastic.

And sorry if I'm misreading it and you actually mean to lock all pvp to level 50 only, which would be even crazier.

no not locking it to level 50, opening it all the way up and raising everything to 50. actually I think the best option is the second option which leaves a little bit of both. I could be convinced bringing bb and SC to 30 or 38 flat for both and only WB to 50. less zone breaking that way, and it still creates a more even zone PvP experience between zones that isn't outright weird. 

I'm not saying remove PvE I'm saying it being -harder- shouldn't really be an -issue- if PvP is the focus of the zone. It's never been the case that a low level character passing through the zone for badges has been able to survive a PvPer with a finished toon. and that's the majority of the time PvPers are in the zones, is on built toons.

Trying to preserve the already non existent illusion that you have a chance in that fight, to keep a version of the zone that isn't conductive to it's intended audience seems unproductive. That's what I feel it's current state is, unproductive for PvP under these level restrictions.

Lastly, 
" (removing badges and mobs) seems pretty drastic." I didn't suggest removing any badges or mobs in my poll

Edited July 30, 2022 by Terius

[Rudra]

I think that may just further embitter PvE players towards PvP players, but as you said, it is a PvP zone. It has PvE objectives thrown in there to lure PvE players in there for some PvP, and no one likes just getting completely demolished, but it is a PvP zone and that already happens. I think the zones should stay as is and said that, but it is for the PvP players to decide what happens to them.

[Completist]

I guess I agree that viable competition between 50 vs below-50 is mostly illusory. But I like the level caps to create restrictions that change up the game play a little. I like the idea of BB maxing at 25, preventing you from getting your T9s, changing the balance of how different builds work out; but admittedly don't know if it matters in practice (I'm getting the feeling that PvPers want to play with all their toys).

 

Making all 4 zones level 50 would diminish the (balance/feel) character of each zone, but it would give 50s more background variety to their PvP--and maybe that sacrifice would be worth it for the PvP devotees. If 99% of PvP happens in RV anyhow, the different level balance in the other three zones doesn't matter; changing things would only hurt 1% and improve the rest by giving it more variety. 

 

I'd sayone zone should stay capped below max--like you said, leaving BB at 30 or something--to be a 'dip your toe in' experience for players who don't want to go all in against hardcore players right away... but perhaps this idea has some merit.

[Rudra]

On 7/28/2022 at 9:58 PM, Terius said:

You're not the first person I've heard complain about archetype disparity in PvP zones, trust me I hear you there.

The goal here again is to make the zone PvP experience more universal, so you get whooped in with your buddies in WB for example, get your feet set a bit, then you can jump into RV with more educated players, -and- a better understanding of how your build works at 50 in a zone. All without having to literally jump directly into the only hot PvP zone to learn how level 50's behave under zone DR

Yeah, that goal as you portray it isn't going to happen. If there are PvP players/fledglings learning the ropes in PvP zone Epsilon, then PvP players will go to PvP zone Epsilon to hunt them. Why? Because they are available for PvP. I've seen PvP players (in other games) specifically going into starter zones to pick fights with the new characters. (And not surprisingly, a lot of the new characters took the bait {insults} and fought the PvP player only to get completely annihilated.) It doesn't happen in CoX because it can't happen in CoX.

 

(And if you want to know what games I saw that in? It was CO and WoW. Level 40s in CO challenging level 6 characters fresh from the tutorial and level 60 characters in WoW sneaking into starter zones to gank NPCs and level 1-3 characters.)

Edited July 30, 2022 by Rudra
Edited to correct "waht" to "what".

[Kataklysm]

7 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Yeah, that goal as you portray it isn't going to happen. If there are PvP players/fledglings learning the ropes in PvP zone Epsilon, then PvP players will go to PvP zone Epsilon to hunt them. Why? Because they are available for PvP. I've seen PvP players (in other games) specifically going into starter zones to pick fights with the new characters. (And not surprisingly, a lot of the new characters took the bait {insults} and fought the PvP player only to get completely annihilated.) It doesn't happen in CoX because it can't happen in CoX.

 

(And if you want to know what games I saw that in? It was CO and WoW. Level 40s in CO challenging level 6 characters fresh from the tutorial and level 60 characters in WoW sneaking into starter zones to gank NPCs and level 1-3 characters.)

how's that any different from now, they can still take their built characters and dominate the fight as a deleveled 50 even from level 25. the suggestion again is largely to universalize zone PvP since a large number of people have expressed enjoying PvP at level 50 the most, also that PvP at level 25/30/38 is largely uninteresting. room to stretch is a benefit if anything. 

[Kataklysm]

15 minutes ago, Completist said:

I'd sayone zone should stay capped below max--like you said, leaving BB at 30 or something--to be a 'dip your toe in' experience for players who don't want to go all in against hardcore players right away... but perhaps this idea has some merit.

 precisely. and it's one cap, not two different power gates between BB and SC. WB and RV as the -hard- zones at 50

Edited July 30, 2022 by Terius

[Rudra]

Not saying it is any different. Was just making a note that the goal of differentiated PvP levels won't happen. If anything, the current configuration where those in Bloody Bay are limited to level 25+5 gives starting PvP players a better chance to learn before facing the unbridled might of a fully developed PvP character. I'm not a PvP player. I'm pretty sure I will never be a PvP player. So while I may make notes and observations, that is all they are. Sorry.