PvP? Inquire Within.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

Aside your purported neg rep, where was the OP's behavior unreasonable? All he suggested was expanding it and perhaps making it into like a slayer-type area. The unruly behavior generally comes from the masses that do not like or have not given PVP a thought whatsoever, they general neg rep any suggestion then blast any OP for even considering the thought.

---

You may have noticed, if you have a look, that my post was against the expansion of the pvp area, therefore, logically, it would be safe to say that the faceless nameless hero of neg rep was someone that wanted pvp expanded, and found the suggestion (in whatever sparse and clinical way it may have been expressed) that someone did not want pvp expanded to be offensive and derogatory.

That behaviour is more unreasonable then the norm.

Further examination of the OP's posts after the inital foray point towards my observation being of some accuracy.

Coit out~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pSINNa

You may have noticed, if you have a look, that my post was against the expansion of the pvp area, therefore, logically, it would be safe to say that the faceless nameless hero of neg rep was someone that wanted pvp expanded, and found the suggestion (in whatever sparse and clinical way it may have been expressed) that someone did not want pvp expanded to be offensive and derogatory.

That behaviour is more unreasonable then the norm.

Further examination of the OP's posts after the inital foray point towards my observation being of some accuracy.

Coit out~

---

Logically its a fallacy as the forum is a very very small percentage of the total playerbase worldwide which consists of alot of people who are able to access forum posts while at work. And if you want to equate the nameless person as a neg rep, i myself have had several neg reps for simply opinining that I like PVP, so on that note it is equally biased in my eyes;

however there are various forum police who feel that if you have nothing to add positive or constructive to a conversation and simply joust, aka troll, for a response without giving an adequatre or rational/thoughtful response, they will neg rep you. your original comment falls into that category. Sorry, but there could be another reason for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

Aside your purported neg rep, where was the OP's behavior unreasonable? All he suggested was expanding it and perhaps making it into like a slayer-type area. The unruly behavior generally comes from the masses that do not like or have not given PVP a thought whatsoever, they general neg rep any suggestion then blast any OP for even considering the thought.

---

I gave the OP neg rep for a post I also reported as a violation of forum rules. That post has since been eaten by the cube.

Maybe you should presume to know why neg rep is given.

Some people can never reach this point, but, myself, i try to know when to......stop feeding the trolls.

GLHF, Coit out~

I tend to favor the occaisional Capture the Flag matches myself, sometimes even the deathmatches. seems like invis and stealth work in there too, stealth can be handy in a ctf match. I've had fun and never gone in with a fighter or wizard..

I usually go into the pit if I have a new weapon to test out on a common player race. I've found most of the PvP'ers in there to be very friendly and even helpful when talking to them. I don't think any of the good ones take it personally..

I've noticed that alot of people didn't seem to know how the matches worked with jackson laws, making it a raid and assigning flags. It took me a while of diggin through the forum to find it out myself.

If it matters to the devs, I would dig a p2p quest area, with some pvp, somewhere around mid-to higher-level. Maybe something a little different would be cool..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jhypsyshah

PvP'ers in there to be very friendly and even helpful when talking to them. I don't think any of the good ones take it personally..


If it matters to the devs, I would dig a p2p quest area, with some pvp, somewhere around mid-to higher-level. Maybe something a little different would be cool..

---

yep outside area more expansive then the capture the flag area would be cool

Here is the real reason why there is on PvP in DDO:

http://www.jokeroo.com/videos/funny/world-warcraft-rage.html

Because most people dont want it and a lot dont even what pvp we have, I enjoy pvp in a game designed for it but I dont want changes made to ddo to accomadate pvp because it would require changes to the core game plus take time from the things I find much much much much more important such as bug development, content, races and classes, etc..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baddax

What about group based pvp? ie 5 on 5 party make up is up to players? Im not a huge pvp fan but i do feal at some point turbine will improve there existing pvp system. If you do not want to pvp im sure you wouldnt have to but for those who do as in other mmos im sure turbine would be glad to attract more players.

---

everybody can use more pve content only a small minority would use pvp so any time spent on it would be a waste for the majority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uska

Because most people dont want it and a lot dont even what pvp we have, I enjoy pvp in a game designed for it but I dont want changes made to ddo to accomadate pvp because it would require changes to the core game plus take time from the things I find much much much much more important such as bug development, content, races and classes, etc..........

---

I am playing devils advocate here so the statement above which to me is the continued straw man argument. What exact core changes would be required to accomodate additional pvp? Oponents generalize the argument saying it is modifying or would alter pve. If we simply add or convert a lowbie explorer area and simply allow a sector to be pve/pvp (using similar coding when we had the market invasion)what is so altering of the game mechanics that this would be the endall beall of DDO?

I find that over the past 4 years, "bug development, content, races, and classes, etc", have been routine if not predictable and often lacking. My argument is if you open up a p4p pvppve explorer area you can gauge the net profits to see if additional implementation would quantify additonal hiring of devs to spend time on another pet project.

I agree in the sense that the current devs should not take time away from there current to-do list, but if a coding on an exlporer area can be implemented without taxing too much time, then what is the harm?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

I am playing devils advocate here so the statement above which to me is the continued straw man argument. What exact core changes would be required to accomodate additional pvp? Oponents generalize the argument saying it is modifying or would alter pve. If we simply add or convert a lowbie explorer area and simply allow a sector to be pve/pvp (using similar coding when we had the market invasion)what is so altering of the game mechanics that this would be the endall beall of DDO?

I find that over the past 4 years, "bug development, content, races, and classes, etc", have been routine if not predictable and often lacking. My argument is if you open up a p4p pvppve explorer area you can gauge the net profits to see if additional implementation would quantify additonal hiring of devs to spend time on another pet project.

I agree in the sense that the current devs should not take time away from there current to-do list, but if a coding on an exlporer area can be implemented without taxing too much time, then what is the harm?

---

You're missing the point.

A central localized area simply designated as a PvP area would not be sufficient. PvP enthusiasts would go there and find it just as dull as combat in the pits.
But the difference would be that now there was an actual PvP area other then a brawl room. The PvP enthusiasts would take that to mean that the game was beginning to focus more attention on PvP.
They would then argue that Class X is OP in PvP compared to Class B, and make a cry for nerfs to Class A, or buffs to Class B.
Remember H4x? There would be THOUSANDS of him.
The new PvP area would attract more PvP'ers to it, and the cries of buff/nerf would gain momentum.

One of two things would happen from there.
1. The PvP enthusiasts would gain enough support from fellow PvP'ers that the Devs would begin to listen to them, and thus change the classes, which would DESTROY the PvE balance. If/when Class A was buffed/.nerfed, a NEW king of PvP would emerge, starting the cycle over again. It would be an ENDLESS cycle.
-or-
2. The PvP enthusiasts would gain enough numbers that the PvE vs PvP hate would become intolerable.

Either way that it goes down, it's bad for the game.
Had this game been designed with PvP in mind, some of the problems could possibly have been avoided.
But it wasn't designed with PvP in mind. Not at all. D&D is a PvE game, not a PvP game. So DDO, but using D&D's ruleset, is also a PvE game by default.
To attempt to change it to a PvP game would literally ruin DDO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

PVP is awesome and enhances ingame skills which can be applied to PVE. And for argument sake, I PVP alot and never bring it up in group, I simply show my skills by way of completions.

---

I fail to see how anything you learn in pvp can be truly useful in pve your not playing against players there with their limiations even the enviroment is different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

I am playing devils advocate here so the statement above which to me is the continued straw man argument. What exact core changes would be required to accomodate additional pvp? Oponents generalize the argument saying it is modifying or would alter pve. If we simply add or convert a lowbie explorer area and simply allow a sector to be pve/pvp (using similar coding when we had the market invasion)what is so altering of the game mechanics that this would be the endall beall of DDO?

I find that over the past 4 years, "bug development, content, races, and classes, etc", have been routine if not predictable and often lacking. My argument is if you open up a p4p pvppve explorer area you can gauge the net profits to see if additional implementation would quantify additonal hiring of devs to spend time on another pet project.

I agree in the sense that the current devs should not take time away from there current to-do list, but if a coding on an exlporer area can be implemented without taxing too much time, then what is the harm?

---

As soon as you do more pvp people will cry for balancing and I promise you that will affect pve even if they dont intend it to there will be bugs. Its a waste of time and you can tell most dont want it even the nonfourm types because if not there would be a larger pop using the pvp we have then is the case now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calebro

You're missing the point.

A central localized area simply designated as a PvP area would not be sufficient. PvP enthusiasts would go there and find it just as dull as combat in the pits.
But the difference would be that now there was an actual PvP area other then a brawl room. The PvP enthusiasts would take that to mean that the game was beginning to focus more attention on PvP.
They would then argue that Class X is OP in PvP compared to Class B, and make a cry for nerfs to Class A, or buffs to Class B.
Remember H4x? There would be THOUSANDS of him.
The new PvP area would attract more PvP'ers to it, and the cries of buff/nerf would gain momentum.

One of two things would happen from there.
1. The PvP enthusiasts would gain enough support from fellow PvP'ers that the Devs would begin to listen to them, and thus change the classes, which would DESTROY the PvE balance. If/when Class A was buffed/.nerfed, a NEW king of PvP would emerge, starting the cycle over again. It would be an ENDLESS cycle.
-or-
2. The PvP enthusiasts would gain enough numbers that the PvE vs PvP hate would become intolerable.

Either way that it goes down, it's bad for the game.
Had this game been designed with PvP in mind, some of the problems could possibly have been avoided.
But it wasn't designed with PvP in mind. Not at all. D&D is a PvE game, not a PvP game. So DDO, but using D&D's ruleset, is also a PvE game by default.
To attempt to change it to a PvP game would literally ruin DDO.

---

I will agree with your theory IF you also agree that it is a possible theory and not matter of fact as you have spoken it to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

I will agree with your theory IF you also agree that it is a possible theory and not matter of fact as you have spoken it to be.

---

It's what happens in every single MMO that has balance issues within PvP.
This game has HUGE balance issues within PvP. It is a matter of fact, which is why I stated it as such.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uska

I fail to see how anything you learn in pvp can be truly useful in pve your not playing against players there with their limiations even the enviroment is different.

---

i think you missed the subliminal interaction that occurs in PVP:

Okay so you drop down against a foe in the pvp arena, you have no idea what will transpire, it is up to you and your abilites to kill him. You get wasted from your opponent quickly adn without remorse. So then you adjust and learn to adapt and try new tactics, you enhance your ability to use clickies on the fly and sometimes your ganged up on and it is up to you how well you deal with pressure that will kill you in an instance if you hit the wrong key. In PVP this changes everyday, Meles' casters, archers all play a role in how well you can convert from shield block, to saves to besting your open or saving your arse with a trip. Sure you can get to know regulars and their tactics but there is often an element of surprise waiting.

Now lets go to PVE, AI is no better than Arlos wanting to attack everything he sees. PVE if anything is predictable, the only thing unpredictable is people you PUG with (of course that can always be entertaining as well)

You know where the creatures are and what there capable of and can anticipate just about every case scenario. Even in raids if somethign goes wrong, people who run it often have backup plans arranged in their heads and can anticipate and quickly re-calculate the next necessary thing.

I die alot in PVP, I rarely if ever die in PVE and I attribute the synergy of finger mechanics and sharpened skills from PVP that have trancended into the PVE area. I Solo alot of content on my own and I can tell you personalyl the difference is knowing whats coming versus not knowing. PVP enhances response and reaction time if anything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Uska

As soon as you do more pvp people will cry for balancing and I promise you that will affect pve even if they dont intend it to there will be bugs. Its a waste of time and you can tell most dont want it even the nonfourm types because if not there would be a larger pop using the pvp we have then is the case now.

---

Well I enjoy both PVE and PVP and I might be the rare case in thinking that PVP is fine the way it is but id also like to see additions. However, unlike you and most opponents I do not see it simply as black and white, perhaps I am missing somethign but if anythign im not going to be absolute without regard and because the masses on this forum sight object does not mean there is not intrinsic value to PVP.

But for concession purposes, let the devs put somethign on Lamania (sic) if it works there I see no reason not to implement it on the servers. If it flops, then you can all bask in your glrious postion. It really matter not for me int he end, I think its amusing how many people cry out against it and yet half of them dont or have not even bothered trying it or in some cases get owned so bad they hate it without recourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calebro

It's what happens in every single MMO that has balance issues within PvP.
This game has HUGE balance issues within PvP. It is a matter of fact, which is why I stated it as such.

---

what happens elsewhere cannot be applied here. It can be implied therefore it is conjecture at best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yajerman01

what happens elsewhere cannot be applied here. It can be implied therefore it is conjecture at best.

---

When I drop an apple from the top of a tree it falls.
When I drop an apple off the top of the Empire State building it falls.
When I drop an apple from the top of Mount Everest it falls.
When I drop an apple off of the Eiffel Tower it falls.
When I drop an apple off of the top of the roller coaster it falls.
Do I need to climb to the top of the Sears Tower and test this "theory" again here?

What happens elsewhere CAN be applied in other places, as long as the data supports it's use.
The data supports my "theory" here as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Calebro

When I drop an apple from the top of a tree it falls.
When I drop an apple off the top of the Empire State building it falls.
When I drop an apple from the top of Mount Everest it falls.
When I drop an apple off of the Eiffel Tower it falls.
When I drop an apple off of the top of the roller coaster it falls.
Do I need to climb to the top of the Sears Tower and test this "theory" again here?

What happens elsewhere CAN be applied in other places, as long as the data supports it's use.
The data supports my "theory" here as well.

---

Your statement is a false analogy my friend. Your stating that human interaction is the same everywhere, therefore your stating that the personalities and human reaction in DDO are no different then WOW. Next time dont use the laws of physics to interplay human reaction. I will agree that it is a theory as I have stated before, not fact.