And the Biggest Problem with PvP Is...

[ragazzomorto]

To me, it's the queuing system and UI. The ability to queue anywhere is one of the best things Champions Online does with their PvP system, and Turbine, you guys need to rip it off wholesale. It allows players to get in and get out, and quickly get back to what they were doing. Taverns are nice, but as much as they should be, they're not social areas, and people aren't going to wait around to queue for a match when they could be out actually doing something. In my opinion, that is what kills PvP in this game.

If the accessibility were there, more people would do it. I'm not a programmer, but it seems like setting up a worldwide queue system should be a relatively simple thing to do. PvP in DDO sounds fun in theory, but I have yet to actually try it because of a simple problem, and I really feel like I'm missing out on something fun.

It's sad that there are less than ten threads in the PvP board. EU is a big opportunity and I don't want a lack of PvP options to turn players away from this really cool game.

This is just my observation. Does anyone else have any ideas about how to make PvP better/more popular?

[Freeman]

The biggest problem with PvP is that they tried to fit it into a game that was not designed with it in mind. Given the huge imbalances between the classes, I don't think PvP will ever be more than a small sideline to this game.

[ragazzomorto]

I don't think that's really the best excuse, though. Each class has it's advantages, and just like in any MMO, there are some classes that are better played in PvE than PvP, but any class could be leveraged in PvP to some extent, especially if you include multiclasses, and even moreso if Turbine builds areas with each class in mind. If players wanted to PvP, they could easily come up with PvP builds for this game. It's just a matter of Turbine supporting the idea and making the content more accessible.

[Goldeneye]

PvP is really just for testing out your cool new equipment on friends!

In practicality, serious PvP matches are often frustrating because of how differently different classes can perform vs. their usefulness in quests.... though organizing small groups can be very very entertaining.

[ragazzomorto]

The idea that fighting players is frustrating or impractical shouldn't be used as an excuse. PvP is already in the game, obviously Turbine spent time putting it there, so why not do it right?

Fighting players is tougher and you have to think differently, but that doesn't mean PvP should be abandoned. PvP can and has been designed to work with all classes in mind in plenty of other MMOs, and there's no reason DDO couldn't work the same way. DDO has so much potential for variety in character builds, there's no reason players couldn't come up with plenty of effective PvP builds to fill any role.

I have fun with the PvE game as much as anyone, but isn't it at least a little frustrating to anyone else that Turbine created a PvP feature that isn't being utilized because of a simple functionality issue that could be fixed relatively easily? In Champions Online, they had worldwide queuing as soon as PvP was introduced in the closed beta, and it was a godsend. It was so great to be able to just jump in and play a couple of matches when I was bored of doing missions without having to travel to some terminal to initiate PvP content. I really think that if it was done the same way in DDO people would participate much, much more.

Not only would it be nice to have, it would be a draw for more new players, and that's what Turbine wants right now.

[Angelus_dead]

The idea that fighting players is frustrating or impractical shouldn't be used as an excuse. PvP is already in the game, obviously Turbine spent time putting it there, so why not do it right?
Look, you clearly need to investigate PVP a little more before coming up with suggestions for it.

It's already been mentioned that the game design doesn't support PVP,but maybe you don't know what that means. Pop quiz: How many level 20 rogues can my level 20 cleric defeat at once?


PvP can and has been designed to work with all classes in mind in plenty of other MMOs, and there's no reason DDO couldn't work the same way. DDO has so much potential for variety in character builds, there's no reason players couldn't come up with plenty of effective PvP builds to fill any role.
That is a theoretical possibility, but it would be a significant effort.. quite a bit more than adding a new raid, for example. And that kind of effort would form the essential core of an improved PVP experience. World queing or whatever is just a minor convenience on top of that.

Allowing faster access to matches isn't valuable if the matches aren't fun.

[Freeman]

It's already been mentioned that the game design doesn't support PVP,but maybe you don't know what that means. Pop quiz: How many level 20 rogues can my level 20 cleric defeat at once?

LOL, just about all of them :) Ok, I guess the dwarves and WF might be able to hold out a bit longer, at least until you hit them with Greater Command...

[issiana]

Pop quiz: How many level 20 rogues can my level 20 cleric defeat at once?


better quiz... when was the last time you even saw a rogue enter into a pvp pit?

all the rogues i know of wont even set foot in one because they know they wont last a few seconds vs anyone. heck even a lvl 10 wizzie could probly knock off a lvl 20 rogue without much trouble at all. that speaks volumes about pvp balance vs pve (ie real game) balance.

[Xaearth]

Pop quiz: How many level 20 rogues can my level 20 cleric defeat at once?

Hrm... I'd think that would depend on how many of them have Cheat Death. :D

As to the OP, I think the biggest problem with pvp in DDO is the fact that, unlike other MMOs, the discrepancy between defensive ability for "tanks" and casters is far less of a factor.
In most MMOs, a caster is deadly at range, but once the melee close in it's pretty much a done deal.
In DDO, not only can the caster nuke, insta-death, dance, stone, level drain, hold, hypnotize, and/or otherwise disable or kill an opponent, but also has the buffs (displacement, energy resist/prot, stoneskin, etc) that make it much more durable in pvp than most melees.
Add to this an Armor Class system that significantly loses value as we continue to level up, a reliance (for most classes) on outside buffs in order to survive many of the caster's abilities listed above, player-chosen build progression (most MMOs nowadays have stats hard-coded based on class and gear, making sure the casters have low hp and armor for example), and a combat system balanced for pve team play and not for pvp and you have a pretty "Meh" environment for pvp.

[ragazzomorto]

You're right, I don't know anything about PvP in DDO because I haven't been able to try it. I still think it could be done, though. What happens when two identical parties fight? A decent battle, probably.

Anyway, I still think it would be nice to have the ability to enter PvP from anywhere in the world. It may not make sense storywise, and I understand how important that is to Turbine, but it's more fun that way.

[Angelus_dead]

You're right, I don't know anything about PvP in DDO because I haven't been able to try it.
The reason you couldn't try it is not because the queuing is hard to access- it's because nobody else is using it, because the matches aren't fun.


What happens when two identical parties fight? A decent battle, probably.
No. The technical term for what happens is "rocket launcher tag"


Anyway, I still think it would be nice to have the ability to enter PvP from anywhere in the world.
How long do you think it takes to run from some random location to the closest pvp tavern?

[Melkor_The_Mighty]

If the new players like to Pvp then they need to voice their fondenss of PVP to Turbine. Many of the older subscribers hate PVP (about 99%) because its not authentic DnD, well this just in from REUTERS: Neither is DDO. Pvp is a lot of fun. Embarrassing big mouth no skilled players is funny. Have a skilled opponent who is decent person also is fun in different way. I am hoping the huge influx of new players are PVP minded players, that way if your a unskilled player who only PVP's i wont have to see you in end game elite content. If Turbine borrowed a 100th new thing from LOTRO they need a PVP zone like the Moors. To the old school players who hate pvp face it DONT PVP, also keep in mind that type of mentality didnt make DDO a big success, if it had then they wouldnt have gone to F2P. If the majority of f2P like pvp then give it to them. Dont only cowtow to the forum complainers who no matter what you do they will cry anyway. Do something nice for the new players who like PVP. You have all the tech you need from LOTRO, Moors in DDO-land would be fun with or without monster play. LOTRO has tons of players and the Moors would have some slow times (like when Mines of moria launched) but most times you could easily find upwards of 100 freeps and 100 creeps. No new mods for awhile PLEASE!!! Get PVP up to speed then when thiers a 50/50 or 60/30 balance then focus on new content.

[Uska]

If the new players like to Pvp then they need to voice their fondenss of PVP to Turbine. Many of the older subscribers hate PVP (about 99%) because its not authentic DnD, well this just in from REUTERS: Neither is DDO. Pvp is a lot of fun. Embarrassing big mouth no skilled players is funny. Have a skilled opponent who is decent person also is fun in different way. I am hoping the huge influx of new players are PVP minded players, that way if your a unskilled player who only PVP's i wont have to see you in end game elite content. If Turbine borrowed a 100th new thing from LOTRO they need a PVP zone like the Moors. To the old school players who hate pvp face it DONT PVP, also keep in mind that type of mentality didnt make DDO a big success, if it had then they wouldnt have gone to F2P. If the majority of f2P like pvp then give it to them. Dont only cowtow to the forum complainers who no matter what you do they will cry anyway. Do something nice for the new players who like PVP. You have all the tech you need from LOTRO, Moors in DDO-land would be fun with or without monster play. LOTRO has tons of players and the Moors would have some slow times (like when Mines of moria launched) but most times you could easily find upwards of 100 freeps and 100 creeps. No new mods for awhile PLEASE!!! Get PVP up to speed then when thiers a 50/50 or 60/30 balance then focus on new content.


Those of us that hate pvp dont want any dev time wasted on something so inane and useless pvp wont work in ddo without out class balancing and that is a bad thing for ddo we get little enough new content wtihout them wasting time on this stuff. and most of you pvp would proably come in and not spend a dime where as if they made new content VIPs would keep subscribing and f2p would buy the new content if it was good enough.

[eonfreon]

If the new players like to Pvp then they need to voice their fondenss of PVP to Turbine. Many of the older subscribers hate PVP (about 99%) because its not authentic DnD, well this just in from REUTERS: Neither is DDO. Pvp is a lot of fun. Embarrassing big mouth no skilled players is funny. Have a skilled opponent who is decent person also is fun in different way. I am hoping the huge influx of new players are PVP minded players, that way if your a unskilled player who only PVP's i wont have to see you in end game elite content. If Turbine borrowed a 100th new thing from LOTRO they need a PVP zone like the Moors. To the old school players who hate pvp face it DONT PVP, also keep in mind that type of mentality didnt make DDO a big success, if it had then they wouldnt have gone to F2P. If the majority of f2P like pvp then give it to them. Dont only cowtow to the forum complainers who no matter what you do they will cry anyway. Do something nice for the new players who like PVP. You have all the tech you need from LOTRO, Moors in DDO-land would be fun with or without monster play. LOTRO has tons of players and the Moors would have some slow times (like when Mines of moria launched) but most times you could easily find upwards of 100 freeps and 100 creeps. No new mods for awhile PLEASE!!! Get PVP up to speed then when thiers a 50/50 or 60/30 balance then focus on new content.

Well I was all for PVp (even though I don't do it much) until you reminded me that it could take away Dev time from creating new Content. PVP is fine, but not at the cost of new content.
You had me until you brought up content.
/not signed

[Tannniss]

If the new players like to Pvp then they need to voice their fondenss of PVP to Turbine. Many of the older subscribers hate PVP (about 99%) because its not authentic DnD, well this just in from REUTERS: Neither is DDO. Pvp is a lot of fun. Embarrassing big mouth no skilled players is funny. Have a skilled opponent who is decent person also is fun in different way. I am hoping the huge influx of new players are PVP minded players, that way if your a unskilled player who only PVP's i wont have to see you in end game elite content. If Turbine borrowed a 100th new thing from LOTRO they need a PVP zone like the Moors. To the old school players who hate pvp face it DONT PVP, also keep in mind that type of mentality didnt make DDO a big success, if it had then they wouldnt have gone to F2P. If the majority of f2P like pvp then give it to them. Dont only cowtow to the forum complainers who no matter what you do they will cry anyway. Do something nice for the new players who like PVP. You have all the tech you need from LOTRO, Moors in DDO-land would be fun with or without monster play. LOTRO has tons of players and the Moors would have some slow times (like when Mines of moria launched) but most times you could easily find upwards of 100 freeps and 100 creeps. No new mods for awhile PLEASE!!! Get PVP up to speed then when thiers a 50/50 or 60/30 balance then focus on new content.

I fully agree...if this is what the F2P crowd wants then give it to em...but not at the expense of developing new content for those of us who were here all along and could give two squirts about your e-peen displays at the Lobster.....

[ragazzomorto]

I'm all for more PvE content over PvP content, believe me. The reason I enjoy this game so much is because of what Turbine has done with their quests. There's no other MMO that delivers such variety and sense of immersion. It's great. I just thought it would be nice to have a little convenience.

At the very least, you should be able to see whether there are other people queued for a specific instance. That way, if there are a couple of people queued for one, you'll be able to see that and join them, instead of queuing for one that no one is playing. It would be a minimal thing that would help players that actually want to use the content that has been provided, use it.

[Zekral]

Queuing from anywhere is a great idea. Also, even if the game isn't particularly well balanced for pvp doesn't mean that face pwning a few people isn't going to be fun.

[Angelus_dead]

Queuing from anywhere is a great idea. Also, even if the game isn't particularly well balanced for pvp doesn't mean that face pwning a few people isn't going to be fun.
It is inaccurate to say DDO "isn't particularly well balanced" for PVP. The word "particularly" is a softener which conveys that the degree of the problem is mild.

That is untrue.


Queuing from anywhere is a great idea. Also, even if the game isn't particularly well balanced for pvp doesn't mean that face pwning a few people isn't going to be fun.
Why would people queue up to be pwned?

If someone queues for pvp and gets pwned, will he be more or less likely to keep playing DDO in the future?

[Kistilan]

It is inaccurate to say DDO "isn't particularly well balanced" for PVP. The word "particularly" is a softener which conveys that the degree of the problem is mild.

That is untrue.


Why would people queue up to be pwned?

If someone queues for pvp and gets pwned, will he be more or less likely to keep playing DDO in the future?

Don't normally read your posts, but...

The reason why people continue to play in the pits (besides testing) is to gank or avenge their ganking. If they get peeved enough, with an over-developed sense of revenge, they will continually jump in on their offender until the offender leaves. This creates a very incessant (and harrowingly-fun) time for both the conqueror and the would-be conquered.

And of course when the would-be conquered gets a lucky pot-shot off that kills the conqueror, the conqueror becomes irrate and jumps in even more vigorously to attack said would-be.

Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding human nature... but I've watched enough pvp pits (and been in enough of them) to know the cyclic process. Balance is the last thing pvp needs unless it means something (ie faction ratings, rewards, etc). And even then, balance need not be the #1 priority if Teams & Luck are factors (which they are for anyone wishing to last more than a little while in the Royal Rumble).

[Dexxaan]

Melee PvP is broken beyond anything due to Glancing Blows.

Shouldn`t take much to remove this feature so that a true contest of builds can measure themselves in Melee.

PvP IMO is a fun-factor part of DDO, unfortunately even the fun-factor parts need to make some sense and not be a total SNAFU.

[Thrudh]

Nothing wrong with the OP's suggestion... A queue would be fine instead of waiting around in a tavern...

But the others are right that PvP doesn't work in D&D (and DDO) because of the class imbalances...

[Angelus_dead]

Don't normally read your posts
You really shouldn't mention that.


The reason why people continue to play in the pits (besides testing) is to gank or avenge their ganking. If they get peeved enough, with an over-developed sense of revenge, they will continually jump in on their offender until the offender leaves.
That is an inaccurate observation that applies only to a narrow set of possible character builds. It can only happen if the characters on both sides of the match are rather weak.

If I decided to jump into Lobster and clear the pit, my victims would not gain any enjoyment from trying to take revenge. Unless they can switch to a level 20 caster it ain't happening, and for them to need to make that switch means it isn't fun.


Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding human nature... but I've watched enough pvp pits (and been in enough of them) to know the cyclic process.
Limited observation is limited.

[Missing_Minds]

The idea that fighting players is frustrating or impractical shouldn't be used as an excuse. PvP is already in the game, obviously Turbine spent time putting it there, so why not do it right?

Turbine would have to rewrite 3.x rules to make it right aka Balanced. Fact of the matter is that the classes are not balanced. We already have people complaining that one class can do X which they can't defend against, and.. yeah. Casters are nerfed on some of their more fun spells already for PvP, then you have the tickets for griefing...

No, PvP was put in a while back because of enough complaints. This game was NEVER designed for PvP, so be greatful for what you do have currently. For now, ask for things that are within scope of the system.

1. Make them finally give you a leadership board. This was supposed to be given to you PvPers back with Mod 3. I hate PvP, but Turbine stated it back then, so I'll /sign with you guys to get it in.

2. Other styles of PvP arenas. Aka an anything goes area with no nerfs on spells, or anything would be one idea. Let the mage have their full power back at their finger tips. A spell battle areana where casters can compete, a gladiator arena where after X time mobs are thrown into the phray, or even an arena where the environment effects change around such as the ground turns to ice, fog covers the area, rocks drop from the sky, etc.

If there are glitches in the queing and such... Well, honestly, I guess the best thing to do is file bug reports on why you think the system isn't working correctly. And if you find a bug, continue after it. I mean it took months, but we were able to get them to make changes to ranged attacks 1.5 years back or so. Still trying to get more made to them. But the idea is stick with it. Why do I say stick with it? There isn't going to be budget either for a rewrite of the system (at least in the near future. The rest of the PrEs need to be finished at a minimum), but you know.. in about a year or so if you've garnered enough support, I bet it will become a lot more feasible.

[Missing_Minds]

If I decided to jump into Lobster and clear the pit, my victims would not gain any enjoyment from trying to take revenge. Unless they can switch to a level 20 caster it ain't happening, and for them to need to make that switch means it isn't fun.

Naw, I tend to call in the troops then. :) No need to switch.

[Angelus_dead]

Melee PvP is broken beyond anything due to Glancing Blows.

Shouldn`t take much to remove this feature so that a true contest of builds can measure themselves in Melee.
That is false.

You probably meant to say "Grazing Hits", but that would still be false. Both glancing and grazing attacks are part of the DDO rules, and how well a character copes with those effects reflects on the power of his build. If you start changing the rules for PVP, then the outcome of the contest is only valid for PVP.

[Kistilan]

In Red = Response.


You really shouldn't mention that.

Why Not?

That is an inaccurate observation that applies only to a narrow set of possible character builds. It can only happen if the characters on both sides of the match are rather weak.

Hmm, I killed Blah this way with a weak creature. I wouldn't say Blah is weak either. Inaccurate observation? Or maybe you failed to understand the idea of ganking ie unfair fighting, which is fair if you're capable of doing it (and thus why I do it). You don't agree to put down a gun at a sword fight. You feint and shoot the bastard.

If I decided to jump into Lobster and clear the pit, my victims would not gain any enjoyment from trying to take revenge. Unless they can switch to a level 20 caster it ain't happening, and for them to need to make that switch means it isn't fun.

Tu coques -- Limited Observation is Limited.

Limited observation is limited.

.: Ad hoc & Ignore Again Implemented

[Angelus_dead]

No, PvP was put in a while back because of enough complaints.
More precisely, it was because Turbine was trying to get Japanese and Chinese companies to run licensed DDO servers, and the (notional) Asian customer profile demanded PVP features.

Of course, the kind of PVP that DDO got wasn't nearly up to the standard of fulfilling that need.

[sephiroth1084]

PvP is fun, or can be. I've spent a few hours here and there doing a 12-man melee with my guild, or some challenges against other characters, but ultimately, the OP should harken to the fact that nearly everyone who has replied here has said the same thing: PvP in DDO doesn't work.

You may think that a balance can be reached, but the fact is that unless a melee characters gets really, really lucky, a caster/cleric will win. Period. They just have too many tools in their arsenal, and most of them do not require being next to their foe.

In one of the 12-man PvPs I participated in (6 on 6), I played a wizard, and turned the entire rest of the team to stone. Then level drained them so they couldn't break on anything but a natural 20. With a save each minute, that's potentially 20 minutes before they get to do anything. After the rest of my team took them out (everyone bare-handed just to rub it in), I changed tactics and set everyone dancing with Otto's Irresistible Dance. If that weren't enough, Scorching Ray (a lvl 2 spell), can do upwards of 300 damage a shot, easily. Other spells can deal twice that against multiple opponents, and all can be performed from well outside melee range or have no defense against them. Power Word Stun/Kill vs. many characters is just an auto-win.

Another time, I squared off on my wizard against 2 clerics. I wracked up about 10 kills to their 1 (they aren't very twitchy), before they discovered that they could just place Maximized Blade Barriers at all the spawn points, killing me before I could react: die, respawn dead, rinse repeat. They thought it was very funny.

The point is, all these characters work well together when they are fighting monsters, because that is what the game is designed around. They do not function well against each other, and there is no way to reconcile the two.

[Angelus_dead]

The point is, all these characters work well together when they are fighting monsters, because that is what the game is designed around. They do not function well against each other, and there is no way to reconcile the two.
If you wanted to add good PVP to DDO, you'd simply avoid that situation:
The normal existing characters aren't used in primary PVP competition. You pick a PVP character from a list of pregenerated builds and use that.

Here's a quote (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=193926) which explains why D&D PVP shouldn't use normal player characters:

DDO is based on the game rules of D&D 3.5, and although it has many deviations (both intentional and accidental), it generally works towards the same gameplay objective (frequently surpassing the original on formal metrics).

Combat between characters built using the adventurer advancement rules was not one of the objectives of D&D 3.5. The designers explicitly ignored which character could win in a fight, and instead balanced them around how well they could contribute to a group facing encounters with monsters and traps. (They often failed at that objective as well, but the effort was made)

When PVP occurs between adventurer heros, it is either in the service of roleplaying (when alignment differences become too deep to suppress!), or as a nerd-macho test of whose build is tougher. It's not a fun game in and of itself. However, there is a way to have fun PVP matches using the D&D rules, and many people play that way. The key is that you don't use characters built according to the D&D system, and instead select from creatures who were roughly based on D&D monsters but then redesigned to work when arrayed against each other, and given point-buy costs commensurate with their power.

That's how you get fun PVP out of D&D, and an analogous approach would be the fastest way to add a satisfying PVP component to DDO as well: give up on making PVP enjoyable for the characters people play already, and instead let them pick from 3-10 manually-built characters tuned for each competitive scenario. It could be Silver Flame vs Xorians for one board, and Orc vs Hobgoblin for another.

That kind of system could be viewed as a more extreme form of the Player Vs Monster Player gametype used in LOTRO, except that instead of PvMP it goes all the way to MPvMP. Obviously if it doesn't involve existing characters many people will be less attracted to it, but eliminating player adventurers from the equation would be the swiftest and surest way to get a PVP system that meets the triple goals of balance, complexity, and verisimilitude.

[Gorstag]

All I really play is rogue's. Now why would I even attempt to pvp with a rogue? There is nothing to balance a rogue with even other melees in pvp, much less casters.

[sephiroth1084]

If you wanted to add good PVP to DDO, you'd simply avoid that situation:
The normal existing characters aren't used in primary PVP competition. You pick a PVP character from a list of pregenerated builds and use that.

Here's a quote (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=193926) which explains why D&D PVP shouldn't use normal player characters:

Go play King of the Monsters or Blood Roar Primal Fury. Why hop on Dungeon and Dragons if what you desperately want is a fighting game?

[Angelus_dead]

Go play King of the Monsters or Blood Roar Primal Fury. Why hop on Dungeon and Dragons if what you desperately want is a fighting game?
You have no idea what you're talking about. It might help if you tried reading more thoroughly.

[sephiroth1084]

You have no idea what you're talking about. It might help if you tried reading more thoroughly.
The suggestion was made that DDO PvP could be "fixed" by giving us the option of choosing from a selection of pre-generated characters that are balanced against each other for such. The base for this was that of monsters modified for player control and combat. Kind of removes the whole point of combat via DDO doesn't it?

[Darrendil]

I just wonder what happens in PnP when a party confronts another party... Isn´t it PvP, what happens when drizzt confronts artemis? I know its a novel and it shouldn´t apply, but what i´m trying to say is that i totally disagree with the ones stating that in 3.5 PvP was not included (altough actually the term PvP is just a mmo term) when someone in PnP confronts an evil wizard which was harrasing the asses of some townsfolk, isn´t that PvP?

I have to say i´m quite new to ddo, but not to mmo´s as a whole. In absolutely every mmo out there PvP was implemented upto some kind of extend, meaning it was implemented for good, you could log on one day and just do some PvP and actually have fun at it...

I would so much love seeing some sort of system implemented.. The GW system sounds fit for this game.

[sephiroth1084]

I just wonder what happens in PnP when a party confronts another party... Isn´t it PvP, what happens when drizzt confronts artemis? I know its a novel and it shouldn´t apply, but what i´m trying to say is that i totally disagree with the ones stating that in 3.5 PvP was not included (altough actually the term PvP is just a mmo term) when someone in PnP confronts an evil wizard which was harrasing the asses of some townsfolk, isn´t that PvP?

I have to say i´m quite new to ddo, but not to mmo´s as a whole. In absolutely every mmo out there PvP was implemented upto some kind of extend, meaning it was implemented for good, you could log on one day and just do some PvP and actually have fun at it...

I would so much love seeing some sort of system implemented.. The GW system sounds fit for this game.

I haven't done much high level play, but it can be kinda silly, where one or two members are carrying the whole group--usually a cleric, druid, wizard, sorcerer (roughly in that order). Honestly, I'm not entirely sure how this would play out, though I've read several people's documentation of their experiences playing a high level wizard, and have a feeling that it would fair far worse in PnP than in DDO.

There is probably a band of one or two levels where PvP in DDO is fun and fairly balanced. I'm thinking maybe around level 5-8, though I wouldn't swear to that.

[Darrendil]

As usual, arcane spellcasters are foddermeat in low lvl´s, but are absolutely awesome higher up. In regards as to how a high lvl arcane spellcaster would fare against an equal lvl say... fighter, although i would say that the spellcaster has the upper hand, he is still beatable, i´m refering obviously to PnP.
But that´s why i stated that a system such as the one in GW would come in handy. Team oriented PvP. The team´s class selection could be hindered so as to prohibit an arcane spellcasters only team and such.

Just my thought.

[Hendrik]

Only thing 'good' about PvP is DDO is the Challenge System.


Only PvP thing related I use, and enjoy, in DDO.

[Angelus_dead]

when someone in PnP confronts an evil wizard which was harrasing the asses of some townsfolk, isn´t that PvP?
No, the wizard is an NPC, meaning "Non Player Character". He is a PVE enemy just like an orc or dragon.


In absolutely every mmo out there PvP was implemented upto some kind of extend, meaning it was implemented for good, you could log on one day and just do some PvP and actually have fun at it...
Most games which include PVP had designed their classes with the intention of functioning in PVP. That is not what DDO did, although some people have gotten that impression.

That's not unfounded: it doesn't make much sense to include PVP without having designed for it. You could say that DDO's PVP feature is false advertising, as it gives an illusionary impression that this gameplay is supported by the design.

[Darrendil]

No, the wizard is an NPC, meaning "Non Player Character". He is a PVE enemy just like an orc or dragon.

And in terms of combat, who exactly uses the wizard, dragon, orc to fight the characters? isn´t it the DM?
Semantics aside, when it comes to combat, the evil wizard is controlled by the DM, meaning the DM uses the Wizard to fight the other characters. It´s pretty obvious to me that that is PvP, it doesn´t matter who uses which character, the point is there are characters in combat.
Once more, the terms PvP and PvE were not originated from PnP, but from online games. It´s not correct to say PvE on a PnP game where the Environment is not actually the Environment but a campaign created by the DM, where all the challenges have a meaning campaign wise and the Environment is impersonated by the DM.

[ManinBlaq]

Class balance, in general is a very poor excuse for lack of PvP content.

Off the top of my head I can bring up 3.5 srd 'core' material that would make (nearly) any melee a threat to casters -- and that would simply to be implementing Spell Resistance as designed.

That's just step 1. More could be done - very simply, to put up the illusion of 'balance'.


Balanced classes aren't the real issue however. The real problem with PvP, is that there is no 'stamina'. Even if you make all classes 'balanced' vs one another - everyone has instant kill aces up their sleeves. It starts at low-med levels, and just gets more ridiculous through 20.

Effectively @ level 20 - [conservatively speaking] a 1v1 match would last less than 10 seconds [and honestly, I would expect the majority of them to be half that]. It would take longer to 'buff' for the match, than the match itself.

It comes down to whoever gets their ace out [successfully] first.

So really - for PvP to be successful. For it to be 'Fun' and 'Meaningful': participants would need the same ridiculous stat inflation that the mobs receive out in the quests.

Basically, going into a pvp match a player would receive:
HP x 10
Abilities x 3
Saves x 3
AC x 2

or perhaps merely HP x 1000 would be more appropriate. [But then I think PvP would merely degenerate into exclusively using con damagers.]

[Velexia]

To me, it's the queuing system and UI. The ability to queue anywhere is one of the best things Champions Online does with their PvP system, and Turbine, you guys need to rip it off wholesale. It allows players to get in and get out, and quickly get back to what they were doing. Taverns are nice, but as much as they should be, they're not social areas, and people aren't going to wait around to queue for a match when they could be out actually doing something. In my opinion, that is what kills PvP in this game.

If the accessibility were there, more people would do it. I'm not a programmer, but it seems like setting up a worldwide queue system should be a relatively simple thing to do. PvP in DDO sounds fun in theory, but I have yet to actually try it because of a simple problem, and I really feel like I'm missing out on something fun.

It's sad that there are less than ten threads in the PvP board. EU is a big opportunity and I don't want a lack of PvP options to turn players away from this really cool game.

This is just my observation. Does anyone else have any ideas about how to make PvP better/more popular?

Actually, you can "queue" PVP from anywhere... That doesn't change the fact that D&D isn't well suited for it, nor does it correlate to effectiveness in quests. Just try PVP as a Rogue =)

[Velexia]

PvP is really just for testing out your cool new equipment on friends!

In practicality, serious PvP matches are often frustrating because of how differently different classes can perform vs. their usefulness in quests.... though organizing small groups can be very very entertaining.

( Like Laelyth Ka [14 Sorc 2 Pal at the time] vs everyone else.... score Laelyth 17, everyone else 0 )

[Zippo]

Plain and simple DDO wasn't built with PvP in mind nor was DnD for that matter. PvP was a mere after thought which in my opinion doesn't belong in the first place.

[garbalen]

Class balance, in general is a very poor excuse for lack of PvP content.

Off the top of my head I can bring up 3.5 srd 'core' material that would make (nearly) any melee a threat to casters -- and that would simply to be implementing Spell Resistance as designed.

That's just step 1. More could be done - very simply, to put up the illusion of 'balance'.


Balanced classes aren't the real issue however. The real problem with PvP, is that there is no 'stamina'. Even if you make all classes 'balanced' vs one another - everyone has instant kill aces up their sleeves. It starts at low-med levels, and just gets more ridiculous through 20.

Effectively @ level 20 - [conservatively speaking] a 1v1 match would last less than 10 seconds [and honestly, I would expect the majority of them to be half that]. It would take longer to 'buff' for the match, than the match itself.

It comes down to whoever gets their ace out [successfully] first.

So really - for PvP to be successful. For it to be 'Fun' and 'Meaningful': participants would need the same ridiculous stat inflation that the mobs receive out in the quests.

Basically, going into a pvp match a player would receive:
HP x 10
Abilities x 3
Saves x 3
AC x 2

or perhaps merely HP x 1000 would be more appropriate. [But then I think PvP would merely degenerate into exclusively using con damagers.]

I think you're on the right track with this.
It would be easy to make changes in an arena where saving throws are every 3-5 seconds rather than every minute in one of the examples where PvP doesn't work.
Overall it would be tons of balancing to get it right.
Fighters get 10x health at level 1, 12x at level 2, 14x at level 3.
Wizards only get 4x 5x then 6x.
Hybrids would get balanced out by the classes chosen.
Spells that break PvP don't need to even be allowed in the arena.
Having a separate spellbook for allowed arena spells would allow casters to prepare in advance.

I have very little interest in PvP myself, but I could see it working.

[knchmpgn]

For those who are saying that Dungeons and Dragons v3.5 is not balanced for PvP I must say you are wrong. Allow me to share a personal experience with you to explain why. I first got into PnP DnD when I was around 15. Prior to that, I had only played Baldur's Gate for the PC and Shadows of Amn.

Anyways, I learned from my cousin and he was the only person I ever had to play with. So we had to just make characters and pit them against one another and occasionally we would take turns acting and random monsters we would pick from the Monster Manual. All in all i think it was pretty balanced.

I think the real problem with pvp in DDO is that DDO doesnt follow the PnP rules closely enough. If wizards in DDO had spell slots instead of spell points, all the numbers (HP, AC, Saves) werent so inflated, we didn't have "loaded dice" etc, etc. DDO would be perfectly suited for PvP.

Just my 2cp.

Please don't flame me.

[malaky]

No new mods for awhile PLEASE!!!

I contest, without exaggeration, that this would kill the game. That is possibly the worst idea I have heard on these forums, ever. Turbine needs to release content if they want their game to stay afloat. I, for one (and I don't think I'm alone in this), would probably leave the game if they wasted dev time on PvP at the expense of actual content. Many, many people left due to the delays on mod 9. An intentional delay on content such as you suggest would spell the end of DDO.

[BLAKROC]

You're right, I don't know anything about PvP in DDO because I haven't been able to try it. I still think it could be done, though. What happens when two identical parties fight? A decent battle, probably.

Anyway, I still think it would be nice to have the ability to enter PvP from anywhere in the world. It may not make sense storywise, and I understand how important that is to Turbine, but it's more fun that way.

search the forums for the Tackilack friday nite fights videos......:D

swing swing swing miss miss miss......................oops dw buff wore off and someone rolled a 20 ....snick snack goes the vorpal blade.....:eek:

good times

[RomaFilth]

My persongagem stuck in the arena, someone has a solution to help me?

[Angelus_dead]

My persongagem stuck in the arena, someone has a solution to help me?
You will be out if you log out for 5 minutes and wait.

[Lorien_the_First_One]

Plain and simple DDO wasn't built with PvP in mind nor was DnD for that matter. PvP was a mere after thought which in my opinion doesn't belong in the first place.

Correct. And the biggest problem with PvP is that devs waste any time at all on it.

[Wessex]

PvP done well can form the core of a game but from the games I have played thus far, it looks like it needs to be factored in from the very beginning in order to work. Provided the penalties for death are not too severe, and the reward for killing is worthwhile it can be amazing, especially when you have things to fight over. Shadowbane (RIP) had a great system and death penalties were not too severe. Gear wasn't too important either, unlike in some other games. An experienced player at medium levels could still take out a poorly played level 75. It had plenty to fight for, something I find essential to motivate me into pvp. I enjoy the fights but I need something to fight over. They had resource mines and player towns were fully siegable. Some amount of pvp was needed just for a guild to survive. It did however stop producing new content and the patches they released were for adjusting classes and gear, such as resistances. There was no new content in the years I played from 2006 to May of this year, and I would agree with the PvE advocates that you can't afford to neglect content. Some people might be able to find new things to do in an old game but a lot of people prefer to be lead around a course, hence why quest based games I am guessing, are so popular.

I was looking for a good game to pvp in when I started, but having seen what can happen when you alter games not designed for it, I would hope if they did make pvp more important here, they didn't break what already works.

[Hendrik]

The idea that fighting players is frustrating or impractical shouldn't be used as an excuse. PvP is already in the game, obviously Turbine spent time putting it there, so why not do it right?

Fighting players is tougher and you have to think differently, but that doesn't mean PvP should be abandoned. PvP can and has been designed to work with all classes in mind in plenty of other MMOs, and there's no reason DDO couldn't work the same way. DDO has so much potential for variety in character builds, there's no reason players couldn't come up with plenty of effective PvP builds to fill any role.

I have fun with the PvE game as much as anyone, but isn't it at least a little frustrating to anyone else that Turbine created a PvP feature that isn't being utilized because of a simple functionality issue that could be fixed relatively easily? In Champions Online, they had worldwide queuing as soon as PvP was introduced in the closed beta, and it was a godsend. It was so great to be able to just jump in and play a couple of matches when I was bored of doing missions without having to travel to some terminal to initiate PvP content. I really think that if it was done the same way in DDO people would participate much, much more.

Not only would it be nice to have, it would be a draw for more new players, and that's what Turbine wants right now.


Not in the least. What's hard about: Tab + Fts or FoD?

TBH, PvP is NOT the 'feature' that needs to be sold to bring in more players. DDO is better then that and does not need to scrape the bottom of the player barrel to get more froobs.

[Dretharis]

Not in the least. What's hard about: Tab + Fts or FoD?

TBH, PvP is NOT the 'feature' that needs to be sold to bring in more players. DDO is better then that and does not need to scrape the bottom of the player barrel to get more froobs.

"Bottom of the player barrel"? Get off your high horse, your arrogance is disgusting.

Skill doesn't just refer to the combat itself, but also the build design. What's FtS and FoD going to do against a WF with a deathblock item and high saves? You could say disjunction -> edrain -> FoD, and that *could* work assuming his deathblock item gets shut down, but wouldn't he do something while you're casting those three spells? And even then, what's forcing him to fight you?

PvP is voluntary. If a specific build at a specific level is known to be drastically overpowered, people will just choose to avoid it. No one's advocating for world-based PvP, I dislike it myself.

[Hendrik]

"Bottom of the player barrel"? Get off your high horse, your arrogance is disgusting.

Skill doesn't just refer to the combat itself, but also the build design. What's FtS and FoD going to do against a WF with a deathblock item and high saves? You could say disjunction -> edrain -> FoD, and that *could* work assuming his deathblock item gets shut down, but wouldn't he do something while you're casting those three spells? And even then, what's forcing him to fight you?

PvP is voluntary. If a specific build at a specific level is known to be drastically overpowered, people will just choose to avoid it. No one's advocating for world-based PvP, I dislike it myself.

Not arrogant in the least. Call it like I see it. May want to visit the PvP pits and actually see what goes on there.

Three spells on a single target?!? You really do need to get to the PvP pits with your Caster.

[Visty]

You could say disjunction -> edrain -> FoD, and that *could* work assuming his deathblock item gets shut down,

try a maxed empowered polarray
thats one spell and your target is still dead

[Dretharis]

Not arrogant in the least. Call it like I see it. May want to visit the PvP pits and actually see what goes on there.

Three spells on a single target?!? You really do need to get to the PvP pits with your Caster.

You implied anyone who enjoys PvP is scum. That's a pretty arrogant overgeneralization.

Frankly, your logic is baffling. We all agree the present system has some problems which need to be addressed - yet, you're saying that it's not worth fixing because it's broken? Right.

The tavern system is awful. Turbine's implemented the dueling system, which seems to have a lot of potential, if it's given a couple minor fixes. One of the largest issues at present - the lack of functional stealth in PvP - is recognized as an issue. Granted, there are quite a few more outstanding issues which should take priority over that, but at least we know it's something they intend to fix "soon."

You also conveniently ignored my second point. If the WF is say, a high AC melee tank with average saves, nothing's forcing him to fight the caster in the first place. Some builds just aren't very good against most others, and some character types are inherently good against many others. That's the nature of a diverse class system, and there's no problem with that - as long as the PvP itself is organized. It's not very surprising that bar-room brawls typically don't work out very well.


try a maxed empowered polarray
thats one spell and your target is still dead

Maybe if they're overencumbered or laggy.

[Angelus_dead]

which need to be addressed - yet, you're saying that it's not worth fixing because it's broken? Right.
The reality is that it's not worth it because it's so broken that the effort to fix would be monumental.


One of the largest issues at present - the lack of functional stealth in PvP
That's not even close to a large issue.


If the WF is say, a high AC melee tank with average saves, nothing's forcing him to fight the caster in the first place. Some builds just aren't very good against most others, and some character types are inherently good against many others. That's the nature of a diverse class system, and there's no problem with that
Wrong, there is a very serious problem with that. If PVP is only going to work for a minority of kinds of characters, then why should effort be spent expanding it?

[Dretharis]

The reality is that it's not worth it because it's so broken that the effort to fix would be monumental.

No, it wouldn't be. Stealth should be fixed, and there needs to be an incentive to duel - a betting system would fit well. Beyond that, not much is necessary.


That's not even close to a large issue.
Either you quoted me out of context, or we disagree. If it's the former - I qualified that in the next sentence. Of course it's not a large issue when considering the entire scope of the game.

In the context of PvP, it is. Assuming a fix to stealth is done competently by also removing the graphical save indicators (which shouldn't exist in quests on stealthed mobs, either), Spot/Listen skills would become vital to prevent opponents from sneaking up with a trip/stunning blow. Casters don't feature either of those as class skills (except bards), while the monk, rogue, and ranger get Hide/MS as class skills.

And who knows. Maybe they'll get ambitious and address the heavy fort issue with something like fort-reducing enhancements/items.


Wrong, there is a very serious problem with that. If PVP is only going to work for a minority of kinds of characters, then why should effort be spent expanding it?
You missed my point. If we see a paradigm shift in PvP from the tavern system to the dueling system, perhaps accompanied by a betting system as well, who do you think will actually get accepted for fights more often - the capped sorceror, or the capped fighter?

The system "works" for both of them - making "equal balance" a goal is about as ridiculous as trying to make all classes equally balanced for quests. Sure, pure Wizards can try to melee, or the Paladin can try to keep the party hasted with UMD'd scrolls, but it's probably not going to work out very well. Some characters excel in some situations, and others don't. That's how variety works. Considering build strengths and weaknesses is a part of build creation.

Granted, the tavern combat system doesn't work very well with the disparity between classes at varying levels, but I've already said that.
------------
If you've ever taken a look or played other games with as much class disparity as DDO/D&D, you'll note that PvP communities are often self-regulated, be it by the virtue of the interest of the individual (in the case of betting), or in the interest of fair competition. I'd consider Diablo II to be a fairly good example with which I'm familiar - the depth of technical analysis by the player community is incredibly impressive, and has lead to some interesting social results.

There's a relatively clear seperation in the PvP niche for various interests: separation of level tiers is a widely accepted concept (and one which would fit well into DDO), as are a variety of accepted rulesets, from strict "Good Mannered" to anything-goes "Bad Mannered" combat. There were those who focused solely on class mirror-matches, some who tried to be as well-rounded as possible, and others who only focused on melee. To give a hypothetical DDO example, you might have one group of people who enjoy optimizing and twinking L6 lowbies, and restricting specific pieces of gear and/or abilities, while you might have others who are only interested in capped combat, without any restrictions at all.

You don't need to consider "my character's effectiveness against every possible build" - competitive strategy necessitates different strategic choices, and you can't have a strategic dilemma if there's no opportunity cost involved.

[Angelus_dead]

No, it wouldn't be. Stealth should be fixed, and there needs to be an incentive to duel - a betting system would fit well. Beyond that, not much is necessary.
To say that shows that you're missing a lot of information.


Either you quoted me out of context, or we disagree. If it's the former - I qualified that in the next sentence. Of course it's not a large issue when considering the entire scope of the game.
It's not a large issue as relating to PVP balance.


In the context of PvP, it is. Assuming a fix to stealth is done competently by also removing the graphical save indicators (which shouldn't exist in quests on stealthed mobs, either), Spot/Listen skills would become vital to prevent opponents from sneaking up with a trip/stunning blow.
That is incorrect. If you'd like to test what would happen, get on a rogue and have a friend pretend that your stealth is working and he can't see you.

The biggest effect stealth could have is enable a stalemate, where the rogue can hide someplace and wait out the clock.


Casters don't feature either of those as class skills (except bards), while the monk, rogue, and ranger get Hide/MS as class skills.
Misleading.


You missed my point. If we see a paradigm shift in PvP from the tavern system to the dueling system, perhaps accompanied by a betting system as well, who do you think will actually get accepted for fights more often - the capped sorceror, or the capped fighter?
No, that was MY point.


The system "works" for both of them - making "equal balance" a goal is about as ridiculous as trying to make all classes equally balanced for quests.
You call that ridculous? Sorry, that is a formal objective of the game designers.


If you've ever taken a look or played other games with as much class disparity as DDO/D&D
Can you name one?


To give a hypothetical DDO example, you might have one group of people who enjoy optimizing and twinking L6 lowbies, and restricting specific pieces of gear and/or abilities, while you might have others who are only interested in capped combat, without any restrictions at all.
If theoretically some people want to do that, they can go ahead already.


You don't need to consider "my character's effectiveness against every possible build"
Untrue and unjustified. That IS something you would have to consider for most PVP strategy.


competitive strategy necessitates different strategic choices, and you can't have a strategic dilemma if there's no opportunity cost involved.
True but irrelevant. It is inaccurate to minimize the imbalances by calling them "costs" instead of "ludicrously insurmountable obstacles"

[Dretharis]

It's not a large issue as relating to PVP balance.

That is incorrect. If you'd like to test what would happen, get on a rogue and have a friend pretend that your stealth is working and he can't see you.

The biggest effect stealth could have is enable a stalemate, where the rogue can hide someplace and wait out the clock.

Are you suggesting that the caster would simply spam AoE effects, or that the melee character wouldn't be able to do anything beyond the initial trip, or something else? I'd like a clarification here before responding.


No, that was MY point.

I think you misunderstood my implication here. I was suggesting that the melee character would have a much larger amount of opportunities to duel, due to the recognized imbalance. While I'd suggest that casters aren't as overpowered, I do certainly agree that they are. I don't see why it's not acceptable for the community to sort out issues such as this, however - that's a trend seen in many other games with active, flourishing communities.


You call that ridculous? Sorry, that is a formal objective of the game designers.

I specified "equal balance." You ignored not only the quotations signifying a specific term, but also the example provided for clarification. Nice.

Would you argue that the game's PvM content is (or ever has been) in any sort of state of equal balance? What's the average caster count for most raids?


Can you name one?

I did. A brief examination of a related forum to the aforementioned game makes it pretty clear that one or two builds, with appropriate gear switches and inventories, are disgustingly overpowered. Hell, there are items which exist in the game which taken in a pair can completely negate about half the skills in the game. Several characters can be handled with a level one antidote potion.

I used a well-geared and designed character negated by the aforementioned potion for about six months, with overall very little trouble - it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that by spamming antidotes, or equipping the mentioned items, or etc. in order to completely invalidate another character only diminished the overall variety of the game and make that specific fight meaningless.


If theoretically some people want to do that, they can go ahead already.

There's no incentive to at present ingame. Some already have established some rules - Otto's is banned pretty commonly, for example. What makes further restrictions any different, especially if they encourage fresh character building exercises?


Untrue and unjustified. That IS something you would have to consider for most PVP strategy.

Actually, now that I re-read that it's probably a little unclear due to my wording. I didn't mean to wholly disregard performance against various builds, but rather that it wasn't necessary to create a build with the idea in mind that it should be able to win against every other build.


True but irrelevant. It is inaccurate to minimize the imbalances by calling them "costs" instead of "ludicrously insurmountable obstacles"

Again, while I agree with you that the imbalance exists, it's not "ludicrously insurmountable," given that the fix to stealth is implemented, and perhaps fair play is kept in mind. Disregarding that though - why are the imbalances relevant enough to justify a complete abandoning of PvP altogether? When characters start hitting 12+, let the casters duke it out amongst themselves. Simple enough.

[Angelus_dead]

Are you suggesting that the caster would simply spam AoE effects, or that the melee character wouldn't be able to do anything beyond the initial trip, or something else? I'd like a clarification here before responding.
Stealth skills aren't a melee vs caster thing, they're a sneaky vs nonsneaky thing. A caster can potentially have high stealth; that's fairly popular in fact. If stealth and antistealth skills were buffed to the point of having PVP value, a PVP build would probably need to include them henceforth.

As for as sneaking up to someone and tripping him: You won't even get an attack roll, because you won't be within reach. Why would the enemy let you into reach? You can test it yourself: go into sneak mode, and then ask a helper to pretend he doesn't see you, and yet prevent you from reaching him. It's not hard.


I was suggesting that the melee character would have a much larger amount of opportunities to duel, due to the recognized imbalance.
Shall I suggest that females have a much larger amount of opportunities for football, due to the recognized imbalance?

You're suggesting that a weak opponent would be given more opportunities to fight, because the challengers think they can win. That may be true, but unless he enjoys losing, he'd tend to agree to many fewer fights. Assuming similar player psychological motivations, it evens out.


While I'd suggest that casters aren't as overpowered, I do certainly agree that they are.
If you don't believe me, you could test this stuff. There are PVP rooms already in DDO; with a few other players to help, you should be able to see what actually happens.


I don't see why it's not acceptable for the community to sort out issues such as this, however - that's a trend seen in many other games with active, flourishing communities.
Incorrect. Those other communities are based on game designs that are fundamentally functional.


I specified "equal balance." You ignored not only the quotations signifying a specific term, but also the example provided for clarification. Nice.
No, I did not ignore them. The example made no sense, and was unrelated to "equal balance".

This looks like a basic logical error: Having observed that differences do not prohibit balance, you decide that differences are irrelevant to balance. That's unjustified. Here's the reality: Game balance is hard, and is unlikely to happen by accident. Simply having a bunch of characters with different strengths and weakness doesn't magically mean they'll be useful for different PVP needs in an entertaining way.


Would you argue that the game's PvM content is (or ever has been) in any sort of state of equal balance? What's the average caster count for most raids?
Do you know the difference between "is a goal" and "has been perfectly achieved"?


I did. A brief examination of a related forum to the aforementioned game makes it pretty clear that one or two builds, with appropriate gear switches and inventories, are disgustingly overpowered.
What, you're saying Diablo2 is as unbalanced as DDO? No. The fundamental core is more balanced, and even if there exist certain items that can be overpowered in combination, they're fairly restricted in natural and could be specifically disallowed by match agreements. Not so with things such as "divine spellcasting"


There's no incentive to at present ingame. Some already have established some rules - Otto's is banned pretty commonly, for example. What makes further restrictions any different, especially if they encourage fresh character building exercises?
They're not different, which is shows the problem. The current restrictions created by some players are quite inadequate at producing entertaining PVP on a meaningful scale, and similar ones would be no better. And of course if there was an actual reward for victory that persisted outside the memories of people who viewed the fight, you could forget even about those kinds of limits being used.



I didn't mean to wholly disregard performance against various builds, but rather that it wasn't necessary to create a build with the idea in mind that it should be able to win against every other build.
If you want to PVP, then the primary consideration will be maximizing the percentage of other characters that you can defeat (possibly with an emphasis on other PVP-focused builds). As PVP consists of defeating other player characters in combat, the ability to defeat player characters will naturally be what is encouraged.


Again, while I agree with you that the imbalance exists, it's not "ludicrously insurmountable," given that the fix to stealth is implemented, and perhaps fair play is kept in mind.
You've still got this idea that stealth is significant. It might help you to consider what would happen to a rogue who (somehow) sneaks up to a paladin or barbarian and thus gets two free unopposed attacks. What's he supposed to do next? (That's an experiment you can conduct with a helper)


When characters start hitting 12+, let the casters duke it out amongst themselves. Simple enough.
I suspect if you elaborate on that suggestion, the shortcomings will become clear.

[Dretharis]

Stealth skills aren't a melee vs caster thing, they're a sneaky vs nonsneaky thing. A caster can potentially have high stealth; that's fairly popular in fact. If stealth and antistealth skills were buffed to the point of having PVP value, a PVP build would probably need to include them henceforth.

All caster classes are inherently poor at stealth and antistealth though. While they can get respectable stealth/antistealth skills, there's no way for them to approach classes such as rogues and rangers without sacrificing too much. It's an opposed roll, not a static DC.



As for as sneaking up to someone and tripping him: You won't even get an attack roll, because you won't be within reach. Why would the enemy let you into reach? You can test it yourself: go into sneak mode, and then ask a helper to pretend he doesn't see you, and yet prevent you from reaching him. It's not hard.

I can see your point here, and I'll probably have to conceed this one. Off the cuff, the only other idea for the hypothetical ranger I'd have would be perhaps a WoE manyshot/repeater after getting into a good position while stealthed, and hope for overburdened/helpless, but that probably wouldn't work.

Although, if stealth were being reworked at all, perhaps it's worth considering a speed increase and limited jump? It's largely underutilized for the same problem in questing.



Shall I suggest that females have a much larger amount of opportunities for football, due to the recognized imbalance?

While I'd consider that a poor comparison (it's much easier to change to an appropriate character than it is to change your gender), technically speaking they do. There's nothing officially barring them from the NFL, yet organizations such as the Women's Football Alliance exist as well.


You're suggesting that a weak opponent would be given more opportunities to fight, because the challengers think they can win. That may be true, but unless he enjoys losing, he'd tend to agree to many fewer fights. Assuming similar player psychological motivations, it evens out.

I'd suggest that's a factor in the event that betting was added/utilized. In that case, individuals would have an interest in attempting to gauge the power level of a given build in comparison to their own. Beyond the imbalance between a pure caster and a noncaster, however, the degree of advantage one build may have over another isn't obvious without specific prior knowledge of gear and build. Thinking you can win isn't the same as winning.

However, that wasn't all I implied. If we don't consider a betting system, or are simply looking at casual/fun PvPing, the dominant factor would likely be character population. If a recognized imbalance exists between casters and non-casters, and it's reasonable to say that there is at the least an approximate even distribution between casters and non-casters at an appropriate level (if it's not distributed in favor of non-casters), then the non-caster will on average have more opponents interested in combat.

You admit yourself it evens out - what is the issue, if that's the case?


If you don't believe me, you could test this stuff. There are PVP rooms already in DDO; with a few other players to help, you should be able to see what actually happens.

The problem is precisely that - we have "rooms" where people just jump into it. For any sort of competitive PvP to exist when class imbalance is a persistant and unavoidable issue, there needs to be voluntary participation by each individual, specifically recognizing the other involved individual(s).


Incorrect. Those other communities are based on game designs that are fundamentally functional.

Define fundamentally functional - is that in regards to the design of interaction specifically for PVP, or are you referencing functionality in regards to class design, or something else?


No, I did not ignore them. The example made no sense, and was unrelated to "equal balance".

This looks like a basic logical error: Having observed that differences do not prohibit balance, you decide that differences are irrelevant to balance. That's unjustified. Here's the reality: Game balance is hard, and is unlikely to happen by accident. Simply having a bunch of characters with different strengths and weakness doesn't magically mean they'll be useful for different PVP needs in an entertaining way.

I didn't imply differences were irrelevant, but that gross differences can often be overcome in MMO's with limited game development by the community themselves. On the contrary, I agree that in an ideal game design, all characters could theoretically combat each other with relatively similar degrees of success, and yes, that is incredibly difficult to design while maintaining class differentiation.

However, if development is limited, slow, or unresponsive, what's wrong with the player community responding by agreeing upon rules themselves? I'd rather have a few small additions to add rewards and fix major bugs, with development still focusing on more pressing issues such as content, fixes to new quest rewards, etc.



Do you know the difference between "is a goal" and "has been perfectly achieved"?

But has it ever been the case, throughout the game's history? Most often the "balance" between caster and non-casters is described as swinging one way or another rather than allowing both to excel equally. I'd say without significant and drastically game-altering changes, it's not possible - and that's alright.

The effectiveness of a character or build is judged based upon comparison; I don't think it's possible under D&D rules (except perhaps fourth) for that level of equality to be reached. That's what makes building characters fun, though.


What, you're saying Diablo2 is as unbalanced as DDO? No. The fundamental core is more balanced, and even if there exist certain items that can be overpowered in combination, they're fairly restricted in natural and could be specifically disallowed by match agreements. Not so with things such as "divine spellcasting"

Clearly you haven't played competitive Diablo II, then. Antidote pots are available from the start of the game, for ten gold, and instantly cure any applied poison, along with providing resistance to it - yet some character paths are solely based around poison, such as the one I mentioned I had used. Paladins, who are generally seen as the most powerful class, are the only character with a (virtually) unresistable, unblockable, ranged attack. They also happen to have access to easier and much faster blocking, naturally atainable higher resistances, one of (if not the) best melee attacks in the game, a unique skill which lets them move in a rapid and unpredictable manner, etc.

The game community as I mentioned also segments dueling into "melee only" games, specific matchups such as "sorc vs sorc", etc. What's the difference between that and disallowing divine casters?



The current restrictions created by some players are quite inadequate at producing entertaining PVP on a meaningful scale

I agree, there needs to be further consideration by players interested of what's "fair" and what's not, although that just requires a discussion/debate on the topic.


and similar ones would be no better.

Why's that?


And of course if there was an actual reward for victory that persisted outside the memories of people who viewed the fight, you could forget even about those kinds of limits being used.

If we're discussing class or level (and therefore item) restrictions, you can clearly see the class and level of an individual prior to accepting a duel request. Limits beyond those (such as specific spells) wouldn't see usage here in most cases, you're correct - but I don't see that as an issue if dueling becomes the norm. As well, I wouldn't completely discount the possibility of them being used - look at Khyber's Friday Night Fights.


If you want to PVP, then the primary consideration will be maximizing the percentage of other characters that you can defeat (possibly with an emphasis on other PVP-focused builds). As PVP consists of defeating other player characters in combat, the ability to defeat player characters will naturally be what is encouraged.

This is one of several reasons I'm in favor of a betting system, as counter-intuitive as that sounds. The perception of your own character's strength comes into play in this case.


You've still got this idea that stealth is significant. It might help you to consider what would happen to a rogue who (somehow) sneaks up to a paladin or barbarian and thus gets two free unopposed attacks. What's he supposed to do next? (That's an experiment you can conduct with a helper)

I'd say it's a poor matchup for the rogue in this case, and I've admitted that heavy fort is still perhaps an issue. However, rangers and monks have the same access to stealth. I'd say the ranger that gets in an early trip probably has a significant, yet not insurmountable, advantage.


I suspect if you elaborate on that suggestion, the shortcomings will become clear.

What's to elaborate? Non-casters in general prefer to duel other non-casters once heavy fort, displacement, and FtS are all factors to consider. Therefore, casters are more likely to find duels with other casters.

[Visty]

lots of text

so, if i got right what you are sayingm then you say that pvp will be lots of fun within certain rules

if so, then answer me this:
why dont you make those freaking rules yourself and leave the devs alone with it?
resctrict certain classes as much as you want but leave the classes as they are alone

and even if stealth would work as it should, it would still suck and be totally underwhelming

[Dretharis]

so, if i got right what you are sayingm then you say that pvp will be lots of fun within certain rules

if so, then answer me this:
why dont you make those freaking rules yourself and leave the devs alone with it?
resctrict certain classes as much as you want but leave the classes as they are alone

and even if stealth would work as it should, it would still suck and be totally underwhelming

A couple of pages was too much for you to handle, then?

That's what the entire last two or three posts Angelus and I have been going back and forth with were about, the community making their own rules. At least skim so you can get the gist of it or something.

[Visty]

A couple of pages was too much for you to handle, then?

That's what the entire last two or three posts Angelus and I have been going back and forth with were about, the community making their own rules. At least skim so you can get the gist of it or something.

well, then forgive me not reading posts which are as long as a book

you wont find some general rules anyway, ppl are too differant for that

rules have to be done befor the match starts

which just shows that nothing is wrong about pvp and this whole thread is pointless

[Dretharis]

well, then forgive me not reading posts which are as long as a book

Give me a break. Kindergarten books are longer than that.


you wont find some general rules anyway, ppl are too differant for that

rules have to be done befor the match starts

So we're supposed to re-invent the wheel every time?

Either way, I'm not saying they have to be specifically established or recorded somewhere - of course people are going to disagree on some points. My argument is that it is acceptable for PvP to be balanced by player-made rules.

In essence, we're saying the same thing you're saying here. Although I would say that for a healthy community, it's a good idea to have some commonly established or well-known rules, again such as the Otto's example. It doesn't need to be a comprehensive rulebook (although I'd probably like that :D).


which just shows that nothing is wrong about pvp and this whole thread is pointless

There are some issues, or it would be a more viable endgame option. I'd say (mostly) all it needs is an incentive. Add betting done through a tradescreen in the duel negotiation screen to put up bets, and the rest will sort itself out. A couple of things (such as stealth/invis, heavy fort) might warrant revising, but I'd say those issues are also problematic for the game altogether, not just in PvP.

[Elvejon]

PvP Will never be better at this game. Casters always win. If you want to make fair. they have to re-configure the entire game into world of warcraft.

[Angelus_dead]

All caster classes are inherently poor at stealth and antistealth though. While they can get respectable stealth/antistealth skills, there's no way for them to approach classes such as rogues and rangers without sacrificing too much. It's an opposed roll, not a static DC.
1. It's about characters, not classes.
2. False. Caster characters can approach and nearly equal rogues and rangers without much problem.
3. It can be called an opposed "check", but not an "opposed roll", as it's not a random die.


I can see your point here, and I'll probably have to conceed this one. Off the cuff, the only other idea for the hypothetical ranger
The people who want stealth changed for PVP are generally doing so to help rogues, who have no noticeable ranged ability.


Although, if stealth were being reworked at all, perhaps it's worth considering a speed increase and limited jump? It's largely underutilized for the same problem in questing.
I have repeatedly suggested that characters be allowed to jump and tumble while sneaking, causing them to take a brief penalty of about -10 on all involved skills.


While I'd consider that a poor comparison (it's much easier to change to an appropriate character than it is to change your gender), technically speaking they do. There's nothing officially barring them from the NFL, yet organizations such as the Women's Football Alliance exist as well.
Technically they do not, as can be observed by technically counting the number of female football players.


You admit yourself it evens out - what is the issue, if that's the case?
That's a really fundamental question, and as such is hard to answer. It would probably help if you looked closer at the question of female professional athletes and their relative degree of success and popularity.


The problem is precisely that - we have "rooms" where people just jump into it. For any sort of competitive PvP to exist when class imbalance is a persistant and unavoidable issue, there needs to be voluntary participation by each individual, specifically recognizing the other involved individual(s).
Uh, have you looked at DDO's existing PVP options? Click on a guy, click the "duel" icon, pick the room from the list... there's no opportunity for any outsider to jump in and interfere without you allowing it.


However, if development is limited, slow, or unresponsive, what's wrong with the player community responding by agreeing upon rules themselves?
As explained already, what's wrong is that your'e talking about something else than what this thread is about, which is the developers adding PVP improvements. To the extent that players can fix the problems themselves, the players already could have fixed the problems themselves. Evidence demonstrates that they did not.

Evidence from other games suggests they would not.


The game community as I mentioned also segments dueling into "melee only" games, specific matchups such as "sorc vs sorc", etc. What's the difference between that and disallowing divine casters?
What's a divine caster? Answer in terms usable in a formal automated rule or computer program.


What's to elaborate? Non-casters in general prefer to duel other non-casters once heavy fort, displacement, and FtS are all factors to consider. Therefore, casters are more likely to find duels with other casters.
What's a caster?

[Angelus_dead]

There are some issues, or it would be a more viable endgame option. I'd say (mostly) all it needs is an incentive. Add betting done through a tradescreen in the duel negotiation screen to put up bets, and the rest will sort itself out.
How do you reconcile these two positions?

1. Problems with game balance can be mitigated by players establishing informal rules about what abilities and items are disallowed, which would be administered by an honor code.

2. Imbalances in character power can be compensated for by enabling wagering on the results, which would be administered by server software.

Bit of a contradiction there...

[Dretharis]

1. It's about characters, not classes.

Semantics. Any character can be a "caster" with a splash of a level, but the imbalance we're discussing here involves at least a majority of character levels being caster.


2. False. Caster characters can approach and nearly equal rogues and rangers without much problem.

First, they'd have to splash for the uncap. Second, they'd have to max at least three cross class skills in that case, along with pumping balance. Not much room for leeway there. Third, they're still missing out on enhancement boosts. Adequate for questing doesn't cut it.


3. It can be called an opposed "check", but not an "opposed roll", as it's not a random die.




The people who want stealth changed for PVP are generally doing so to help rogues, who have no noticeable ranged ability.

I already conceeded this point overall anyway.


I have repeatedly suggested that characters be allowed to jump and tumble while sneaking, causing them to take a brief penalty of about -10 on all involved skills.

Good suggestion.


Technically they do not, as can be observed by technically counting the number of female football players.

"Technically" isn't the same as "in practical experience", or "in reality."


That's a really fundamental question, and as such is hard to answer. It would probably help if you looked closer at the question of female professional athletes and their relative degree of success and popularity.

It's still a very poor comparison, as I already said. It's easy for a player in DDO to switch from one character to another. Can't really do the same for football in your comparison.



Uh, have you looked at DDO's existing PVP options? Click on a guy, click the "duel" icon, pick the room from the list... there's no opportunity for any outsider to jump in and interfere without you allowing it.

Thought you were referring to the tavern rooms instead of the dueling option.


As explained already, what's wrong is that your'e talking about something else than what this thread is about, which is the developers adding PVP improvements. To the extent that players can fix the problems themselves, the players already could have fixed the problems themselves. Evidence demonstrates that they did not.

Evidence from other games suggests they would not.



What's a divine caster? Answer in terms usable in a formal automated rule or computer program.


Why is it necessary to answer in that format? I said nothing in the example I was using for comparison regarding the game itself distinguishing between casters and non-casters. Hell, in the example I was discussing, it's much more difficult to informally categorize characters than it is in DDO - one of the best Lvl 9 tier melee dueler builds was a necromancer, while the paladin build I had mentioned earlier was predominantly caster, but also used melee attacks as well.

In DDO, all you need to do is look at their class - a battlecleric is the only popular build I can think of which could fit in either category.



How do you reconcile these two positions?

1. Problems with game balance can be mitigated by players establishing informal rules about what abilities and items are disallowed, which would be administered by an honor code.

2. Imbalances in character power can be compensated for by enabling wagering on the results, which would be administered by server software.

Bit of a contradiction there...

They're not too simultaneous positions, I clearly said earlier[/b] that they're one of two possibilities - [u]either the vest interest of the individual, or the community as a whole, can serve to compensate for ingame inbalances. The former would come into play if a formal system of wagering was introduced, the latter would be necessary if not.

Frankly, I would agree that the community doesn't seem organized or motivated enough to come to any formal agreement on "fair" or balanced rulesets, but that's why I favor the creation of a simplistic wager system.

[assamite]

PvP in dnd will always be the pit where you beat up your buddies and then lick their faces cus there is nothing they can do about it :PPPPPP. And after licking their faces over and over again for the next 3 days you raid together... possibly getting your face licked for the next 3 days if the right gear drops for them.

Its a huuuuge pass time nothing more. And I'm ok with that :D.

[Pwesiela]

PvP is really just for testing out your cool new equipment on friends!

/QFT

The biggest problem with PvP is that it's in the game in the first place.

[ravane]

Turbine would have to rewrite 3.x rules to make it right aka Balanced. Fact of the matter is that the classes are not balanced. We already have people complaining that one class can do X which they can't defend against, and.. yeah. Casters are nerfed on some of their more fun spells already for PvP, then you have the tickets for griefing...

No, PvP was put in a while back because of enough complaints. This game was NEVER designed for PvP, so be greatful for what you do have currently. For now, ask for things that are within scope of the system.

1. Make them finally give you a leadership board. This was supposed to be given to you PvPers back with Mod 3. I hate PvP, but Turbine stated it back then, so I'll /sign with you guys to get it in.

2. Other styles of PvP arenas. Aka an anything goes area with no nerfs on spells, or anything would be one idea. Let the mage have their full power back at their finger tips. A spell battle areana where casters can compete, a gladiator arena where after X time mobs are thrown into the phray, or even an arena where the environment effects change around such as the ground turns to ice, fog covers the area, rocks drop from the sky, etc.

If there are glitches in the queing and such... Well, honestly, I guess the best thing to do is file bug reports on why you think the system isn't working correctly. And if you find a bug, continue after it. I mean it took months, but we were able to get them to make changes to ranged attacks 1.5 years back or so. Still trying to get more made to them. But the idea is stick with it. Why do I say stick with it? There isn't going to be budget either for a rewrite of the system (at least in the near future. The rest of the PrEs need to be finished at a minimum), but you know.. in about a year or so if you've garnered enough support, I bet it will become a lot more feasible.

I don't have much experience with the pvp in ddo, but I was thinking it could be quite fun to have a multi party dungeon with the goal of only one party leaving with the prize. This would allow for a more even fight as you would be dealing with both pve and pvp forcing your party to bring a suitable team. I could see this being quite popular with a large number of people and there would be room for some interesting situations if the area was large enough and there were enough people (64 maybe?)

[Visty]

I don't have much experience with the pvp in ddo, but I was thinking it could be quite fun to have a multi party dungeon with the goal of only one party leaving with the prize. This would allow for a more even fight as you would be dealing with both pve and pvp forcing your party to bring a suitable team. I could see this being quite popular with a large number of people and there would be room for some interesting situations if the area was large enough and there were enough people (64 maybe?)

it would just lead to large guild farming those rewards

you know, when 1 side doesnt move, the other gets the reward easily

[croger1520033]

The idea that fighting players is frustrating or impractical shouldn't be used as an excuse. PvP is already in the game, obviously Turbine spent time putting it there, so why not do it right?

Fighting players is tougher and you have to think differently, but that doesn't mean PvP should be abandoned. PvP can and has been designed to work with all classes in mind in plenty of other MMOs, and there's no reason DDO couldn't work the same way. DDO has so much potential for variety in character builds, there's no reason players couldn't come up with plenty of effective PvP builds to fill any role.

I have fun with the PvE game as much as anyone, but isn't it at least a little frustrating to anyone else that Turbine created a PvP feature that isn't being utilized because of a simple functionality issue that could be fixed relatively easily? In Champions Online, they had worldwide queuing as soon as PvP was introduced in the closed beta, and it was a godsend. It was so great to be able to just jump in and play a couple of matches when I was bored of doing missions without having to travel to some terminal to initiate PvP content. I really think that if it was done the same way in DDO people would participate much, much more.

Not only would it be nice to have, it would be a draw for more new players, and that's what Turbine wants right now.

You will never win this argument If you like champions online PvP go PvP there, not here. When this game was first developed the original programmers and dev team said PvP would never be in this game for the reasons that you have refused to accept. The other thing that was also said when PvP was announced by the new team was that they would never change things to make PvP more balanced.

PvP will never be great in this game, the reason it was never supposed to be here in the first place. It was an afterthought and it is fun if you stop comparing it to Champions online PvP.

It boggles my mind why people who want to play a certain game like champions online, why they come here and try it out and like everything else better but they want one feature of the game to be exactly like the game they just left. It's like I didn't like champions online but I like DDO, but could you make DDO more like champions online?? It's like ***, why did you even bother posting.

[Angelus_dead]

it would just lead to large guild farming those rewards

you know, when 1 side doesnt move, the other gets the reward easily
That's called a "Fight Club" exploit. There are ways to avoid it, but they require serious developer effort, and nobody seems to get it right on their first few attempts.

[ravane]

That's called a "Fight Club" exploit. There are ways to avoid it, but they require serious developer effort, and nobody seems to get it right on their first few attempts.

I think the solution is simply make a limit on how many guild members can join. You also don't make it a 32vs32 player thing, you do something more like 5 groups of 12 with no more than one guild per group. Or 10 groups of 6 with not more than two guilds per group.

If you design the map right you could even leave room for a more ruthless free for all battleroyal/ highlander style thing(when your dead your out of the contest). There would have to be lots of map design choices to allow advantages to different classes and races.

As far as loot goes, you could just not have any and your guild gets a win for their ranking or something. Loot could also be straight cash, every player has to spend x amount of money to get into the contest. one group leaves with the pot.

You can always balance pvp by changing game play mechanics in favor of pvp. In the arena your in pvp game mechanics, everywhere else it's same as it ever was. One can even leave the option to play a match with old rules. Old school people are happy and people who like the balances are happy.

[Pwesiela]

I think the solution is simply make a limit on how many guild members can join. You also don't make it a 32vs32 player thing, you do something more like 5 groups of 12 with no more than one guild per group. Or 10 groups of 6 with not more than two guilds per group.

If you design the map right you could even leave room for a more ruthless free for all battleroyal/ highlander style thing(when your dead your out of the contest). There would have to be lots of map design choices to allow advantages to different classes and races.

As far as loot goes, you could just not have any and your guild gets a win for their ranking or something. Loot could also be straight cash, every player has to spend x amount of money to get into the contest. one group leaves with the pot.

You can always balance pvp by changing game play mechanics in favor of pvp. In the arena your in pvp game mechanics, everywhere else it's same as it ever was. One can even leave the option to play a match with old rules. Old school people are happy and people who like the balances are happy.

The limitations on guilds does nothing for collusion.

And in the end, what you're suggesting here is an astronomical investment in pvp for a game that is overwhelmingly pve. The playerbase doesn't want it. You simply don't devote 95% of your resources to satisfy 5% of your players. Sorry.

[96th_Malice]

And in the end, what you're suggesting here is an astronomical investment in pvp for a game that is overwhelmingly pve. The playerbase doesn't want it. You simply don't devote 95% of your resources to satisfy 5% of your players. Sorry.

It amuses me that peeps that have no purpose for PvP STILL manage to read the PvP Forums and comment on em !

:)

You wont find me even browsing through the Wizzy or Sorc sections of the Forums. ( Cause I have NO interest in those classes )

Now onto your reply !

No one is asking that 95% of the resources be put into 5% of the players

BUT maybe a little more than what it is ! ... ZERO

For the record I pay JUST as much as you do per month to play this game .........

So what makes you more important than me ?

Absolutley nothing

I understand that devs have to put more time into PvE than PvP or this game would die ...... I do alot of questing as well and only PvP is to pass time when I know I dont have time to run quests or raids !!

You dont have to like PvP BUT it does serve as a great deal of fun and a break from predictable AI creatures in the game .. and anyone who has been in Khybers Wayward Lobster with 3 instances of PvP going knows that there are in fact a great deal of toons who do enjoy PvP !

Busiest time last night had 43 people in the Lobster "Pit"

PvE is Mod central and always has updates !! I would say that "yes" 95% of the resources have been used in PvE Mods !!

PvP was added to the game but there have never been any updates !! Give us our 5% !!

:)

Trust me a dev can find 5% of his time to look at some issues !!

Just my thoughts !!

[Visty]

sorry, i have to comment on that :D



For the record I pay JUST as much as you do per month to play this game .........


what if he is f2p?
he doesnt pay anything
you mean, you also dont pay to play the game?
you dont pay and DEMAND???

sheesh, what do they teach you in school?

not paying and wanting things, pfff





sorry :D

[Pwesiela]

It amuses me that peeps that have no purpose for PvP STILL manage to read the PvP Forums and comment on em !

:)

You wont find me even browsing through the Wizzy or Sorc sections of the Forums. ( Cause I have NO interest in those classes )

Many of us just check to see what the new posts are and look more at the ones that interest us. This interests me for the opposite reason it interests you.


Now onto your reply !

No one is asking that 95% of the resources be put into 5% of the players

BUT maybe a little more than what it is ! ... ZERO

For the record I pay JUST as much as you do per month to play this game .........

So what makes you more important than me ?

Absolutley nothing

Not getting defensive, are we?

As a single (VIP) player against another, nothing makes me more important than you. As a player who is part of the greater majority (dislike pvp), it means I've got the weight of the vast majority of the population on my side.

On an uncorroborated note, I'd be willing to bet that a good chunk of the people clamoring (or who would clamor if they could/were motivated to) for more pvp are those on f2p accounts. Why? Because you don't join and pay for this game if you're a hardcore pvp'er. You'd do another game.


I understand that devs have to put more time into PvE than PvP or this game would die ...... I do a lot of questing as well and only PvP is to pass time when I know I don't have time to run quests or raids !!

You dont have to like PvP BUT it does serve as a great deal of fun and a break from predictable AI creatures in the game .. and anyone who has been in Khybers Wayward Lobster with 3 instances of PvP going knows that there are in fact a great deal of toons who do enjoy PvP !

As opposed to the highly predictable behavior of the player opponent?


PvE is Mod central and always has updates !! I would say that "yes" 95% of the resources have been used in PvE Mods !!

PvP was added to the game but there have never been any updates !! Give us our 5% !!

:)

Actually, it has had updates. Just not recently. Hold on, they've always been tweeking pvp. Most notably in how you can get groups together for it and how you can now challenge people. Look! 5%.


Trust me a dev can find 5% of his time to look at some issues !!

Just my thoughts !!

Depends on the dev and on what management feels is more important. PvE is simply more important. The 5% they've devoted for the addition to the challenge system (with a new fighting area, queuing abilities) is probably as much as they should devote.

[96th_Malice]

Many of us just check to see what the new posts are and look more at the ones that interest us.

Not getting defensive, are we?



Heya,

Nope not defensive at all.

This is the problem for sure with typing rather than speaking I guess.

Dont get me wrong .. I love the PvE content updates and spend WAY more time doing that than PvP

BUT

Comments ( as yours ) saying the following can get me a little fired up ya !!

:)

/QFT

The biggest problem with PvP is that it's in the game in the first place.

At some point some Dev thought it would be a good idea to add this to an already great game ..... Probably based off of peoples request to add it to the game I would guess

I think Turbine must have fired that particular dev. !! :D

I realize things take time and I'd MUCH rather have Shroud being fixed than PvP.

BUT ...... It just seems to me that they may have started somthing with PvP and are not quite sure how to "fix" some of the issues ! Just let us know !!



You'd have to come visit us sometime to note some of the problems peeps are having !!

As for me ....I like PvP the way it is, and generally I have accepted that me vs. 20th lvl Sorc generally leaves me rezzing !!

Its all about fun, I dont think my PvP issues are any more important than say your PvE issues ...... BUT I do think that all issues should be addresed by some dev out there.

Oh well, I think thats about it for now

[Pwesiela]

Heya,

Comments ( as yours ) saying it shouldn't be a part of the game are unjustified.

Never said it shouldn't be in, just that we really shouldn't have the amount of resources thrown at it that it seems to be getting. Like you said:


I realize things take time and I'd MUCH rather have Shroud being fixed than PvP.

Not being a developer or computer programmer myself, I'd believe that a person coding pvp could also be coding the reworking of the Shroud or any other plethora of bugs that are out there.


BUT ...... It just seems to me that they may have started somthing with PvP and are not quite sure how to "fix" some of the issues ! Just let us know !!

You'd have to come visit us sometime to note some of the problems peeps are having !!

I visit on occasion. But less than 1% of my time is in there. It doesn't mean, however, that I don't know about it. The only thing that I'd really want changed in the current implementation is the ability to sneak in pvp. What good is an assassin rogue in pvp? None.

[Beld]

and I will admit, I am not a fan of PvP at all, seems the fix is to create PvP guilds just like the PD ppl do.

You can have the guild rules for PvP matches, do the que'ing within the guild structure and ally with other PvP guilds for larger battles (6 v 6).

No problems, no dev time used up on this and problem solved.

On an aside, making the melee's infinately more powerful and further nerfing caster abilities would just make PvP fun for the melee, which still doesn't 'fix' it by definition, it just shifts the power to the other side. Since the game is designed the way it is and all players use all skills to complete quests, they should be able to use the same tactics in PvP, which hinders back to the balance issue (which can't be implemented btw, there are too many diverse builds that would become broken or over-powered instead of the current broken or over-powered)

The other issue that I have seen, once you start gearing a game for PvP, the griefing issue gets out of hand and you have developement/resource allocation to something that is causing more resource/developement issue in a vicious cycle.

In closing, create a guild (or two or three) and go to town within the structure that is already in place, this solves the issue from both sides, you get to PvP within a rule set agreed upon by all interested parties and I get to PvE and not worry about dev time being siphoned off to something that will never work well within this rule set.

[keegusmcdille]

There was an article I read posted on another thread that was a blog/guide for game developer's. It basically said choose a crowd to please from the get go and stick with it. DDO is a PvE game, the point of this game is to group with people to figure out dungeons for 'rich' reward. You don't get gear off of mobs, you get them from chests, and the ways you gain experience and level in this game is from completing objectives, not slaughtering monsters(unless the objective is specifically slaughtering monsters) individually. The game is for all intents and purposes Dungeons & Dragons: Eberron Unlimited. Other games which either have a pvp element or better yet a pvp focus, are games which tend to be war oriented. LotRO takes place during the war of the ring, Warhammer was a war game from inception, Warcraft was supposed to be Warhammer's first computer game, Guild Wars, etc, ad nauseum.

DDO is a game which is based on a ruleset which actively sought to branch away from the War game concept. Dungeons and Dragons was always a game which was meant to bring people together, not conflict with eachother. Most every D&D ruleset even states that the DM is not supposed to be the bad guy that the team is working against, but the story teller who's trying to enrich the gameplay of everying, including his or herself. Add on top of this that the Eberron setting takes place in a world of relative peace. So as you can see, the whole concept here is one where you are targeting a crowd of people who don't PvP, or if and when they do it's not something they need to be heavily invested in.

Does that mean the majority of the people who play DDO don't like competition or PvP scenarios at all? No, it just means there are plenty of other games out there with those focuses. They have chosen a different crowd to appeal their product too. But really, are you going to go play farmville then get in contact with facebook and be like "Hey, I enjoy farmville, it's fun having my friends pick my melons, and randomly get a black sheep, but you should implement a system where I can go take over my friends' farms and become the despotic ruler of our corner of farmville." No, because there are other games for that.

[96th_Malice]

I visit on occasion. But less than 1% of my time is in there. It doesn't mean, however, that I don't know about it. The only thing that I'd really want changed in the current implementation is the ability to sneak in pvp. What good is an assassin rogue in pvp? None.

I don't have a rogue ...... but hands down I agree with you that this should be in there !!

I'll just have to start avoiding Rogues as well as Sorcs !!

:)

[Surrealistik]

New player, completely agree with calls to make the game more hospitable to PvP. Let's face it; PvP is what you do once the endgame has been conquered, and you want to impose your accumulated awesomeness on others because there is nothing else to really do.

[96th_Malice]

New player, completely agree with calls to make the game more hospitable to PvP. Let's face it; PvP is what you do once the endgame has been conquered, and you want to impose your accumulated awesomeness on others because there is nothing else to really do.

I agree !!

Cassiee is now 20th lvl ........

There isnt a piece of loot out there that she can use to better herself in archery ( That I am aware of )

Any bows I want I can craft !

There is no more XP to be had ........ so basically she's good getting more favor I guess.

And Epic quests !!

I guess thats why I have 10 more toons that are 17th lvl and under !!

:)

PS: Welcome to the game

[Magitu]

Embarrassing big mouth no skilled players is funny. Have a skilled opponent who is decent person also is fun in different way.

Sorry is nothing personal.

You might be not aware all the time but there are kids playing to.

Embarrassing is not funnny, it destroys the enviroment... We have a nicer human enviroment in this game than others MMORPGs. Do not encourage such stupid way to destroy it. Ower skills as players in most cases have nothing to do with this pvp system also.

Embarrassing kids is NOT FUNNY.

[96th_Malice]

Sorry is nothing personal.

Embarrassing kids is NOT FUNNY.

Wow ..... A little preachy for your second post no ?

:)

OK Whos dad are you and why are you here yelling at us about wiping the floor your kid in PvP?

:D

The problem becomes is there is nothing in PvP that shows age. SO one never knows who you are killing.

AND

Believe me ...... sometimes the adults act younger than the kids in the game so you never know !

When in PvP there is a great number of us that group together 12 at a time and sit there and kick the c*ap outta each other .... talk ... and generally stick to ourselves. If there is someone on that I know is a kid .... ( no names mentioned ) but rhymes with "Smaximized" :) Anyways I will let the new PvP toons in our party know that he is like 13 and acts like it and maybe to understand he's young. and leave him be.

Now with that said, I have got some NASTY /tells from people that I thought were adults that turned out to be kids that could be no older than 10. So ..... if your gonna cuss and talk like a trucker ..... I dont care HOW old you are, you are gonna get manyshot it the face the second you drop into the pit.

PvP isnt about age ..... its about respect for one another.

/Rant off

[Magitu]

Wow ..... A little preachy for your second post no ?

:)

OK Whos dad are you and why are you here yelling at us about wiping the floor your kid in PvP?

:D

The problem becomes is there is nothing in PvP that shows age. SO one never knows who you are killing.

AND

Believe me ...... sometimes the adults act younger than the kids in the game so you never know !

When in PvP there is a great number of us that group together 12 at a time and sit there and kick the c*ap outta each other .... talk ... and generally stick to ourselves. If there is someone on that I know is a kid .... ( no names mentioned ) but rhymes with "Smaximized" :) Anyways I will let the new PvP toons in our party know that he is like 13 and acts like it and maybe to understand he's young. and leave him be.

Now with that said, I have got some NASTY /tells from people that I thought were adults that turned out to be kids that could be no older than 10. So ..... if your gonna cuss and talk like a trucker ..... I dont care HOW old you are, you are gonna get manyshot it the face the second you drop into the pit.

PvP isnt about age ..... its about respect for one another.

/Rant off

Who is talking about adults? Just google about embarrassment and wath is the efect it has on most kids. If you want to discus after that... do it by PM. I dont want to destory others people's posts with such uglys talks.

[96th_Malice]

Who is talking about adults? Just google about embarrassment and wath is the efect it has on most kids. If you want to discus after that... do it by PM. I dont want to destory others people's posts with such uglys talks.

OK .... I have a 9 year old !!

SO .. Lets discuss shall we !!

AND I gotta tell you ...... You look up really strange stuff on "Google"

For the record, I am not going to waste my time "PMing you" about who and who does NOT get embarrasssed in a game !!

You are not required in anything this post has to do with sorry !

I'm embarrassed I have replied to you twice ...... see if you can find THAT on Google !

:)

[kyebosh]

all the rogues i know of wont even set foot in one because they know they wont last a few seconds vs anyone. heck even a lvl 10 wizzie could probly knock off a lvl 20 rogue without much trouble at all. that speaks volumes about pvp balance vs pve (ie real game) balance.

Agree with the sentiment, we're generally poor in PvP...
However you might be suprised how well we can do with a suitable build.
Still weak vs self healers & Frenzied Bezerkers are just beastly, but toe-to-toe slugfests are actually pretty fair (vs Fighters, Rangers, Monks, other Rogues etc).
If we got our Sneak Attacks (pray for Fortification reduction items soon) we'd be pretty fearsome!

Come for a demo if you're on Khyber :)

[frecel]

I think that there is no way there could be a good 1vs1 pvp in this game because that would require balancing the classes and to do that would require big changes in the game system. And after those changes this game wouldn't be D&D anymore.

It would be better to focus on a party vs party. But it would be much better if there was some story behind it (ie. battle between two kingdoms) not just fight on the arena for no reason.

[Surrealistik]

I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve at least a rough balance; all it takes is adjusting/nerfing certain spells and item properties in a PvP context. Examples:

In PvP (that is when using spells/abilities/attacks on another player):

Most no-save, no-SR spells (Searing Ray) OR no-save, auto-hit (Otto's Irresistable Dance) spells are given a save.

Fortification is capped at 50%.

Immunity items provide a stacking +4 save against the things they normally immunize against and prevent autofailure on 1s.

Magic Missile immunity becomes 75% damage resistance to Magic Missile attacks, or allows a save to negate at a +4 bonus.

Stealth and Invisibility actually work.

[Visty]

I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve at least a rough balance; all it takes is adjusting/nerfing certain spells and item properties in a PvP context. Examples:

In PvP (that is when using spells/abilities/attacks on another player):

Most no-save, no-SR spells (Searing Ray) OR no-save, auto-hit (Otto's Irresistable Dance) spells are given a save.

Fortification is capped at 50%.

Immunity items provide a stacking +4 save against the things they normally immunize against and prevent autofailure on 1s.

Magic Missile immunity becomes 75% damage resistance to Magic Missile attacks, or allows a save to negate at a +4 bonus.

Stealth and Invisibility actually work.
another attempt to create a whole new game

once you have to change that much to make pvp balanced, you shouldnt bother at all with it

[Surrealistik]

What are you talking about? Does the idea that these changes only occur in a PvP context (outside of PvP they operate as normal) elude you? Do you realize that such context sensitive changes actually don't require all that much coding and effort?

[Visty]

What are you talking about? Does the idea that these changes only occur in a PvP context (outside of PvP they operate as normal) elude you? Do you realize that such context sensitive changes actually don't require all that much coding and effort?

says you

do you work for turbine?

even if its just for pvp, the effort is like creating a whle new game and thus not worth it. and YOU dont know how much coding it takes...me neither, but i play turbine games like 2+ years now, they cant even fix the simplest things, so why should they make those big chances without a problem?

[Surrealistik]

I can code C++, and tell you with 100% confidence and certainty that creating a branching behavior based on a certain input is pretty mickey mouse, even for most novice programmers.

Also what big changes?

[Visty]

Also what big changes?


I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve at least a rough balance; all it takes is adjusting/nerfing certain spells and item properties in a PvP context. Examples:

In PvP (that is when using spells/abilities/attacks on another player):

Most no-save, no-SR spells (Searing Ray) OR no-save, auto-hit (Otto's Irresistable Dance) spells are given a save.

Fortification is capped at 50%.

Immunity items provide a stacking +4 save against the things they normally immunize against and prevent autofailure on 1s.

Magic Missile immunity becomes 75% damage resistance to Magic Missile attacks, or allows a save to negate at a +4 bonus.

Stealth and Invisibility actually work.

those

recording of like almsot all offensive spells

[Surrealistik]

How are these major changes to the core game when they're concerned with PvP only (not PvE)? They certainly aren't big from a coding/development vantage in terms of scale.

[Visty]

considering you dont understand how much effort it would be, no point in duscussing more

there are bugs, like the ladder bug, which are still in game since beta...and i mean the beta in 2006, not the one from this year

so dont say its easy to revamp all spells

[Surrealistik]

considering you dont understand how much effort it would be, no point in duscussing more

there are bugs, like the ladder bug, which are still in game since beta...and i mean the beta in 2006, not the one from this year

so dont say its easy to revamp all spells

Actually, possessing relevant first hand experience in coding content in a modern programming language, yes, I do in fact have a pretty excellent understanding of how much effort it would be, and one I'm sure that is superior to yours unless you have a similar background. What I'm essentially asking for in the majority of cases is an if/then/else branching that corresponds to whether or not a spell/attack was originated by a player against another player, then adjusting the resulting behaviour using already existent code for the most part. That is *trivial* to effect.

[abull74]

To the OP.....

How the F*&K are you gonna say "Fix PvP" and yet you say you havent even tried it?
W T F is wrong with you?
Thats like telling the cook he needs to add salt, when you havent even tasted the food.
We dont even need people like you in game man. Just go back to to flippin your burgers at McDonalds and leave DDO to the adults.
You want PvP? Go play Guild Wars or something.

[Roziel_Longblade]

This arena stuff is not real pvp. If you want real pvp it needs to be an entire zone of open pvp. Casters that actually need to worry about mana and rogues who can sneak up on PCs changes a lot.

[Angelus_dead]

Actually, possessing relevant first hand experience in coding content in a modern programming language, yes, I do in fact have a pretty excellent understanding of how much effort it would be, and one I'm sure that is superior to yours unless you have a similar background. What I'm essentially asking for in the majority of cases is an if/then/else branching that corresponds to whether or not a spell/attack was originated by a player against another player, then adjusting the resulting behaviour using already existent code for the most part. That is *trivial* to effect.
I also have decades of modern programming experience, and although I agree that the tasks under consideration would basically be classified as simplistic from a programming standpoint, they nonetheless are demonstrably beyond Turbine's baseline development ability.

For proof of this, just look at drinking potions under Barbarian Rage. From every reasonable standpoint it would be a trivial fix; the only possible explanations for it to take so long is either (a) incompetent design of the existing software or (b) lack of any programming staff currently.

However, you are making a much bigger mistake than simply overestimating Turbine's capabilities for simple software changes: You are acting as if game design were a programming challenge. It is not; no matter how good the programmers are, game design is a separate field of endeavor.

[hydra_ex]

I also have decades of modern programming experience, and although I agree that the tasks under consideration would basically be classified as simplistic from a programming standpoint, they nonetheless are demonstrably beyond Turbine's baseline development ability.

For proof of this, just look at drinking potions under Barbarian Rage. From every reasonable standpoint it would be a trivial fix; the only possible explanations for it to take so long is either (a) incompetent design of the existing software or (b) lack of any programming staff currently.

You missed one.

(c) Bugs? What bugs? DDO has no bugs.

[Surrealistik]

I also have decades of modern programming experience, and although I agree that the tasks under consideration would basically be classified as simplistic from a programming standpoint, they nonetheless are demonstrably beyond Turbine's baseline development ability.

For proof of this, just look at drinking potions under Barbarian Rage. From every reasonable standpoint it would be a trivial fix; the only possible explanations for it to take so long is either (a) incompetent design of the existing software or (b) lack of any programming staff currently.

However, you are making a much bigger mistake than simply overestimating Turbine's capabilities for simple software changes: You are acting as if game design were a programming challenge. It is not; no matter how good the programmers are, game design is a separate field of endeavor.

What mistake? When did I assert, or even imply that the game design necessary for balanced PvP was in actuality a programming challenge? Further, there isn't altogether much that really has to be done in the way of innovative, clever, or challenging design in order to achieve at least a rough balance in PvP. I've already listed most of the major points that are requisite to a relatively balanced PvP experience: working stealth and curbing of immunities, fortification and no-save spells in a PvP context. The necessity of these things is well known and obvious; the most challenging design orientated component would be precisely tweaking them.

[Angelus_dead]

Honestly there isn't altogether that much that really has to be done in the way of innovative design in order to achieve at least a rough balance in PvP. I've already listed most of the major points: working stealth and curbing of immunities, fortification and no-save spells in a PvP context; these issues are well known, and obvious.
That is completely wrong, meaning that you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Earlier you tried to use your "experience" with programming languages to support your position, so I'll counter it this way: you do not have experience in game design.

Just for one example of how extremely wrong your ideas are, try answering this question: How would working stealth improve PVP? Give a specific narrative.

Newsflash: Game design is hard. People who haven't tried it might not know this.

[Surrealistik]

How? Simple. Coupled with Fortification caps it might actually allow Rogues, and sneak attack dependent builds in general to prove competitive in PvP. It also gives explicit value to the Spot, Listen, Hide and Move Silently skills.

Further, how can you even begin to arrive at the entirely baseless assumption that I "do not have experience in game design?" I really find your unwarranted condescension amusing.

[Angelus_dead]

I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve at least a rough balance; all it takes is adjusting/nerfing certain spells and item properties in a PvP context.
I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve a million-seller novel; all it takes is typing letters into a text document.


Most no-save, no-SR spells (Searing Ray) OR no-save, auto-hit (Otto's Irresistable Dance) spells are given a save.
So casters are now worthless against anyone with two paladin levels, sure... that's balance?


Fortification is capped at 50%.
So melee effectiveness shifts towards characters with strong crits and high hitpoints, sure... that's balance?


Immunity items provide a stacking +4 save against the things they normally immunize against and prevent autofailure on 1s.
Further boosting the importance of paladin2 if you want to PVP, sure...


Magic Missile immunity becomes 75% damage resistance to Magic Missile attacks, or allows a save to negate at a +4 bonus.
So to replace the damage spells you took away above, you instead let them use a nerfed version of a spell that was already really too weak to bother with.


Stealth and Invisibility actually work.
Invisibility? Will it work against the See Invisibility spell though? If not, then it has no effect.
Stealth? So against characters with lower Spot you can just sit there in the pvp room and wait out the clock?

[Angelus_dead]

How? Simple. Coupled with Fortification caps it might actually allow Rogues, and sneak attack dependent builds in general to prove competitive in PvP. It also gives explicit value to the Spot, Listen, Hide and Move Silently skills.
Do you know what a "user narrative" is? That's something a computer programmer should know.

It means you would tell a story advancing in linear time about how the feature could be used. Writing a narrative about stealth in PVP would quickly reveal how it does barely anything to make Sneak Attack helpful.

Go ahead, try to answer it: Even if stealth worked, and there was no Fortification, how could a Rogue sneak-attack someone in pvp?


Further, how can you even begin to arrive at the entirely baseless assumption that I "do not have experience in game design?"
Well, it's because you make claims that are not just painfully incorrect, but also terribly insulting to the people who really work at game design. You are minimizing the difficulty of their jobs by pretending it's actually something easy.


I really find your unwarranted condescension amusing.
Actually, that's you. You claim that PVP game design is easy, when it isn't.

I mean, have you seen PVP in World of Warcraft? Look at how hard they work at it, how few inherent obstacles there are, and yet how many problems consistently occur.

[Surrealistik]

I don't see how it could be so impossibly difficult to achieve a million-seller novel; all it takes is typing letters into a text document.

Your parallel is completely inapplicable. I mean comparing what it takes to effect a rough PvP balance in DDO, the problems of which are readily noted by those who frequent it, relative to the inherent difficulty of achieving a million seller novel? Wow. Really? Are you serious? There's tweaking involved to be sure, but the generalities of what needs to be done are all but obvious.

So casters are now worthless against anyone with two paladin levels, sure... that's balance?

Uh how? Are you assuming that all newly savable spells are A: Reflex based and thus subject to Evasion, B: are negated on a successful save? and C: Everyone with 2 paladin levels is going to have the stellar saves required to consistently save against maximal DCs? You do realize these assumptions are inane, and that most direct damage spells even when inflicting half of their normal outputs still deal substantial amounts, right?

So melee effectiveness shifts towards characters with strong crits and high hitpoints, sure... that's balance?

Given that PvP is currently set against crit reliant builds due to the ubiquity of 100% Fortification, I don't see the problem with enhancing their position.

Further boosting the importance of paladin2 if you want to PVP, sure...

So basically what you're saying is that saves in general will be more important in PvP. God forbid! The horror!

So to replace the damage spells you took away above, you instead let them use a nerfed version of a spell that was already really too weak to bother with.

Seriously, you think maxed out Force Missile with untyped, undodgable, unmitigatable damage, Maximize/Empower, maxed enhancement buffs and a 50% boost from items is *weak*? Maybe the extent to which Magic Missile damage is reduced should be tweaked from what I've initially suggested, but to assert that the spell was "already too weak to bother with" in the first place is absurd.

Invisibility? Will it work against the See Invisibility spell though? If not, then it has no effect.
Stealth? So against characters with lower Spot you can just sit there in the pvp room and wait out the clock?

Concerning Invisibility, periodic opposed caster level checks might work to have the spell retain viability in light of True Seeing and See Invisibility, however Invisibility's utility is not as important as Stealth actually having a role to play in PvP. First, I am not entirely sympathetic for characters with lower Spot/Listen; if you willfully choose to neglect the skill, there are consequences. Second why on earth would you play against an opponent who ganks once and hides out the rest of the time (or care about that particular outcome?)? You can already play keep away like this, and it is almost universally frowned upon, and may even exclude you from a substantial portion of the PvP community. Third, area of effect spells and attacks can help flush out slower moving Stealthed opponents. Fourth, if it's really considered to be such an intolerable problem, stealth limiters could be agreed upon prior to an arena match; basically the total duration of time you can remain hidden over a given period (a total of 10 seconds every 30 seconds as an example).



Do you know what a "user narrative" is? That's something a computer programmer should know.

It means you would tell a story advancing in linear time about how the feature could be used. Writing a narrative about stealth in PVP would quickly reveal how it does barely anything to make Sneak Attack helpful.

Go ahead, try to answer it: Even if stealth worked, and there was no Fortification, how could a Rogue sneak-attack someone in pvp?

Darting behind cover, stealthing, and then closing in on/firing at your target, or SAing him when he tries to pursue off the top of my head. Bluff and feint also come to mind (as non-stealth methods of incurring a SA).


Well, it's because you make claims that are not just painfully incorrect, but also terribly insulting to the people who really work at game design. You are minimizing the difficulty of their jobs by pretending it's actually something easy.

Again, I do not see how you've demonstrated at all that they're "painfully incorrect".


Actually, that's you. You claim that PVP game design is easy, when it isn't.

I mean, have you seen PVP in World of Warcraft? Look at how hard they work at it, how few inherent obstacles there are, and yet how many problems consistently occur.

There is a considerable difference between tweaking an existing system with some pretty obvious and glaring flaws, and designing one from the ground up. Also, the problems inherent in DDO PvP vs those inherent in WoW PvP are very different in terms of quantity, severity and the difficulty of addressing.

[Kemoc]

Regular one on one PvP is not suitable for DDO, but a capture the flag type PvP area would be fun. Perhaps include some traps and puzzles to make it more interesting.

[Visty]

Regular one on one PvP is not suitable for DDO, but a capture the flag type PvP area would be fun. Perhaps include some traps and puzzles to make it more interesting.

CTF arenas exist and noone uses them....prooven by some responses in here which dont even know they exist

just again shows how useless it is to improve pvp as it isnt used currently anyway

[Surrealistik]

CTF arenas exist and noone uses them....prooven by some responses in here which dont even know they exist

just again shows how useless it is to improve pvp as it isnt used currently anyway

A big part of the reason I'm sure is that PvP support and balance is so blatantly terrible to begin with.

[Visty]

A big part of the reason I'm sure is that PvP support and balance is so blatantly terrible to begin with.

just another reason to not improve it

you dont go to burgerking and then complain that you cant get a bigmac...if you want that you go to mcdonalds

if you want pvp, you play a pvpgame

[Surrealistik]

just another reason to not improve it

you dont go to burgerking and then complain that you cant get a bigmac...if you want that you go to mcdonalds

if you want pvp, you play a pvpgame

Or Turbine could make the wise decision to tap into a substantial market by improving PvP and attracting many more players, while further satisfying existing ones. Seems like a smart move to me.

[Visty]

Or Turbine could make the wise decision to tap into a substantial market by improving PvP and attracting many more players, while further satisfying existing ones. Seems like a smart move to me.

again it seems like you dont know turbine

they suck at doing more then 1 thing and that they mostly dont even do right

they should first try to keep their current playerbase befor they try to attract the pvp crowd

[Angelus_dead]

Again, I do not see how you've demonstrated at all that they're "painfully incorrect".
Correct, I did not demonstrate it. There is no reason for me to put in that effort... and to teach a complex subject to someone who knows nothing about it would indeed take a large amount of effort. In this case it would be even harder because not only have you ingrained some misconceptions, but you also have an inflated opinion of your own knowledge.

There's really no reason for me to teach you. I'm not getting paid for it, after all.

[Angelus_dead]

Darting behind cover, stealthing, and then closing in on/firing at your target, or SAing him when he tries to pursue off the top of my head. Bluff and feint also come to mind (as non-stealth methods of incurring a SA).
Ok, let's try again to get that into a narrative.

Your first statement is "Darting behind cover", so let's try to translate that into an actual gameplay action. What does "dart" mean? Is it just the regular running around you get from the "W" key, or is it some new special ability rogues would be given? If it is normal running, then you don't get to break LOS unless the opponent wants to. If it's a special ability, then that's not "simplistic programming".

And "cover", what's that? Can you name the 3d model in DDO that might suffice as cover? It would help to start with an assumption about where the battle is taking place, such as Stash or Pit.


and then closing in on/firing at your target, or SAing him when he tries to pursue off the top of my head.
How would a sneaking rogue close the distance to another player? (Assuming the other player isn't AFK)


Bluff and feint also come to mind (as non-stealth methods of incurring a SA).
Ignoring the fact that most Rogues can't Bluff or Feint, that's still not much of a suggestion. Seeing as Bluff and Feint aren't useful in PVE (where the mobs probably have 0% Fortification), they certainly would be much less useful in PVP. The casting time for Bluff basically outweighs the value of the Sneak Attack you gain.

But let's pretend that Bluff was hugely buffed to be completely instant: in that case, it still just gives you one sneak attack, which means about +60 damage, or maybe +120 with TWF. That's not enough to help the rogue much!

[Zippo]

A big part of the reason I'm sure is that PvP support and balance is so blatantly terrible to begin with.

I'm going to venture to guess it has more to do with the fact that:

a) It doesn't belong in the first place
*which on a side note is proven byt the fact that it was added much later as a mere after thought and not integrated into the initial release of the game*

b) would require such a major change to rules and rule sets that it would dangerously imbalance the PvE side of the game, which lets face it is the real reason for being here, not PvP.

c) Turbine recognizes that the majority of the PAYING customer base does not want PvP or development into it.

[Zynthar]

I'll admit I haven't read most of the posts in this thread. I can imagine they're the usual arguments.

I just feel compelled to put in my two cents since I'm kinda a jerk like that.

From what I remember, PVP was put in just because people DEMANDED it, and when it was put in, it was stated somewhere that they weren't going to balance it, they weren't going to cater to it, and that it was just simply for fun and downtime, and testing.

It's Dungeons and Dragons! When was the last time you sat down to a PnP game and started fighting with your party?

Well I'll admit to doing it once when I failed a save and got hit by a Glyph of Madness trap, but that's it!

That's my two cents, I probably won't read this thread again, or fully read it to start with so pardon if I stated what others already have said.


side note. The new challenge thing is wicked fun! Challenge a guildie today!

[Angelus_dead]

From what I remember, PVP was put in just because people DEMANDED it
That's true if by "people" you mean "prospective licensees in China and Japan".

[MyersVandalay]

Well I'm way late into the game and not going to be able to do much outside of re-itterate what's already been said.


but yeah.

1. in any game/scenerio in PVP, how often do you see someone standing still? Characters pretty much remain in full stint run, so unless rogues stealth is boosted to 125-150% normal running speed, stealth would still be useless. short of standing in bottlenecks, litterally hoping for someone to run into you. Secondly there are spells to counter even stealth, glitterdust anyone? Instant -10 to you.

2. Queuing anywhere vs queuing in a tavern... wouldn't particularly make a difference. Why, because in WoW/other MMO's most of your time is spent soloing. What do you expect to happen here, get half way through shroud Hey PVP up, c ya guys.

3. Builds, OK a level 20 mellee build that is purely built for PVP might stand a chance against a cleric... the problem. How the frick does a purely PVP built character reach 20? Piking at the enterence of a dungeon? Most games PVP built characters, are soloists, fact... soloists aren't particularly beneficial to reach 20, the exception, clerics and wizards due to the fact that they are the only classes that can essentially change a key portion of their build (IE swap spells) based on where they want to go.

and finally

4. the ballancing act is a never ending pile of work, the dev's are already spending way to much time doing it in PvE, and falling way short (ranged damage anyone), class balance is something that if you fix one thing, you break 2 more, and it's a continual rat race to try and fix

[Zynthar]

That's true if by "people" you mean "prospective licensees in China and Japan".


Hunh, is that why they did it? Makes sense to me. I think all but the most delusional can agree that it was strictly just an add on though. And it's better that way!

Btw, my 13 Fighter pwning guildies 17 rogue in the challenge arena = Best day evar
Until he started using those assassin poisons anyway...


Eep, I lied. I looked at the thread again.

[Surrealistik]

Correct, I did not demonstrate it. There is no reason for me to put in that effort... and to teach a complex subject to someone who knows nothing about it would indeed take a large amount of effort. In this case it would be even harder because not only have you ingrained some misconceptions, but you also have an inflated opinion of your own knowledge.

There's really no reason for me to teach you. I'm not getting paid for it, after all.

The irony here is rich; "an inflated opinion of my own knowledge"? Me? Really now? Angelus, you major in self-projection don't you? A person who throws around some completely baseless assertions, and makes absolutely zero effort to qualify or defend them accuses me of "having an inflated opinion of my own knowledge", and then to compound things, to nicely fill out his own patent absurdity, calls accounting for his as of yet groundless assertions "teaching". Teaching! Hilarious. You're too much; the sheer unjustified arrogance is downright gut busting. Angelus, I wouldn't pay you to clean my toilet, much less "teach" anything, for fear you would try and simply insist that the thing has been washed rather than actually doing it.

Ok, let's try again to get that into a narrative.

Your first statement is "Darting behind cover", so let's try to translate that into an actual gameplay action. What does "dart" mean? Is it just the regular running around you get from the "W" key, or is it some new special ability rogues would be given? If it is normal running, then you don't get to break LOS unless the opponent wants to. If it's a special ability, then that's not "simplistic programming".

And "cover", what's that? Can you name the 3d model in DDO that might suffice as cover? It would help to start with an assumption about where the battle is taking place, such as Stash or Pit.

How would a sneaking rogue close the distance to another player? (Assuming the other player isn't AFK)

First off, I appreciate the unsubtle attempts at condescension by making the unnecessary addition of such language as "let's try again". You won't play ball by providing meaningful arguments in support of your opinions, but you are trying to imply that my unwillingness to play along with your game is entirely a function of ignorance (or stupidity)? "News flash" Aspenor; you seem like you have at least a rudimentary ability to collate several very self-explanatory elements into a meaningful account of Stealth's usefulness without me having to go into superficial detail about things like "cover", but I'll humour you.

To begin with, you probably are making the unreasonable assumption in every case that the other player somehow always knows the approximate location of the Rogue and never ends up moving towards him, not even close enough to be hit by a ranged sneak attack.

Cover would include any obstacle that breaks line of sight. On the Stash for example, there is plenty in the form of boxes, corners and niches.

Darting means movement, and it is absurd to assume that a rogue can never effect a broken LoS, particularly with movement slowing abilities in play such as Hamstring.

As an aside, not that it was at all a suggestion of mine, calling an ability that effects a burst of movement speed anything other than "simplistic programming" really casts doubt on the coding expertise you claim to have, given how indisputably easy it is to copy/paste existing code for similar spells and abilities, and adjust it so it stacks with other movement speed bonuses, or alternatively have it increase speed such that it supersedes existing movement speed bonuses.


Ignoring the fact that most Rogues can't Bluff or Feint, that's still not much of a suggestion. Seeing as Bluff and Feint aren't useful in PVE (where the mobs probably have 0% Fortification), they certainly would be much less useful in PVP. The casting time for Bluff basically outweighs the value of the Sneak Attack you gain.

But let's pretend that Bluff was hugely buffed to be completely instant: in that case, it still just gives you one sneak attack, which means about +60 damage, or maybe +120 with TWF. That's not enough to help the rogue much!


First off, that most Rogues can't Bluff/Feint is a testament to how badly the skill needs revision. That said, I do find that Feinting needs to be substantially improved, both in terms of its execution times, AND either its refresh rates, OR the number of SAs it permits before its benefits terminate.

Now +120 with TWF which is what the majority of Rogues have, is quite a boost in terms of burst damage. Sneak attacks also offer bonuses to hit, and things like strength penalties, so there are benefits other than simply raw damage. Granted, if there is still 50% Fortification, the benefit declines to a +6 bonus to DPS, and a much more modest +60 burst damage. On the other hand, Assassinate comes into play. To round out the usefulness though, I like the idea of increasing the number of permitted Sneak Attacks.



I'm going to venture to guess it has more to do with the fact that:

a) It doesn't belong in the first place
*which on a side note is proven byt the fact that it was added much later as a mere after thought and not integrated into the initial release of the game*

Opinion, and the half-arsed addition of PvP features doesn't "prove" the veracity of your opinion.

b) would require such a major change to rules and rule sets that it would dangerously imbalance the PvE side of the game, which lets face it is the real reason for being here, not PvP.

No. That's the precisely point of PvP context specific changes which is what I am expounding; things that behave differently when used by a player against another player.

c) Turbine recognizes that the majority of the PAYING customer base does not want PvP or development into it.

Where's the proof of this? Second, what of the huge potential for more paying customers should PvP be adequately supported?




1. in any game/scenerio in PVP, how often do you see someone standing still? Characters pretty much remain in full stint run, so unless rogues stealth is boosted to 125-150% normal running speed, stealth would still be useless. short of standing in bottlenecks, litterally hoping for someone to run into you. Secondly there are spells to counter even stealth, glitterdust anyone? Instant -10 to you.

Addressed earlier.

2. Queuing anywhere vs queuing in a tavern... wouldn't particularly make a difference. Why, because in WoW/other MMO's most of your time is spent soloing. What do you expect to happen here, get half way through shroud Hey PVP up, c ya guys.

Not sure who this is in response to.

3. Builds, OK a level 20 mellee build that is purely built for PVP might stand a chance against a cleric... the problem. How the frick does a purely PVP built character reach 20? Piking at the enterence of a dungeon? Most games PVP built characters, are soloists, fact... soloists aren't particularly beneficial to reach 20, the exception, clerics and wizards due to the fact that they are the only classes that can essentially change a key portion of their build (IE swap spells) based on where they want to go.

Respecing feats/enhancements works well, and with the Reincarnation series about to be implemented, the game becomes even more receptive to PvP builds.

and finally

4. the ballancing act is a never ending pile of work, the dev's are already spending way to much time doing it in PvE, and falling way short (ranged damage anyone), class balance is something that if you fix one thing, you break 2 more, and it's a continual rat race to try and fix

Perfect balance yes, agreed. However, all I really want is a modicum at this point as opposed to virtually 0, and that isn't nearly as hard to effect. It simply requires relatively straightforward revisions of some of the biggest, most glaring issues.

[Zippo]

First off, that most Rogues can't Bluff/Feint is a testament to how badly the skill needs revision. That said, I do find that Feinting needs to be substantially improved, both in terms of its execution times, AND either its refresh rates, OR the number of SAs it permits before its benefits terminate.

Now +120 with TWF which is what the majority of Rogues have, is quite a boost in terms of burst damage. Sneak attacks also offer bonuses to hit, and things like strength penalties, so there are benefits other than simply raw damage. Granted, if there is still 50% Fortification, the benefit declines to a +6 bonus to DPS, and a much more modest +60 burst damage. On the other hand, Assassinate comes into play. To round out the usefulness though, I like the idea of increasing the number of permitted Sneak Attacks.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vr8Xl0cbUZA/SIoasKqc6cI/AAAAAAAACfs/oiA9Q53GNz0/s320/Image+% 3D+sorry+wrong+answer.jpg


a)The fact that it was NEVER in PnP and wasn't a part of the release of DDO shows that it was never supposed to be in here in the first place so your counter argument is tenuous at best.

b)Which again as would incur a serious amount of development time and money to be put into something that doesn't belong in the first place especially when people are railing about wanting more PvE content as it is (not PvP). And yes from a code and design aspect would impact the PvE realm to make things work for something that doesn't belong in the first place

c) Look at the sheer number of the community that rails against it. Most all of them are the long time PAYING customers, not people that are part of the "I'll come in and do the F2P thing".

[Angelus_dead]

The irony here is rich; "an inflated opinion of my own knowledge"? Me? Really now? Angelus, you major in self-projection don't you? A person who throws around some completely baseless assertions, and makes absolutely zero effort to qualify or defend them accuses me of "having an inflated opinion of my own knowledge", and then to compound things, to nicely fill out his own patent absurdity, calls accounting for his as of yet groundless assertions "teaching". Teaching! Hilarious. You're too much; the sheer unjustified arrogance is downright gut busting. Angelus, I wouldn't pay you to clean my toilet, much
I admit, I have not been very honest here. It's because I obey the forum rules, which prohibit an accurate assessment of your ability.

It would be enjoyable to document the various flaws you are exhibiting, but there's really no need. I shouldn't care what a person like you thinks, and anyone whose opinion I might value can easily figure out what's going on by reading your text.

Suffice it to say that you do not understand what you're talking about, and you keep looking worse the further you push it.

[Angelus_dead]

Cover would include any obstacle that breaks line of sight. On the Stash for example, there is plenty in the form of boxes, corners and niches.
Those do not work as something you could reasonably dart behind to enter stealth, which would be obvious to someone with limited experience.

Seriously: go into The Stash with another player and fight him, but with both of you pretending that stealth works according to your suggestions. Try to pop behind cover and stealth... it just won't happen, unless your opponent is bad or AFK.


Darting means movement, and it is absurd to assume that a rogue can never effect a broken LoS, particularly with movement slowing abilities in play such as Hamstring.
This is difficult for me. It's really tough to summon the energy to reply in detail to anyone who said that Hamstring is "in play".

I mean, realistically, to have written that pretty much disproves everything else you said. Of course it doesn't directly or technically invalidate your other claims, but it does demonstrate a severe failure to correctly analyze rule mechanics. This makes all your other unsupported assertions appear that much more suspicious.

Here's some advice:
It seems that you're making a not-uncommon mistake of "handwavey game design". Professionals do it too, sometimes, as evidenced by things like the Monk class in DDO. What happens is a person gets a rough idea for how a game interaction can work, but the details required to support it aren't there, and he doesn't notice. There's no surefire way to avoid this problem, except to be aware of the possibility so you can tell when you start to fall into it. Avoiding it means thinking hard about the real consequences of the rules as written, or better still iteratively testing the design while its still early. Don't fall in love with an idea until you see what it will really do.



As an aside, not that it was at all a suggestion of mine, calling an ability that effects a burst of movement speed anything other than "simplistic programming" really casts doubt on the coding expertise you claim to have, given how indisputably easy it is to copy/paste existing code for similar spells and abilities
That is exactly backwards. The truth is that your repeated underestimation of the difficulty of tasks is making you look inexperienced.

[96th_Malice]

It's Dungeons and Dragons! When was the last time you sat down to a PnP game and started fighting with your party?

Actually the last time I played PnP

Its quite common with my friends

:)

[Surrealistik]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Vr8Xl0cbUZA/SIoasKqc6cI/AAAAAAAACfs/oiA9Q53GNz0/s320/Image+% 3D+sorry+wrong+answer.jpg


a)The fact that it was NEVER in PnP and wasn't a part of the release of DDO shows that it was never supposed to be in here in the first place so your counter argument is tenuous at best.

Again, how is this proof, especially given that DDO features a great deal of rolling, iterative development?

b)Which again as would incur a serious amount of development time and money to be put into something that doesn't belong in the first place especially when people are railing about wanting more PvE content as it is (not PvP). And yes from a code and design aspect would impact the PvE realm to make things work for something that doesn't belong in the first place

It takes relatively little time to address the most odious and outstanding issues with PvP in the manner I've described.

c) Look at the sheer number of the community that rails against it. Most all of them are the long time PAYING customers, not people that are part of the "I'll come in and do the F2P thing".

You have an ongoing poll? Where are you getting this information? Posts from a portion of forum members really don't count, much less qualify as substantial numbers.



I admit, I have not been very honest here. It's because I obey the forum rules, which prohibit an accurate assessment of your ability.

It would be enjoyable to document the various flaws you are exhibiting, but there's really no need. I shouldn't care what a person like you thinks, and anyone whose opinion I might value can easily figure out what's going on by reading your text.

Suffice it to say that you do not understand what you're talking about, and you keep looking worse the further you push it.

Likewise Angelus, although I think I've been a little more forthright on the "documenting flaws" part of your spiel, particularly the humourous deficiencies in any even partially reasonable arguments you have so far attempted to respond with. That is of course, when you're not hilariously waxing on about your empty convictions and how the accuracy of your judgment is so completely self inherent and infallible as to be above explanation. Reading your posts is like a sampling a fine, unintentional self-parody; it leaves me to wonder how anyone could have seriously imagined what he put down was at all consistent with even the tiniest iota of coherent, rational thought.

Those do not work as something you could reasonably dart behind to enter stealth, which would be obvious to someone with limited experience.

Seriously: go into The Stash with another player and fight him, but with both of you pretending that stealth works according to your suggestions. Try to pop behind cover and stealth... it just won't happen, unless your opponent is bad or AFK.

Give me a ranged weapon and it proves easy to exploit working stealth in conjunction with Sneak Attacks.

This is difficult for me. It's really tough to summon the energy to reply in detail to anyone who said that Hamstring is "in play".

I mean, realistically, to have written that pretty much disproves everything else you said. Of course it doesn't directly or technically invalidate your other claims, but it does demonstrate a severe failure to correctly analyze rule mechanics. This makes all your other unsupported assertions appear that much more suspicious.

Here's some advice:
It seems that you're making a not-uncommon mistake of "handwavey game design". Professionals do it too, sometimes, as evidenced by things like the Monk class in DDO. What happens is a person gets a rough idea for how a game interaction can work, but the details required to support it aren't there, and he doesn't notice. There's no surefire way to avoid this problem, except to be aware of the possibility so you can tell when you start to fall into it. Avoiding it means thinking hard about the real consequences of the rules as written, or better still iteratively testing the design while its still early. Don't fall in love with an idea until you see what it will really do.

On the specific subject of Hamstring, yes, the feat isn't at all popular, understandably so at a flat DC 15 Fort save. Again, like Bluff, or Feint, it is something else clearly underpowered and in need of revision; properly adjusted, the synergy with stealth and SAing is obvious. Clearly, having stealth alone work isn't the total answer to making the Rogue PvP viable, but it is a very substantial first step in that direction, just as the other proposed fixes are substantial, functional first steps to addressing the most outstanding flaws. In fact, what I had laid out was a partial list of the most desirable fixes presented as examples.

Second, we again have dispensation without qualification. You essentially know very little, can prove and substantiate even less, and so choose to troll by projecting the inherent weaknesses of your opinions and your ability to supplement them by using a patently laughable strategy of claiming that it is somehow "beneath you". Based on what I've seen, this seems to be something of a bad joke as there is little if anything that really appears to truly qualify for that distinction.

That is exactly backwards. The truth is that your repeated underestimation of the difficulty of tasks is making you look inexperienced.

Exactly backwards? Actually I'm pretty sure there is absolutely nothing backwards about the very correct assertion that any presumption about any sort of speed increasing ability being anything but "simplistic programming" given the sheer amount of pre-existing code in the game for it, does objectively call into question ones programming ability and credentials.

[assamite]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_vr8xl0cbuza/sioaskqc6ci/aaaaaaaacfs/oia9q53gnz0/s320/image+% 3d+sorry+wrong+answer.jpg
A)the Fact That It Was never In Pnp? And Wasn't A part Of The Release Of ddo Shows That It Was Never Supposed To Be In Here In The First Place So Your Counter Argument Is Tenuous At Best.


C) Look At The Sheer Number Of The Community That Rails Against It. Most All Of Them Are The Long Time Paying Customers, Not People That Are Part Of The "i'll Come In And Do The F2p Thing".
Ahhh You Must Be Referring To The Uncoordinated Elders :d

:p
I don't think the people that are for PvP are asking for a DDO Olympics Zipp :rolleyes:


It's Dungeons and Dragons! When was the last time you sat down to a PnP game and started fighting with your party?

Well..... there was that time at the dmv.... Singing a "Song of Slander" My bard called my pals barb ugly... the barb raged... couldn't hit my ac and i serenaded him to death :D... which then turned into a RL physical altercation... at the dmv :(

[skarwolf]

It isn't a problem but it could become one.

People don't pvp because they don't get any rewards. Plain and simple. If there was a benefit people would be pvp'n more.

Then you'd get a million rants about X class being overpowered and to nerf it. Then all these classes end up getting hit with the nerf bat to balance pvp, while people who never actually pvp are thinking *** why did I get nerfed?

[SgtSplacker]

I dont even understand why theres even an argument on wether PVP should be in game or not. The most fun I have ever had in any game has been in large scale combat. Thats keep seiges, huge battles, etc. Everyone loves this stuff, so why not put it in game? I mean haw many directions can the game go? We should have a combined queing system (combined as in all servers) and a couple capture the flag (or keep) style battlegrounds. If you dont like this then just dont que.

I'm having alot of fun with the game, and i'm really worried whats going to happen when I reach 20. I know that in WOW I really liked to take a break from instancing to run some BGs.

[sephiroth1084]

I dont even understand why theres even an argument on wether PVP should be in game or not. The most fun I have ever had in any game has been in large scale combat. Thats keep seiges, huge battles, etc. Everyone loves this stuff, so why not put it in game? I mean haw many directions can the game go? We should have a combined queing system (combined as in all servers) and a couple capture the flag (or keep) style battlegrounds. If you dont like this then just dont que.

I'm having alot of fun with the game, and i'm really worried whats going to happen when I reach 20. I know that in WOW I really liked to take a break from instancing to run some BGs.
The following is basically the reason.

It isn't a problem but it could become one.

People don't pvp because they don't get any rewards. Plain and simple. If there was a benefit people would be pvp'n more.

Then you'd get a million rants about X class being overpowered and to nerf it. Then all these classes end up getting hit with the nerf bat to balance pvp, while people who never actually pvp are thinking *** why did I get nerfed?

As I understand it, WoW made some efforts to balance classes for PvP. Whether that was just in PvP, or whether that balancing carried over into PvE, I don't know, but the risk is here is that balancing in one would lead to adjustments in the other, which really should not happen.

The problem with not making attempts to balance classes for PvP is that, currently, the classes are not even close to being balanced fairly for PvP; most melees just cannot compete with a caster (divine or arcane), and there really isn't a very good way around that. In WoW, the developers were working from a cleaner slate in terms of what each character could and should be doing, while in DDO, there is a fairly clear picture of what each character should be able to do.

How does one alter a wizard to be comparable to a fighter without dramatically altering the system?

[Angelus_dead]

As I understand it, WoW made some efforts to balance classes for PvP. Whether that was just in PvP, or whether that balancing carried over into PvE, I don't know
Oh it was far more than "some effort", and that balancing absolutely applied to all modes of the game.

[Linenoise2]

To be totally honest, I did not even know a PvP sub-forum existed. While people are debating the merits/needs of a PVP system, I am debating the merits/need of a PVP subforum. I guess that says where I stand on the whole PVP thing. :D

ETA: 406 total posts in this subforum and 1/3rd of those posts are in this thread. I think that says it all right there, no? :P

[sephiroth1084]

Oh it was far more than "some effort", and that balancing absolutely applied to all modes of the game.
Thanks A_D, I had thought that I recalled some friends saying that, but didn't want to put down false info.

Had a crazy friend who took a week off from work and school, PvPing in WoW for something like 20 hours a day in order to become the top-ranked PvPer on his server for a few minutes. Silliness.


To be totally honest, I did not even know a PvP sub-forum existed. While people are debating the merits/needs of a PVP system, I am debating the merits/need of a PVP subforum. I guess that says where I stand on the whole PVP thing. :D

ETA: 406 total posts in this subforum and 1/3rd of those posts are in this thread. I think that says it all right there, no? :P

Hahaha! Nice. Rap for this one! A_D, you have more than enough already! :p

[assamite]

If you want PvP FERRRGIIITT this game :). Come join meh in Aion :D Ariel be is my server. Deathwaltz/Vaapad beith my name.

[negroi]

better quiz... when was the last time you even saw a rogue enter into a pvp pit?

all the rogues i know of wont even set foot in one because they know they wont last a few seconds vs anyone. heck even a lvl 10 wizzie could probly knock off a lvl 20 rogue without much trouble at all. that speaks volumes about pvp balance vs pve (ie real game) balance.

They must forbid heavy fortification.

Each minos legen to the trash.

[Scarlet-Kiss]

Mate. I have read all the replies. Your ego seems to get in the way of reality. ANYONE can observe that all your comments are all very 'carefully' written to look like you're being objective and diplomatic, however it's plain to see that all you're doing is trolling to create the environment and the responses that you desire. Which of course is fairly obvious = one that (in your mind) makes you look good AND when (because they will) people get angry due to your answers, you, (which we all can do), claim that we have become unprofessional in our arguement / delivery and therefore our point/s are moot. Angelus... mate there are other ways to receive attention... you don't have to troll on everyone else's posts all day just so that you can show everyone how much of a DDO expert you are. MOST of the replies to YOUR posts were very diplomatic and patient and clever. After awhile it is clear to see that people caught on to your little game and put you in your place.

If you talked face-to-face, in the same manner that you have talked to most of the people here, then you wouldn't get very far. We only put up with it because forums are all very non-personal and don't require any social norms or real interaction. Please learn how to have a respectful conversation. Just because this is an online forum, does not give you the right to be rude. Not only have you been rude, you've outright insulted peolple when they have tried to honestly defend their opinion. That's not cool. Maybe, in future, pretend that you're having a face-to-face conversation with people before pressing submit reply. Maybe then you'll be more respectful.

By the way, i love pnp and DDO. Both are very different but amazing at the same time. Is DDO PVP viable? Who knows. Would it be enjoyable for those that CHOSE to submit themselves to the joys/agonies of PVP? Of course. Just like all pvp, the thrill is in the ability to customize, experiment, customize, experiment. People aren't saying that they want an easy win. What they want is the arena/opportunity to play DDO pvp in a supported pvp environment... if you don't like the experience...then simply don't que. It's that simple. Saying, "if they spend too much time on pvp and not on contect development - ddo will implode on itself and die" is just unneccessary. Of course people can wait. We do it all the time. Some of us may delete, re-install, delete, re-install. However, when the new expansion/content/updates come out, what do we do? We all log in...because we're curious.

Turbine, you are not going to lose players because you focus on developing a supported pvp aspect to DDO. You will in fact gain MORE players. It is the way of games. Kids want competition. So do adults. We want the opportunity to show off. If you want a game that is similar to the Neverwinter Nights online mods etc, then keep DDO how it is...however it will always be a small time niche game that will never give the hoped for returns because it never really hits the nail on the head. Face it, if you wanted awesome PVE then you'd just play Bethesda games. But putting a role-playing game online where people play/join with other people is in fact a Player with/vs Player environment AND not providing supported pvp is like shooting yourself in the foot. It's like creating a social media interface like FB but then telling people that it doesn't support email.

On a side note. Remeber the Contest of Champions mod from Neverwinter Nights where you could edit things so that you could pit different characters/builds against monsters of differing/increasing levels of Challenge Rating. Imagine if there was an offical DDO leaderboard published of the player and the creature that he/she had successfully slain? We would all be customizing/experimenting to be that number one player who managed to kill the top monster or npc...pit fiend/dragon/eye tyrant/Zass Tam... There could also be team vs monster/npc challenges and leaderboards. My point? Let's not limit DDO to just PVE or PVP play. Why? Because it's a bad marketing strategy. People obviously want both. Just google DDO and PVP in the same sentence... I dare you Turbine...

PS Angelus Dead if you feel that I've misjudged you, then I will be happy to settle it PVP style ;)

[grgurius]

Is it just me or do PvP threads get necroed more often then others?

[Pwesiela]

Is it just me or do PvP threads get necroed more often then others?

/facepalm

If only PvP would just die.

[heyytoi]

/facepalm

If only PvP would just die.

PvP is Awesome

[flynnjsw]

Thank you 1st time posting troll for necroing a PvP thread and killing it.

No really, Thank You.

[heyytoi]

Thank you 1st time posting troll for necroing a PvP thread and killing it.

No really, Thank You.

I'm serious, PvP is awesome

The most fun i had in DDO was in PvP.. what can i say!

[IWZincedge]

Requiescat in pace.