PvP is just Deathmatch or Team Deathmatch, so 90's

Reading PvP threads and complaining that I don't want to lose stuff, I suddenly realized a core truth of the matter.

I haven'ted DM'd or Team DM'd since the 90's. And I never will again unless I'm at a LAN party with my nephew and his friends. Although, even though they aren't ten they've may have moved past Deathmatch too.

If there were some modern game types with matchmaking I'd be all over it.

CTF, anything from Battlefield, capture the castle, play as the boss.

Plus some way to keep it competitive. I certainly won't spend much time getting one shotted before I'll go back to hauling resources around on my Trade Routes.

 

I suck at PvP but when I need a break from SotA... I just play SMITE or CS: GO or even Special Force 2 for a few matches... oh, Heroes of the Storm is fun... love playing as a Lili... just healing all day... LOL

 

create your own lore and wage war

 

For Honor is pretty sweet. You just have to deal with Ubisoft's servers which aren't the best.

Heh, I usually play as Leoric.

Really? You haven't been playing many MMOs then because that's been in pretty much every MMO since 2004.

GuildWars 1: had 4v4 arenas with team deathmatch and maps with "control points".
World of Warcraft: followed suit with Capture the Flag and other Battlegrounds... to later on have a more competitive arena team deathmatch setup.
Warhammer Online: had basically the same things...

I'm not going to name all the MMOs but (among the ones still standing) GuildWars 2 still has the arenas, Elder Scrolls Online just got teams arenas in the Morrowind expansion and Final Fantasy 14 had team deathmatch (including a 12v12v12) for years now.

The reason why it's so prevalent is because a lot of devs don't know what to do against ganking.

The whole "losing your stuff" is something that only the ones from Eve Online, Pirates of the Burning Seas and Ultima Online really strive for. I don't think anyone else is really a fan of it.

It would work a lot better if the rest of the game actually supported it but no.

 

@Gix I haven't been playing a lot of other MMO's. I did play CTF in WoW, and a bit of it or CP in Warhammer Online. How much straight out DM did I play? 0.0 minutes.

It appears that the Devs and the PvP Players would LIKE me to join, as well as a whole bunch of other players as well.

How much interest myself and the 5 people I regularly game with in SotA have in playing DM and Team DM?

0.0% of our interest is tied up in it.

Get some other team games in there AND a level matching matchmaking system so that we can get to the game without spending all night trying to make it happen, and it wouldn't take much convincing to get 5/5 of us into the games many nights.

I'd even cave on the stupid Ransom thing, and spend the ten minutes it takes making sure everyone has put all their stuff in chests and taken a bunch of rotten flesh with them. It would be dumb to have to do it regularly, but we'd put up with it.

 

So... you want Objective Based PVP?

I think thats pretty much what 80% of the PVP threads summarize down too heh.

 

When Friends Online shows more than just your party, then we can have some fun with PVP (my opinion). Just my team and your team(s), and an objective of some sort (baked in or sandbox). That will be fun.

 

Would somebody explain to me exactly what "Objective Based PvP" is and what is required to reach it ?

 

Capture the Flag.
Control the Point.
Protect the Keep / Siege the Keep

etc etc

DAOC was always my favorite.
3 realms/teams.. all with unique races.

Battlegrounds for level 1-15.. 16-20.. 21-25.. etc etc
each battleground was unique but same concept.. 3 home bases, all with un killable guards where you would spawn when entering zone.
Neutral keep in the center with guards on the higher end of the level cap of the battlegrounds. Keep was captureable.
Neutral keep was on an *island* with 3 bridges to get to the island. (though you could swim across )
So you would need a few people at the very least (5-6 i think if everyone was good) to deal with guards.. hack your way through the door.. fight way to the keeplord.. and when you killed keep lord it became under your Realms control. So those guards were now friendly to you.

Now picture that, but taking an empty keep took a solid few hours of sieging. Now throw in defenders from the other side trying to get in to defend (no spawn point in there, couple hidden ways in ) .. and throw in a 3rd team also fighting to take it but still completly hostile to the other 2.

If i remember correctly they not only had Rams, but they had catapults and ballista you could setup to Siege AND defend with.

I dont know how much is just fond memories but i rememebr HOURS of sieging with sometimes 100+ people, i rememebr defending with and without the numbers. Winning and loosing the keep. I remember playing as an assasin and cutting off re inforcements en route to the center. I remember forming reinforcement groups and hitting the siegers from behind while the defenders ran outa the keep.. etc etc..


And then i believe End game had 1 big battlefield with like 7 or 9 of these keeps .. and which ever relm held the majority had access to the end game dungeon with the *rare loot* or w.e.

Also when you LOST control of that dungeon, you wernt booted.. you just couldnt re enter it. So a lot of the times there was Massive 100+ people in the end game dungeon fighting off the invaders as long as possible when the new realm took it hahaha

mix all this with good PVE fun, bosses and such.. and gear that you got in PVP that was on par with anything craftable, but not better

Thats how i remember DAOC, but i also have played a LOT of games between then and now, so i dont know how much is just fond memorries /nostalgia and if im remembering parts of other games lol.


THAT was Objective based PVP done right, and theres some Early access games i kickstarted that are going back to that core idea of PVP fun.
----------------------------------------------

That was one example.
But pretty much anything other then *using your imagination to find the fun* kind of PVP..
A mechanic that has a GOAL / Objective in a PVP zone.

RG closest hes talked about here was saying guilds will be able to fight for control of a control point.

My problems with this.. is hes calling that guild wars. For me there isnt any real mention of having mechanics to isolate the fighting of 2 guilds.. so really its just open PVP is all.
Also it goes agianst what i thought the CP's were originally there for.. dividing up the regions and needing players to hold control.. (but okay, so are Passes all going to be PVP zones? no? then why wouldnt i just walk across not flagged?

Too much Maybes, What Ifs, and Vague Hints at what their gameplan is...
And my big problem with that, is for a GOOD PVP system.. it should have already been implemented / being tested.. not 3 months before release.
Which tells me it will be half ass for a long time. (IMO)

I dont think their instances can really even support the PVP DAOC had over a decade ago. Which i dont really undestand =/
Games like Camalot Unchained are in early access, and are alpha testing each weekend with 500+ active players + 1500 bots all fighting at a time to *stress test* the servers. Edit - All in the same zone ****
IMO ( and this is jsut my opinion ) I dont see SOTA competing with a game like that when it comes to PVP.

The only saving grace for me, would be a proper implementation of Guild Vs Guild in SOTA.
And to do that, they need to at LEAST limit the hostility of me to you, when we declare war on each other. Not just flag us both open pvp and call it a war.
That would be the first step.
2nd step would be find a reason to G v G ..
Personally i did a big post about making an instance private to the 2 guilds, and make a scene with 2 keeps. 1 belonging to each guild.. maybe some NPC guards on each side.. and do a keep capture scenario. And make it something like DAOC was, where it took numerous time + planning to take an enemy keep. Or like 4-5-6 hours if your catch them with 0 defenders , and you have 7+ people kinda thing..
And the beauty of SOTA, is they could do this and implement upgradeable doors.. add catapults that can be built.. **** pretty much anything. Makign crafters relevent (this is what i THOUGHT they were going to do)

And have the win of the guild war.. maybe the capture of 80% of the resources the other guild used or something..
Something like this where conflict could last weeks.. would be simply amazing.

But alas.. right now we have Open World .. consequence free.. no objective based.. no goal based... and essentially No PVP.

 

Objective Based examples:

King of the Hill/Headquarters - Team A holds a spot, i.e. the hill or some fortified location, Team B tries to take or destroy. The resurrection point is farther away for Team B, but Team A gets a longer timer to resurrect. Either Team A holds for a certain length of time, or Team B succeeds in capturing, destroying, whatever. Not switch sides.

Capture the Flag - Defend your flag/treasure/underwear from the other team whilst trying to capture theirs. Item must be grabbed and then returned to your base to score a point. Switch sides, repeat.

Sabotage - Team A defends a wall, gate, sally port, something defensible. Team B tries to get a holy hand grenade or something inside the fortifications and pull the pin. Obviously trying to be vague, there are many different variations with different names.


So yes, some sort of objective rather than, "Ha, ha, I killed you."

 

@MrBlight By seconds I tell you. At least our lists are nearly identical.

 

i got caught rambling about Keep vs Keep captures.. and what not.. lol

But the closest ive gotten from a Dev in ackowledgement is that there will be - Castle Sieges! .. and by this they mean Sieges in castle scenes.

so.. ardoris will be under siege.. and the zone will be a zone like a forest siege but with stone walls or w.e ..
*shrug*