Human_Being

[ QUOTE ]
NO. Banning people for making racial comments and comments agains the EULA in ANY context, pvp or pve, is the perfect policy that should be enforced.

NO. Just cause you are pvping doesn't mean you get talk about some one's mom or some of the worse idiocy I've heard in places like Siren's call.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed.

[ QUOTE ]
Back on topic, I think the flag in a PVP ZONE idea is a stupid idea.

You go there expecting pvp. You don't want pvp, don't enter the zone. Period.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's the current model under which CoX PVP is dying of anemia. Conceptually this is a facet of game-play that should be a nominal subscription draw.

Is your objection based on the desire not to encounter PVP even tangentially; to keep it separate and let it die off if it will? (Remember, this is a genial debate and "yes" is an acceptable answer.)

[ QUOTE ]
First, to date no "flagged" system that has ever been implemented worked well.

Second, the exploits associated with flagging in most of the implementations results in much more acrimony and problems for casual players interested in trying PvP.

Third, PvP'ers are no nicer or meaner than any other segment of the gaming population but they are more unavoidable if you go into a PvP zone.

Fourth, your experience of how the zones are populated or not is far from representative. Many/most PvP'ers (which were reasonably dispersed) have migrated to one of a couple servers. This has caused the zones on servers other than Freedom and Virtue to greatly drop in activity while on those servers (and to a degree Infinity) there is more PvP activity.

[/ QUOTE ]
Other games are not CoX, I've addressed the griefing complaints that have arrisen in this thread, player behavior in PVP is far more important since you must have someone else to play with you, and I play almost exclusively on Freedom with some time on the Test server.

[ QUOTE ]
I think that might be true if the trash talkers were actually capable of reason. I mean really, how well has that worked so far? It's still one of the biggest complaints after all this time, and it's not even as bad as it used to be.

[/ QUOTE ]
The question of "trash talkers'" reasoning capabilities aside, I believe they are capable of getting bored.

[ QUOTE ]
If only people would learn to turn off broadcast in PvP then the issue wouldn't exist.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is a symptomatic solution based on the miscomprehension that those who avoid PVP for the "trash talk" are viscerally offended by the words themselves. The reason for citing "trash talk" is that they find the people voicing it not worth spending time with; let alone playing with. Just because they can't hear it doesn't make the problem go away.

*Not being forced to play with said individuals, on the other hand, would better address the irritation

EDIT: edited for clarity *

[ QUOTE ]
The first thing I thought of was that broadcast trash talk would escalate beyond all reason in an attempt to get people to flag for PvP.

Not really a trick, but if trash talk is really as big of an issue as people say it is now it certainly would be counterproductive to getting non-PvPers to try it.

[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed it would be. And then it would taper off shortly after as PVP players either learned to be more solicitous or left off because they kept themselves from having any playmates.

[ QUOTE ]
PvP-ers would have to glow at a distance of one mile to even find one another among the PvE crowds. And convincing a PvE player to turn on the PvP flag... Not likely to happen often.

[/ QUOTE ]
Or they could just target the people with the Orange names as they do now. Or they could Broadcast "I'm in X_neighborhood looking for a fight" as they do now. Even Steel Canyon doesn't see the un-navigable population density you describe. PVP players should be lucky to have such a problem to deal with.

[ QUOTE ]
People would also develop various nasty tricks in order to get others PvP flagged. Get yourself PvP marked, then stand next to someone who is using a healing aura fpr PvE purposes? Probably instant PvP flag.

[/ QUOTE ]
I have no clue what you are talking about here. I suspect this is the legacy of Xury's posts based on it not making sense. Please go back a couple pages and read the recap post I put up.

[ QUOTE ]
So, while I like tie idea of making these zones more useful, I don't think this is the way. One possible way to do it would be to create separate PvE instances of them. That salvages the job put into the zones from a PvE perspective, but kills the idea of introducing PvEers to PvP.

[/ QUOTE ]
That kills the idea of getting any infusion of new players into PVP and essentially kills PVP period for development priority.

Perception boost.

Stealth isn't needed specifically against the rocks in PVP mode as you may never even set off the spawn and in PVE it's not desirable

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did we get teleported? We're in "City Life - CoH & CoV General Discussions" now?

This is hardly a general discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]
It's been in here the whole time.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually it wasn't; see Gata_'s post on the second page. About three seconds after I copy-pasted the second post in it got shifted to suggestions and ideas based on its nature. A little over an hour after that someone read through the content, saw the reaction, and moved it back here.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Bloody Bay
If a PVE mode character should attempt to grief a PVPer making the run, the more dangerous spawn they generate will initially be aggroed on them, giving the PVEer (and possibly friends) time to get their samples before having to face a larger threat.

[/ QUOTE ]
Right there, that addresses my concern with your plan for BB. I would add the caveat that maybe the tougher spawn would in fact be "taunted" onto the player that made them spawn, at least for a few seconds, to make this solution feasible. Otherwise, since the defending Shivans can't chase after a griefer doing, say, a Super Speed "drive-by", they would immediately shift their attention to those still hanging out at the meteor.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I described much earlier in the thread, but it's a long way back. I avoided using a specific mechanic word like "taunted" since I'm mucking about in some complex alterations, but that's exactly the effect I wanted: You woke it up, you get the hate for a good while regardless of where anyone else is (unless another PVEer goes for the rock; then they get the hate).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Siren's Call

The "hotspots" would still appear on the map and be active, but "control" of the hotspots would not gate access to the zone temp powers. The temps are accessed with merit-alikes and the hotspots merely serve to let all open-zone free-form PVPers know "where the fight is". Players of appropriate faction in either PVE or PVP mode could buff npcs of their own faction, but the npcs are so weak it really would be pointless and if they did, PVPers could just shift their fight 50 ft so they're out of aggro range to ignore the attempted "griefing".
All the play types that are currently in the PVP zones would still be available.

[/ QUOTE ]
With respect, that still ends up marginalizing the SC play type that I enjoyed - Villain PCs and Arachnos vs. Hero PCs and Longbow. So not quite "all" of the current play types would still be there. I think you're writing off the NPCs a little too lightly. Back when I was winning the zone for villainy, I didn't just fly in and laugh off a Warden, 2 Officers, and 5 Nullifiers, with assorted minions to the tune of 8-12. I had to use Arachnos as a shield. And when a hero or heroes showed up, things really got interesting. Some flag-off Defender strolling in with his AE heals and buffs would completely destroy that scenario, and the only balancing factor (the Defender's personal vulnerability) would be off limits.

Don't get me wrong! Again, your system would add a lot more than it would take away! I just think you're going a bit far saying that absolutely nothing would be lost.

[/ QUOTE ]
As I haven't actually done that, I can't speak to your specific criticism and you may have a point. I considered it an unnecessary bit of finageling. If that's not the case then leave PVE-flagged characters unable to buff npcs of same faction and still targettable by npcs of unaligned faction.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
merit-alikes (can someone please come up with a better name for these things?)

[/ QUOTE ]
"PvP Merits" sounds good to me. You could even call them
PPMs for short.

[/ QUOTE ]
"Merits", as in 'citation for Merit', is a character and roleplay specific name associated with military activity in the Vanguard. I'm looking for something similarly appropriate.

As to whether merit-alikes should be earned for a loss, as I said in an earlier post I leave all such calculations to someone who knows more game-theory than I do.

[ QUOTE ]
HB.

Love the ideas. But I think what the merits can buy should be beefed up. PVP is hard and thus needs better rewards.

PVP only IOs and IO sets (can be copies of the current IO sets). IOs that only work with your PVP build.
These wont impact the current market, cant be sold, cant be traded and can only be bought via merits (no drops).
Really want to see how your toon works with a few LOTGs, but dont have 50mil? No problem get a few PVP kills and buy em up. This also helps level the PVP playing field by giving equal access to hard to find stuff that PVPers have to PVE farm.

[/ QUOTE ]
My concern here would be that "IOing Up" your PVP build might lead to a long stretch of thrown-matches until the desired enh were available. I also didn't want to 'penalize' people who'd already put large amounts of Inf into their enhancements and make they "had to do all of that again" once they started PVPing. Still, it's not a terrible idea.

[ QUOTE ]
Crazy idea. Merits that buy a level. Yes its exploitable, but what if you have 5 level 50s and are tired of the PVE content. Do you really need to pay a farmer to level up your PVP toon to 50 so you can get into all the PVP content? If you set the amount needed pretty high (level of PVP effort = to PVE effort per level) then who cares? PVE farmers exploit the PVE game already.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just the idea would be corrosive. From a Dev perspective and trying to manage the player's expectations and perspective I'd call "no" on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
PVP merit exploits patching:
Anybody with 0 or -rep gives little or no merits per kill. (I assume getting killed gives you -rep)
Each PVP kill vesus the same person in a 4 hour sliding timeframe gives exponetially less merits per kill.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll leave any comment on specific rewards, reward weighting, and cost-amounts to someone who knows more game-theory than I do.

[ QUOTE ]
PVP in the future:
If PVPing takes off... you could add PVP only IOs, costumes, titles, and other items to ego boost the big merit earners.

[/ QUOTE ]
My friend Ogon_Dark (who also helped me proof-read the Original Post) suggested something similar with PVP-only enh that would exist to address imbalances in specific builds. It's not a bad idea, but is a solution looking for a problem at the moment and couldn't be justified until/unless PVP took off. Put a pin in the idea for later.

Being able to publicly display your PVP history at a glance was the impetus behind my suggesting a "Wrestler's Championship belt" and "Luchadore mask" costume pieces purchaseable with merit-alikes. Purchaseable titles I hadn't considered and can't think of specific ones for. Anyone else with specific costume piece ideas?

Okay, I've addressed a number of concerns about play experience earlier in this thread; but that's now far "earlier in the thread". As a recap, I'll go through what play would be like in each zone. This is what my reply to ICF_Zombra turned into, so please consider it the reply to Zombra and Fenrisulfr (who has a great avatar for his forum name).

Bloody Bay
A player zones in with PVP Flag OFF. They can wander the zone, explore, pick up exploration badges, fight random npcs, roleplay, or just hang out. They can team and run any story-arc missions that happen to be available in the zone, but cannot run any of the zone buff/debuff or patrol missions as they are not currently participating in PVP. The generic npcs in the zone (Circle of Thorns, Freakshow, etc) would be no different than they are now.

If they should decide to start on the zone mini-game, they should probably get a team together (regardles of AT). Whether they do or not, from a great distance from each rock, a Shivan Decimator spawns along with a coterie of Devastator bosses. The shivans will not leave the immediate vicinity of the rock and thus cannot be taunted away; nor will they remain aggroed on another if a player "attacks" the rock with the spoon. The mobs essentially must be defeated at each rock in order to get a sample. If the players remain at a given rock too long then the defenders will respawn as well. Yet they would give token xp and thus are not worth farming. Once each team member has all six samples, the eight turrets of a firebase must be defeated in order to process the sample, but the mobs scale to be significantly tougher than they are in the game right now.

If the player should elect to engage in PVP, they need to go back to the zone PVP contact and select "enter PVP mode". This switches them to their PVP build and a different power-tray arrangement. A 30 second timer starts counting down to the switch from PVE to PVP flag just as it does now. Once the flag is set, they are now in free-form open-zone PVP in the same way as play currently exists in PVP zones. They are free to attack and be attacked by anyone else engaged in the same activity, whether teamed or not. They can also select the buff/debuff and patrol zone missions from the PVP contact.

If they should decide to run the mini-game, they can choose to team or not, but it isn't a practical necessity. Accepting the spoon from the scientist contact prevents them from issuing or accepting a challenge and if they are already in a challenge they cannot access the spoon. Gaining possession of the mission temp sends a message to all players in the zone of opposite faction currently in PVP mode that "someone" is trying to get meteorite samples. When the player (and/or teamates) approaches the meteorite, the large spawn radius that generates the Shivan EB and coterie would not detect them; the smaller one that exists in the game now instead generates the Boss/Leutenant/Minions spawn. However, since it's the currently existing spawn radius, that's only if they are inexperienced or clumsy; there are plenty of ways to get your sample without generating the spawn at all. (I actually had to go into the game while writing the Original Post and deliberately set one off because it had been so long since I'd even seen the guards I couldn't remember what the spawn consisted of ). The PVPer's actual opposition, if any, is other PVPers. It's possible that on a low-population server there could be no one to oppose the PVPer and they would have a much easier time than if they were in PVE mode. In that case, the run is no easier than it is in the game now and there is the chance that they may just get unlucky and call down some opposition.

If a PVP mode character attempts to grief a PVE group making the Shivan run, all they can generate is a Boss/Leutenant/Minions spawn which is initially aggroed to the PVPer and should pose little additional threat to a PVE group loaded for EBs. If a PVE mode character should attempt to grief a PVPer making the run, the more dangerous spawn they generate will initially be aggroed on them, giving the PVEer (and possibly friends) time to get their samples before having to face a larger threat. If there is already an EB spawn at the meteorite because of a PVE team's defeat (or earlier griefing attempt), the PVP mode character can approach and see if the Gamester's-present-snowmen code auto-kills them because they have set unattended for X amount of time. If not, they can skip to another rock and come back to this one afterwards.

When they get to the firebase, the gun turrets scale as they do now and are no more dangerous than currently (i.e. not very but can be time consuming).

If the player in PVP mode encounters player-behavior or game conditions they do not want to participate in, they can travel back to their base (as normal or via faceplant express) and re-enter PVE-mode. If they are not done PVPing, they can also offer challenge to an individual or team and play with just them; all members of the Challenge would see each other as being in PVP mode, but all other players in the zone regardless of flag could not attack or effect the challengers as if they were in PVE mode and of opposite faction. All npcs in the zone can still attack player characters regardless of flag.

When offering a challenge, a selection of the Ouroboros difficulty settings can be included; allowing a duel or conflict to have a definite end-point in time or number of defeats and restricting access to temp powers, inspirations, or anything else that might bias a match. Self-debuff can also be engaged if the opponent(s) doesn't think the match is fair due to some other factor like normally-inappropriate primary/secondary choices. A radio button would exist when entering PVP mode which would allow one to refuse all Challenges, preventing the pop-up window from being annoying or used for griefing. (though one would expect it to still be polite to send a tell and ask first; if for no other reason than to inquire what settings the opponent would accept.)

Siren's Call
The same PVE activities as in Bloody Bay would be available to someone entering Siren's Call. They would not be automatically entered into the Bounty exchange.

When someone entered PVP mode, they could play just as in Bloody bay and again are not automatically entered into the Bounty exchange. If they decide they wish to participate in that particular type of play though, they can select to enter the Bounty hunt from the PVP contact. The cannot do this if they are in a challenge or accept challenges if they are in the bounty exchange.

The "hotspots" would still appear on the map and be active, but "control" of the hotspots would not gate access to the zone temp powers. The temps are accessed with merit-alikes (can someone please come up with a better name for these things that is easier to type and isn't a thinly-veiled pop-culture reference like my "bars of soap"?) and the hotspots merely serve to let all open-zone free-form PVPers know "where the fight is". Players of appropriate faction in either PVE or PVP mode could buff npcs of their own faction, but the npcs are so weak it really would be pointless and if they did, PVPers could just shift their fight 50 ft so they're out of aggro range to ignore the attempted "griefing".

Warburg
Playtypes available in Warburg are again similar to Bloody Bay. In PVE mode, the npcs on the streets would be of the same scale and spawn size (though perhaps more spawns in some of the emptier areas; there are some very barren streets in that zone), but would perceive PVEers from much further away and aggro faster. Moving through the streets would be a fight rather than a casual stroll. The spawns of Arachnoids would also be set to the "the zone has many people in it" sized spawns with a leavening of smaller spawns for people who wished to try and stealth the spiders.

If a character entered PVP mode, the aggro-distance for street npcs would be the same as it currently is (i.e. they can essentially walk past 98% of the spawns). Any character in PVP mode who did not yet have a launch code-piece that tethered a tech would generate a message to all other PVP mode players in the zone saying that someone was attempting to launch the rocket. Posession of a tech would prevent someone from entering a challenge and those in a challenge could not talk to a free tech.

Recluse's Victory
In Recluse's Victory, a PVE mode character could explore, talk to people, get exploration badges*, enter any story-arc missions, but do nothing else. No npc would attack them and they could not effect npcs. Since the entirety of the zone is tallied for the win or loss of the mini-game, only those in PVP mode and not in a challenge could participate.

(* If PVE characters cannot get exploration badges, then they must construct a PVP build in order to get an accolade pre-req. That would be terribly counter-productive to a series of changes attempting to present PVP as casual and consensualy-associative to the majority of the playerbase. A huge Red Line.)



All the play types that are currently in the PVP zones would still be available (with the exception that "controlling Siren's Call" does not gate access to the zone temps). One can choose when and with whom to PVP rather than it be someone else's decision. And the variety of play types expands. Finally, PVP changes are able to be considered at all because they open up pre-existing areas to new PVE content.

[ QUOTE ]
the pvp community is growing. i'm pretty sure it will continue to grow as long as pvp remains challenging in both the intellectual aspect (optimize your build or die.) and the performance aspect (learn to play your toon or be farmed).

[/ QUOTE ]
The "PVPers are the elite" concept aside, you completely lost me here.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a thought, keep the flagging to toggle between a PvE and PvP build, or when you enter a PvP zone in instantly toggles to your PvP build. Instead of coming in from a chopper, or in a street like sirens, you enter into a base like in RV for all zones. Add some type of terminal screen/hi-tech gadget in the bases which allows you to view other heroes in the zone, would be seeing things from their perspective. They would be safe inside their base, and there would be no PvE toggle in the zones. Just off the top of my head.

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, that would eliminate the rationale for adding PVE content using pre-existing zones (i.e. making PVP changes pay for themselves). It would also prevent the influx of traffic to the pvp zones. People could "go to observe PVP", but still that is a pvp-centric activity instead of having PVP ubiquitously to-hand to catch when a whim might strike someone.

[ QUOTE ]
I really like this idea of flagging. L2 has something similar, as does SWG. However, as Xury said,...

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I have no idea what it was Xury was reading when he raised his objections, but it wasn't my Original Post. Case in point being this concern about PVEers buffing RV AVs. As I've stated *counts on fingers*...four times: the ideas laid out in the original post do not allow for that to happen.

*Drives a stake through the meme, sets in on fire, and feeds it to the Hamidon* "And stay dead! @_@"

I was very conscious of ways a player-settable PVP flag might be abused in a mixed population setting and addressed each that I saw for the different specific environment. I know it's a long post, I shortened it as much as I could and still be comprehensive. If you're unclear on something, please go back and read both Original Posts and then raise a question if you think a point doesn't make sense.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No.
Remove PvE content from PvP zones altogether. Don't add more, don't make the current options more appealing.

Remove them.

No more missions of any kind.
Remove the XP and drops from any NPC in the zones.
If you want to make a new zone with PvE content that both sides can access, make it a purely PvE zone.


You can't make both sides happy by forcing them to interact.

[/ QUOTE ]

100% full agreement. Keep PVP out of PVE and take PVE out of PVP.

IF PVP is a viable, legitimate playstyle, it should be able to stand on it's own merit rather than having to force (OK, I agree people aren't forced, but that's the perception) or bribe players into PVP.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, two related points so I'll take them together.

To Faolon:

I would agree with you entirely on the idea that you "can't make both sides happy by forcing them to interact". And while "PVEers" and "PVPers" are not taxonomically distinct animals (despite copious commentary on their differing mating habits in BB broadcast chat), there is a 'split' in the game resulting in two "sides". PVP is almost a separate game because of everything I listed in the original post. With virtually no one happy with this schizoid condition, there are two options. You can remove the friction points when the two different types of play are occuring in the same locale, or you can go ahead and make the separation complete so they do not interact at all. That latter would eliminate the unhappiness, but it would also mean cutting the PVP portion of the game loose without any support. For a game-element that is already struggling, this is tantamount to a developmental death sentence. Which brings us to...

To Leatherneck:

...the fact that PVP is on development-priority life-support. Anyone can go and see the small zone-populations in the PVP-zones or hear the annecdotes about just how small the subscriber-base involved with PVP is. The lack of major development activity since Issue 7 with Recluse's Victory also speaks volumes. The clincher if any was needed is Ex Libris' focused and high profile interaction with the PVP community. (Activty which she has had to defend from protests that she should spend time on "more worthwhile" areas of the game by saying she "goes where the bleeding is".

That's the subtext for the entirety of the conversation of this thread: is PVP in CoX worth spending resources on to try and save?

"No" is an honestly valid opinion. It was actually my opinion to let PVP sink on its own until just recently. I'd seen plenty in two years that convinced me CoX PVP contributed far less in subscription-revenue, forum-conversation, and game-experience terms than it consumed. The final nail was the "Go die" post and its ilk during the Scrambled Eggs incident of i11 Beta. (If you don't know what I'm referring to there, it's too asinine for you to spend time in your life learning about and I won't entertain a rehash of that conversation here.)

The NCSoft buyout in the midst of i11 Beta changed things. Firstly, that was a fantastic Beta. Every Dev that we could see was right in there with us, grease up to their elbows, and I swear BaB's ankles hurt from being stuck in that oil lamp: every time someone said "I wish that...", it happened. Lighthouse and Ex Libris were extremely involved and responsive. I came away with the idea that player opinions would indeed be given more than lip-service attention and a well reasoned argument could effect the direction of the game.

The buyout itself and decision to "reinvest" in CoX convinced me there was a long-term future for City of Heroes. Before the general mood seemed that it might fall by the wayside when MUO came out. Now if CoX ever became too long in the tooth to continue growing, there was nothing standing in the way of a re-engined CoH2.

The migration en masse of the Developers to NCSoft showed me that the people working behind the scenes love this game. I'm sure the employment offer was "competitive", but no one had to take it. Still, the entire team wanted to keep working on CoX!

This is a game crafted by people who really care about it, that has a bright future outlook, and I feel personally invested in its success and my experience with the game.*

With that state of mind, if there is an ill portion of the game and a way to help it while helping the rest of the game at the same time, I think it's worth looking for. I can't argue if you say you don't want to see more resources poured into PVP with little chance of return. I will argue that if the resources and technical capabilities are present to do what I outline in the Original Post, it would work.

(* To any powers that be which might read this: yes that does mean the heavy interaction and feedback is worth it and your community team is doing its job.)

Regardless, it's a pertinent conversation topic and one that ought to be out in the open. At some point, a decision has to be made whether to keep supporting a non-performing game element or cut it loose. I have no idea when such a decision might be taken, but the community was put on notice very recently that: The Clock. Is. Ticking.

Edit: edited for formatting.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Upon being invited to a challenge and accepting, both members would switch to a flagging scheme such that they could only attack one another. No one else could attack them and they could not attack anyone else. (I do not know if this is possible with existing tech.) If the challenger or challenged is a team leader, then all of their team would enter the challenge on their side.

[/ QUOTE ]

On re-reading HB's post, I think this part is unworkable because it's too easy to exploit. Arrange to meet a buddy in PVP, then work out a scheme for one character or the other to earn the merits or whatever other benefits are in the zone.

[/ QUOTE ]

I address part of that here with stating the zone mini-games granting significant buffs (i.e. Shivans and Nukes) should be inaccessible to someone in a challenge and vice versa.

As to teaming and trading "falls" for merits, people already do that with "Rep" and that was assumed in the formulation of what could be gotten with merit-alikes. The rewards there are useful but non-overwhelming or can be gotten elsewhere in the game without PVP at all (though in random fashion).

The vernacular term is "straw-manning"; the construction of a fallacious argument, imputing it to an opponent, then attacking the argument.

Usually it's done deliberately as a type of debate character-assassination. Here and in the post before I believe it's unintentional. Never the less, the concepts you are criticizing are so twisted as to be nigh unrecognizable.

You referenced the example of Taunt I mentioned in my reply to Bionic_Flea, so you did look at that. But for that post and the Original one it seems like you are arguing against something composed of every third sentence. You talk about 'Elite Bosses in Warburg' when the only one's I ever mentioned were specifically Shivan Decimators (something you actually quote in your post). You conflate instanced PVE story arcs with external zone mini-games. You repeatedly express confusion.

I've already done due diligence by responding in full to one of these and pointing out where you hadn't seen or at least not understood. This is yet another tangle that has nothing to do with the actual concepts I raised. Furthermore:
[ QUOTE ]
I had no idea Lord Recluse was being played by a Dev the entire time. I don't honestly remember him saying," I'm using temporal anchors to try and take over the world. It's your job to beat 4 turrets on top, but leave the hero players alone, cause they're in pve mode, even though they're trying to stop me from taking over the world."

[/ QUOTE ]
You're beginning to snark. Snark directed at you for an opinion you've expressed is annoying. Snark directed at you for something someone else made up is just tiresome.

I was already tired beforehand so I'm only going to directly respond to a piece of this for illustration...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As I go into here, the only "upgraded PVE danger" a PVPer might face is a Shivan EB. These can be dealt with in the same fashion that one deals with an abandoned Christmas Present spawn and are localized to six known locations that actually appear on the map.

The only npcs a PVE player might interfere with would be the faction-aligned spawns in Siren's Call. While putting Fortitude on a Longbow Flamethrower or rocking-the-aura for a Tarantual Mistress might fall under the category of "annoying", it isn't game breaking or something that prevents a play element. The spawns are unlikely to be that dangerous to a PVP team in the first place, they are again localized to specific spots and any PVP-build worth its salt has un-supressable travel, the hotspots and "control of Siren's Call" would no longer gate access to the currently un-bought-and-unused reward temps with implementation of merit-alikes, and at the current time the hotspots already serve merely as map locations to let PVPers know "where the fight is". I actually see people more often fighting near the oil rigs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Waitaminute... didn't you just say they can't attack anything if they're in pve mode? You said,"PVE-mode characters could enter, collect badges, ask questions, learn about the zone game, but not attack anything."

[/ QUOTE ]
I certainly did. The two sentences prior to that one establish that the one you have quoted is a special case and only applies to Recluse's Victory. It does not reference Siren's Call whatsoever.

There are so many sentences that are mix-and-matches of things from completely unrelated segments of the report it would be pointless to go through them all. I am not going to respond to another one of these even in token fashion.

[ QUOTE ]
btw, an idea to tack on to this

I think that a PvP respec recipe should be buyable via "merit-alikes"

make cost a lot or whatever but it usually takes a few drafts of a build for newcomers to find the perfect fit

[/ QUOTE ]
Whoah!

While writing the original post it occurred to me that if new people did start moving into the PVP zones, there's going to be a lot of people making new mistakes. New players don't have that many respecs and old-timers (those with the most inf in IO builds) have often used most of theirs. I *tried* to come up with a fair way to give extra access to respecs for PVP and couldn't find one.

This is an excellent idea.

Someone might argue that if someone really needed the respec, they wouldn't have the merits to purchase it. But as I said in the original post, merit-alikes should be gainable from all PVP: zone, Arena, and Gladiator Arena. There are ways to find a challenge to suit your current abilities.

Speaking of that last, if you are looking for a system in which all players are set to the same potential for PVP, it already exists in the form of Gladiators.

*stands back and watches Folonius run with the ball.*

EDIT: Said in reference to the last few pages, not the fumble immediately above .

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say that the onus is on those who want to defend PvP zones as a free-fire experience to explain why continuing to use a mechanic that is failing is better than implementing something else. If someone could make a compelling case for how a flagging system would make PvP less appealing to the whole of the COX population, I'd be glad to hear it. But seeing as how that system is already in place, and not doing very well, it's hard to imagine what someone would have to construct to make a viable argument out of it.

[/ QUOTE ]
What he said (the referenced post in toto).

[ QUOTE ]
There was a few things I wanted to address though, the first was on Flagging.

I'm a believer that there SHOULD be seperate PvP and PvE builds. But I'm with Pax, and strongly disagree that there should be a 'PvP off' mode in pvp zones.

See, here's the thing... If it does happen, there needs to be an option where the two could NEVER interact, which IMO is counter-productive to everything you've said.

This was because of something that was brought to my attention on my own server. During an event in Recluse's victory, there was a lot of heroes in the zone that were going AV hunting. Also in the zone were about 5 or 6 villains. So they were grossly outnumbered. The thing was, they didn't mind.

So when Lord Recluse spawned, the heroes went after him. Since the villains would get thrashed if they went up against that many heroes at once, instead they buffed Lord Recluse. Forge, Shileds, Fulcrum shift. They were killed for doing that... but they instead 'went to base' and respawned again right next to them (an issue which should be fixed).

Now they had a 30 second timer of no pvp... Again, they buffed/healed Lord Recluse with no risk at all to them, and all the heroes wiped.

[/ QUOTE ]
From the original post:
The mini-game for RV is a bit different from all the others since it directly effects the zone itself and the entire zone is tallied for a win or loss. Therefore, there really is no PVE element to it. Anyone in PVE mode should be rendered incapable of targeting and attacking the pillboxes or npcs (say that they are subtly out of phase with the temporal locus the anchors and PVPers are at or something ). PVE-mode characters could enter, collect badges, ask questions, learn about the zone game, but not attack anything.

[ QUOTE ]
Now, what if we DO make it so that PvE and PvP cannot interact? Well what if someone's genuinely in trouble? Like for example if the PvE mobs that are nice and upgraded start hitting the PvP players hard, and the player is in trouble of getting zone debt? Well they can't really help you at all, besides someone with taunt.

Or vice verca, A pvper hero sees someone PvE getting overwhelmed, and he tries to help them out... but let's say he's a buffer class. Well he can't buff him at all, or heal him. It's rather depressing that you can't help out them unless you run back to base and 'switch off' pvp mode if this were true.

[/ QUOTE ]
As I go into here, the only "upgraded PVE danger" a PVPer might face is a Shivan EB. These can be dealt with in the same fashion that one deals with an abandoned Christmas Present spawn and are localized to six known locations that actually appear on the map.

The only npcs a PVE player might interfere with would be the faction-aligned spawns in Siren's Call. While putting Fortitude on a Longbow Flamethrower or rocking-the-aura for a Tarantual Mistress might fall under the category of "annoying", it isn't game breaking or something that prevents a play element. The spawns are unlikely to be that dangerous to a PVP team in the first place, they are again localized to specific spots and any PVP-build worth its salt has un-supressable travel, the hotspots and "control of Siren's Call" would no longer gate access to the currently un-bought-and-unused reward temps with implementation of merit-alikes, and at the current time the hotspots already serve merely as map locations to let PVPers know "where the fight is". I actually see people more often fighting near the oil rigs.

The expression of charity in the above statement also might be seen as admirable, but the specific players in quiestion might also see it as interference. Furthermore, that type of situation is an edge case. It's not terribly often I run into a character in a regular zone that is in over their head, rarer that I'm in a position to do something about it in time, and rarer still that assistance is wanted.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not seeing a way that this wouldn't be exploited, unless you made it a 1 time deal. After they enter the zone and not con for pvp, if they enter again, they are flagged for pvp.

The way I see it, if a badge hunter just wants to badge hunt and has NO interest in pvp whatsoever, no matter how many rewards or goodies are thrown in... well they go in once, get everything they need, and leave with no problems.

Wether or not this would be limited to actually exiting or logging out, I'm not sure. But I would be sure that it would be once per pvp zone.

[/ QUOTE ]
From the original post:
A potential criticism of this idea I've heard before is "PVP is for PVP zones and PVE is for PVE zones; leave PVP for PVP". This mental segregation is foolish. Beyond the fact that there is already nominal reason for PVEers to enter for badges and such, all the PVPers already PVP. It is the PVEers that would need to be courted to find something appealing in PVP for it to flourish. That will only happen with more (and better) exposure. This also doesn't "destroy PVP" by any stretch of reality. All those who PVP will still PVP. Those who had thought about it but didn't want to make design compromises for the rest of the game will give it a second look. And those who avoided PVP zones 100% of the time are now free to enter the zone and possibly be invited (or repelled) by what they see to give it a try. The only standpoint from which this is a bad thing is the opinion that PVEers are drawn into PVP zones to be the rightful prey of dedicated PVPers. Strangely, "you are there for my enjoyment" is rarely an attractive argument for people .

While it might have happened, I consider it unlikely that many people heard that there were badges in CoX and bought the game. Yet badging is a thriving, active subcommunity in the game. Some leapt at it when they got their first shiney, some after they had acquired a substantial collection by osmosis, some after they had tired of other activities in the game. Regardless it was always there for them to pick up (or not) as their interest and mood dictated at the time. They were not given an option of looking at it once and deciding on the spot, in that one mindset of the moment, whether they wanted to 'be a badger' or not.

If PVP is going to draw casual players, it needs to be something people can eye, poke at, leave where it is, and come back to some other time. "One tour and then get out if you aren't a true PVPer" is barely better, if not actively worse, than today's model for the PVP zones.

But far more importantly, removing the flagging concept removes the ability of the zones to be used for PVE story arcs. Traffic to the zones would not increase and the financial rationale for implementing build switching would disappear. If there is no traffic increase and no reduction in the entry barrier, there is no incentive for coding a system of grouping opposing PVP teams in weighted fashion. If neither of those are there, there's no point in making a reward system for a game element that will structurally and culturally keep itself from growing.

[ QUOTE ]
Now what about the whole hero and villain thing? What if 2 people are both in the zone and PvEing... and are stealing each other's mobs?

[/ QUOTE ]
This is basic killstealing and already exists in the game. What's more, I've already encountered it hero-vs-villain (we did not attack each other at all) in the BB salvage yards.

[ QUOTE ]
But those are my reason PvP flaging wouldn't be a good idea. I'm seeing a lot of ways to exploit the system. Plus as many problems as it might solve, there will be others that crop up.

[/ QUOTE ]
The above criticisms either can't happen or are edge cases. Since it gives a chance of revitalizing PVP, avoiding it for unspecified-yet-inevitable future problems is not a sound argument.

[ QUOTE ]
Challanges

I like the idea around it.

Only again, like I had said for flagging, what's to stop outside interference, via buffs and healing? Wanted or unwanted, it's gonna happen. Oh and what about mobs? What if the challangers are moving around and mobs, like Longbow are shooting the villains only? Yet they can't interact with anything else but the other players they've challanged, so they can't fight back? Nor can their allys (Outside allies of the same fraction I mean) heal the damage from NPCs.

[/ QUOTE ]

The idea around it is you can choose which other players to interact with *period*. Whether they belonged to your faction or not. So again what you describe is not going to happen unless it is as a massive load of buffs right before a challenge is accepted. In that case I doubt the same player would accept challenge a second time (which is also the point). If you are fighting in a location where you are taking fire from your opponent *and* npcs: move.

[ QUOTE ]
Here's my suggestion to this instead:

Allow challange mode to be setup the same way, but WITH being able to be interfered with by the outside. You see the challangers as conning RED as if you were taunted.

Outside players will see you conned as a lighter color of orange or blue. If the challangers are hit with outside interference, via NPC or healing, the challange is temporarly dropped for 20 seconds... thus giving them time to either move away or just drop it alltogether.

[/ QUOTE ]
Rather than fixing a problem that doesn't exist, this actually creates the problem it purports to address.

[ QUOTE ]
Merit System

I like it. This is something we've asked for, for a long time now. But I would make 1 suggestion to this...

Most of the items listed here aren't used much for pvp. I would say add in the option for a LOT of rep to get a random generic IO (at their level), or a random pool C IO.

[/ QUOTE ]
The idea for the merit-alikes is that they are free to be given without distoring the market (or any other part of the game). What you describe would have to be set so ludicrously high in cost to prevent it being conceivably earned by "cheating" that it would both be pointless in code-execution and come to be seen as an insult by those it was meant to entice.

[ QUOTE ]
Mutual Support

And this folks, is what it's all about. We would like some love, just as much as the PvE game gets love...

[/ QUOTE ]
from the original post:
Mutual Support
On the face of it, adding a seperate PVP power build for characters sounds complex, but the effort can be rationalized as work towards new PVE play options. (The Ouroboros system would ensure such content was on offer to all existing characters as well.) Allowing groups of opposite factions to merge into a "team" in which opposite faction members may attack one another but no one else might also be complicated. Or it might simply be an expansion of the existing grouping mechanics of the game and the Ouroboros limits already exist. The Merit system is proven and popular in the game already. Regardless of their difficulty or ease, in order to work all of them would have to be present at the same time. PVE to PVP build toggling is useless if no one wants to enter the zone because of ubiquitous and unavoidable bad behavior. A dueling system that lets you avoid encounters with players found unpleasant and compete with those you choose to is useless if the entry barrier competition still limits participants to those with a dedicated PVP build. Neither has any lasting appeal unless there is a reward that can be shaped to be whatever a given player might find interesting. All would have to be implemented together to allow their complements to work.

It's not about "I want as much as he got". It's about expanding the game, leaving the play elements PVPers currently enjoy*, preventing the situations that drive people from the zones right now, and giving people freedom to examine-take-or-leave PVP casually.

(*Well except for PVE activity in Siren's Call gating the 30 min temps ^_^;, but from what I've seen and heard that doesn't get used much now anyway.)

Thank you for that.

I'd like to say Thank You to everyone who has offered compliments on the original posts. To thank everyone individually would spam the thread but I really do appreciate every one.

[ QUOTE ]
Wow... that pretty much covers all the bases. I hereby nominate Human Being as Official Forum Voice of Reason.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
from what I hear, its already pretty much of a given that you need a team to get nukes due to Stalkers camping the site,

[/ QUOTE ]
Not really. If you're on Freedom I'll show you. If the zone is quiet a nuke run is easier than a Shivan run and WB tends to be emptier than BB.

[ QUOTE ]
[p.s. Some persons participating in this thread might want to make sure their PM-boxes are not full - its hard to reply to PMs if the recipient cannot accept any more PMs *clears throat* ]

[/ QUOTE ]
What, again? *sigh* Try it now and send again.

[ QUOTE ]
My only criticism comes from your proposed implementation of PvE mini games in the zones. How do you have stronger, more agressive, and greater numbers of NPCs only effect the PvE flagged and not the PvP flagged? I'm not stating that it can't be done, but it seems to me that it would be a very difficult thing to do. And if a PvP flag rendered you somehow immune or invsible to NPCs, the practical thing to do would be to turn on the PvP flag and go when the zone was empty to get those valuable temps with even less effort than now.

[/ QUOTE ]
With PVP-on and PVP-off status, the PVE difficulty of the zone *must* be increased because it had to be taken into account before that someone might be facing both a PVE threat and a PVP one at the same time during a mini-game. In fact this isn't so much making the mini-games harder as making them function at the difficulty they originally should have had but failed to achieve because of incorrectly predicted player activity.

As to how to actually do it, the only code I work with is DNA not Assembler so I'm grabbing functions I see in the game and putting them together with liberal amounts of supposition. But currently when you approach the BB meteors, there is a certain radius at which Shivan guards will spawn (two minions, one leutenant, and a boss). So conceptually, you create two trip-wire radiuses: A much larger outer one that detects PVE-flagged characters but ignores PVP-flagged ones and spawns EBs and bosses, and the current one that recognizes PVP-flagged characters but not PVE-flagged characters and spawns the weaker mobs we have now.

You could make it more difficult for someone to just spawn the EB + cohort and leave by setting its AI to remain near the rock (If Thomas The Tank tries to taunt it away it just stands where it is and lobs big green -Def bombs at him.) Also, if "attacking" the rock was set to over-ride aggro, one could taunt the EB while attacking it, but would lose that control if someone tried to gain a sample before it was down. Never the less, someone could come up with a clever way to get around those restrictions that I haven't thought of; I would also want to co-opt the Snow Monster code from the Gamester's presents. If you keep pestering the spawn it stays there, but if you leave and someone else shows up later, the spawn is auto-defeated and a new spawn (of appropriate type for your flag) is generated. That code would have to be set, if possible, to actually generate a new spawn rather than having the "window" between when the old one is auto-defeated and the new one is supposed to be generated but fails because the bodies are still there. So if you are a PVPer making a run and a PVE group has just given up in defeat, you can just go to another rock and come back to this one later.

A PVPer can't grief a PVE run because the spawn they generate is so tiny in comparisson to what the PVEers are combating in the first place. A PVEer can't grief a PVP run because any spawn they generate notices them from much farther out and starts firing on the ones who spawned them, not the PVPer who happens to actually be standing closer. Even so, having two groups at the same rock at the same time would actually be a happy event because right now they're pretty empty.

The rock guards are something that you fight all at once, but the pillboxes you essentially fight one at a time (even if in a team). Beyond which, their greater geographic displacement makes it harder to have them despawn and respawn with traffic. Therefore we could either co-opt the GM code to force their level to be higher for PVEers than PVPers or, as Reiraku suggest (in a far more elegant solution than myself ) simply have the zone set different auto-exempt levels for different flag types.

The Warburg settings are less complicated since they are just wandering outdoor spawns. I'm not sure whether or not the spawns need to be larger or tougher in Warburg (though I would like to see more of them in a few of the emptier streets) because....I've never had to fight the stupid things!! Which is the thing to change. The aggro radius or perception radius or something distance on those spawns is *tiny*. Instead they should have the perception distance and aggro hair-trigger of an AV. (Ever activated one and then tried to sneak up on it again? They see you a mile away.) Map spawns are packed fairly close together and you come upon them quickly around corners so their near-sightedness makes sense in game mechanic terms. Ones patrolling an open outdoor area are free to have much better detection abilities. The Rogue Arachnos should "Shoot on sight, shoot first, shoot to kill, and keep shooting." You should have to fight every spawn you see on the way to the drop-off point (think Mayhem mission with 4+ people). The Arachnoids are dangerous enough as they are, they just need to come packaged in standard Hazard Zone sized spawns with a leavening of smaller spawns for the preferentially sneaky-minded players. You might work this by giving PVPers a stealth buff that only works on the npcs or have the PVEers radiate a perception buff that applies only to them.

[ QUOTE ]
Also relating to the minigames, my tank and scrapper can do either with ease, but my squishier characters (controller, defender, corrupter) have to be very careful and frequently die to arachnoids and shivans or have a hard time defeating the base turrets before a reset. Making them significantly harder might require that some ATs or builds need a team to get the temps (which might be a desireable goal). But it will certainly raise a loud cry from those who already find it difficult or who find that they can no longer succeed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Making it so that a team was required for a PVE run was my explicit intention. As I said, if I can solo it on my Brute it's still too easy. Considering the time and effort to reward ratio of nukes and shivans compared to much lesser temps and tools in the game, this corrects a distortion. Squishy characters that can't solo it right now...still won't be able to solo it, but might just find getting a team easier since the previously solo-capable characters now need a team as well.

I like being able to get nukes and Shivans at will too, but it makes a mockery of other game play elements and has for a long time.

As a side note, I find it odd that seemingly every character in the game keeps a Shivan Decimator EB in their pocket but I've never actually seen one as an enemy to fight in the game. I suspect people might have a leetle more respect for the Gummy Bear if they had it jump up and down on them and push their face into the debt.

Gata_ wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
The only large hurdle besides some of the technicle limitations are RP limitations. I mean what RP can you use to explain why someone with thier PvP flag down can't be attacked, or why if they are locked into a Challenge why they can't be attacked by the non challegne PvPers. Maybe youcan use the desynchronized time/space shift thing you mentioned in the RV.

[/ QUOTE ]

andAnd EmperorSteele wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
And while i wouldn't argue at ALL if these changes were made... well, i do have some... thematic reservations about the overall concept of what you propose.

Good guys and Bad guys FIGHT each other. It's how it is.

[/ QUOTE ]

Players with different flag settings in PVP zones wouldn't attack each other for the same reason Venom doesn't go out of his way to attack Captain America: He's not Spiderman !

All heroes and villains have an agenda and things they Need To Do(TM). Those may be more important than pummeling a random member of the opposite faction. While a worthy cause, you're out looking for that One Guy. You know, that One Guy? So you ignore everything and everyone else and focus with superhuman will upon the Task At Hand (like collecting Magic Salvage ). People of opposite factions may have their own agendas too and will follow them even though they would just as soon attack you. Or maybe they just see that look in your eye. You know, that look? And they don't want to end up being That One Guy .

[ QUOTE ]
Also, let's not forget Stalkers, even though I'm sure we'd all like to (except, well, the dedicated Stalkers). There's NO POINT to playing one if you have to ask someone to accept your challenge. No one in their right mind, except maybe a built-up stalker-killer, would accept.

[/ QUOTE ]
From what I was hearing on Test twenty minutes ago, nobody's going to be forgetting Stalkers any time soon.

[ QUOTE ]
The whole point of Stalkers is to sneak up on someone, deliver a crushing blow, finish them off and slip away. Asking permission to do that isn't part of the job description.

I mean, think of it like this: Stalker asks you to duel. You say yes. You get TP Foe'd, AS'd, stunned, and killed. Okay, deflag.

[/ QUOTE ]
That's scenario one, in which case you didn't have fun and the Stalker is out one playmate.

Scenario two is: "Let's try that again..." Orange Insp. Yellow Insp. Breakfree. "Okay GO."

[ QUOTE ]
Stalkers would run out of victims reeaal quick, and they would lose all purpose for existing in the game

[/ QUOTE ]
As solo Gank-guns they would likely have less utility from fewer targets. On a PVP team they can still show up suddenly with a devastating flank attack.

[ QUOTE ]
(because, apparently, the attitude towards stalkers in PvE is... well, "lawl stalkers". Not that they're not effective, but slow soloers (hide, kill, RUN... hide, kill.. RUN!), and no one wants to team with them.

[/ QUOTE ]
Seriously, not that big an issue any more I'm thinking. Ever fought a Pylon in a Rikti Ship Raid? Yeah. On Test Stalkers are soloing them. YEAH.

[ QUOTE ]
The PvP-spec idea is nice... however, they would need to add stores to the PvP zones or something, because my ideal PvP build would tend to take different powers and even POOLS than my PvE one... and I'd need new enhancements.

[/ QUOTE ]
.........[XXXXX]._._._._.<.<...

*drags in a completely separate wish list item, nails it into place, and pretends it was there all along*

....................[XXXXX] ^.^...

A store would just be too complicated. I don't want to have to sort through SOs and DOs for all origins from 15-50, do you? And having the Market have outlets in PVP zones is silly.

But !

If characters had personal Enh storage to go along with personal salvage storage, you could then put access to that in the PVP zones as well. Vault Reserve Inc would be silly to put in, but the Daleks would fit right in and look fine. Then you could put, say, ten extra enh in storage along with what you have in your tray. Go to BB, enter PVP mode, slot the enh, go to the Dalek and get the other ten to slot them as well. You also have Salvage to hand, so if you've got a stack of recipies in your tray you could have someone drop the portable crafting table and build enh on the spot. See! Perfect rationale for personal enh storage.

<.<

>.>

What?

[ QUOTE ]
Unless you mentioned this and i skipped over it. The only "problem" with this, again, is thematics. Why/how should/would/could my Mind/Kin/Fly/Fit/Psi
suddenly become Mind/Kin/Leadership/Fit/Primal because she stepped into a new zone?

[/ QUOTE ]
Firstly, superheroes are always manifesting some new variant of their powers or some new MacGuffin ability. Longshot: "I can Object Read and tell the history of things that I touch". You can WHAT? Since WHEN?

Secondly, you only use aspects of your powers, or focus your abilities in certain ways when they are pertinent. You're not flying anymore because you need to stay near the fight. Since you are up against real Super Villains instead of street thugs you have to really pay attention to teamwork and exercise some Leadership. For the same reason, your kid-glove Psi powers that you use to disable angry young toughs will have to be left aside in favor of your harder hitting Telekinetic talents. If you're moving faster, perhaps even at Super Speed, it's because you are tightly channeling the Kinetic Energy of your powers into greater velocity; something you don't normaly do because it's -exhausting- (gives you a splitting headache hours later too!) And that medscanner? Well they gave you that when you came in...of course you have to give it back .

They've already done the "radioactive" thing heroside and the "magic" thing villain side. In this case you're not permanently changing yourself. You're just using different talents or the same abilities in different ways for a different set of circumstances. Then later you go back to doing other things.

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, I was thinking the game should force buffs and debuffs to even things out while encouraging fair sportsman-like play. But again, you'd hear no argument from me if your ideas were actually integrated.

[/ QUOTE ]
Specific temporary nerfs or buffs I'd want to wait and see how things settled out with the system before implementing. I'm a big believer in empirical data.