Problems With PvP: Looking at the Bigger Picture

Everything in this post is intended to be used to benefit GW2 and PvP. Any criticisms should be taken as constructive; I love GW2 and PvP and I want to see this game do better.I've been playing GW2 PvP for about 2 years now. It's pretty much all I do in the game now, aside from the occasional WvW or Raid.

There are three fundamental issues that are plaguing PvP at the moment:

1- Inability to bring in new players2- Inability to retain PvP veterans (such as myself)3- Inability to develop a truly competitive PvP scene

Solutions:1- The best way for me to answer this question was to look back and see what brought me to PvP in the first place: the wings of ascension. Legendary backpacks had just come out, and those wings looked glorious. I had to have them, so I started playing ranked.It's dumb, but what brought me-- and a lot of other players-- was a sexy backpack skin. It was unique to PvP, and served as a symbol that you as a player were truly competitive. Kind of like legendary armor with PvE.Today, PvP rewards are lackluster at best. No one wants to go PvP for the legendary armor because it lacks any significant skin. You get PvP legendary armor and no one can even tell. As of now, I have all the requirements to get a full set of legendary PvP armor. I tried, and got the chest piece. But it's useless, especially when I have 4 diff sets of ascended armor. You can't even tell its there. I know it sounds pretty dumb to say this, but if Anet wants new players to come to PvP they need to give them legendary skins. The skins give players something to strive for-- something that's unique to PvP. Of course this doesn't just apply to the legendary armor; the rewards in general are not worth it.

2- The longer I stay in PvP the more realize that this is becoming a bigger problem. Veterans keep leaving, the top ratings on the leaderboard decrease every season, and I myself have lost most of my PvP friends. This became especially noticeable last season when Anet prevented people from duo queuing above 1600 rating. It really put a dent in the veteran PvP community.That's not the only problem though. It's just always the same. Every season is the same-- same game mode with the same players. It gets repetitive and boring. People NEED new game modes. It just has to happen. Imagine playing Call of Duty with Domination as the only game mode. That'd be stupid, right? See what I mean.Maybe Anet can add an free-for-all mode. Team death match. There's a lot they could do here. Personally, I think it'd be cool if they added a map where it's free for all, with players being able to kill other players and loot the items they have equipped. Kind of like the wilderness in Runescape if anyone's ever played that.Another feature they could use to keep veterans playing is to insert how many times they've won a title into the title. For example, I've been in the top 100 for two seasons. My title could be: 2x Ruthless Legend.

3- I used to look forward to PvP seasons. Now I look forward to the break I have in between the seasons so I can have fun in unranked. That's a big issue.PvP seasons are too frequent. They're meaningless now. How could you possibly call it a "season" when it's become the standard for PvP? Seasons are things athletes need to prep for. It's where you give the game your all-- there's supposed to be big hype around them. It shouldn't be a perpetual thing, like it is today. Don't call it a season if that's not what it is.E-Sports needs to come back. People need to look forward to watching competitive games-- to try to learn from them, to try to improve their own skills.

I'm not sure what's going on with Anet, but I feel like their PvP team has lost its focus. It seems to be adding things left and right in hopes of making things better. I'm not saying they don't have a plan-- I'm just saying that's what it looks like to me. The purpose of this thread was to try to give them three things I think they should focus on-- and plan around them.

That's most of what I have to say. If you agree with me, maybe try to come up with your own solutions to these problems.

I agree with all your points. I think what they could've done to keep vet players was have the God of PvP and subsequent titles to not be permanent. Like u get God of PvP and everything down to Top 250 Merciless Legend but you only keep the title till the end of the next season giving an incentive to the good players to keep playing to defend their title and they should also have like an alternate leaderboard that lists down the top 3 players for each season so they will be remembered as champs. Other than that everything you stated.

@Les.4872 said:I agree with all your points. I think what they could've done to keep vet players was have the God of PvP and subsequent titles to not be permanent. Like u get God of PvP and everything down to Top 250 Merciless Legend but you only keep the title till the end of the next season giving an incentive to the good players to keep playing to defend their title and they should also have like an alternate leaderboard that lists down the top 3 players for each season so they will be remembered as champs. Other than that everything you stated.

That's not a bad idea at all. I'd support that, would certainly make the titles more precious.

Kill conquest, balance for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 arenas and people will have a game that can draw players, and keep investment in.

@Daishi.6027 said:Kill conquest, balance for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 arenas and people will have a game that can draw players, and keep investment in.

I wonder what makes you think this is such a good idea in the first place. You can balance conquest around holding points. What are you going to balance 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3 after? Killing other players as a sole objective? Closest thing we have to something like that was courtyard and it was horrible to play. The meta will be horrible with only 3 to 4 viable bursty ranged classes and no one's going to want to play it. Conquest 5v5 is competitive and all the devs need to do is to balance better and maybe lower the pace of the game so that lower tier players can keep up. Right now the game is very fast paced which the higher tier players are great at but lower tier players can't keep up so they fall victim to 1 trick pony builds and classes and start crying on the forums.

What I find keeps people interested in a game is how fun it is to watch, how fun it is to play, balance (doesn't need to be perfect balance), and the glory of winning it all. Soccer (or football for the EU people), is simple, fun to watch, fun to play, pretty much the most balanced game ever, and of course there's the glory of winning something like the World Cup. Guilds Wars 2 is hard to watch due to so many AoEs and excessively fast pacing brought by two xpacs, often not fun to play, horribly balanced, and there's no real glory in winning unless you play a genuinely weaker profession and actually work harder for the glory. New, elite quiality skins, that are actually hard to get (Ascension is far too easy), can attract a lot of players. But keeping them is difficult when poor balance and matchmaking drives them away more easily than the thought of sporting the fancy legendary hangs onto them.

Anet, I think there's one simple solution that can solve a lot of issues: reduce AoEs. Keep the flashiness of all the skills, but make it harder to land them. This raises the skill ceiling, making for more interesting gameplay to watch and the game more rewarding when you succeed. It also helps spectators to follow the action more easily. It's been said before that nobody wants to see "evade" or "block" or any word over and over again simply because using one dodge avoids multiple AoE attacks. Weaver is one of my favourite PoF specs, not because it's fun to play, but because it has hard to land skills. Many of them require melee range and facing your target. This is why people hate Scourge. Scourge doesn't actually apply their conditions that quickly. But good luck staying on a point and not having those conditions stack up quickly. It's not a fun spec to watch and it's not rewarding to win with, unless you have low standards for rewarding, or you are fighting a heavy condition cleansing spec that can actually put up a good fight. I want to see more Weaver skills with other professions. I'm sick of seeing mindless AoE spam that ends up confusing you more than being interesting to watch. People love seeing skillful plays. Reducing AoE output makes the game harder to play at a top level, and thus, the game will be more interesting to watch. Fewer AoEs also means fewer "evade evade evade" too. These are just a few reasons why AoE output should be reduced. I'm sure, and I hope, there are more.

Can you imagine if soccer had more than one ball to watch, but all of which could score a point?

The answer to everything is to fix balance.Veterans are leaving in droves because the game isn't fun. A few builds dominate. Those builds have limited counter-play and take way more effort to stop than to play. It's the same reason the competition scene collapsed at the start of HoT.

@Sultane.9150 said:There are three fundamental issues that are plaguing PvP at the moment:

1- Inability to bring in new players2- Inability to retain PvP veterans (such as myself)3- Inability to develop a truly competitive PvP scene

As a relatively new player (just like 300 matches behind) I can only talk about the first subject.

For absolute beginner, PvP is pretty easy to go in: you queue yourself and get in to a match. For game novices like me, the rewards are pretty much enough: some gold (which you need a lot in the beginning as you haven't yet got huge piles of everything), items and such.But after the absolute beginner phase, after like first 50 matches, I have found one thing pretty hard: I don't have any place to practice my PvP playing. Taking matches improves your skills pretty slowly. As your team & opponent is ever changing, you really don't have good indications when you played it better and when you played it worse. You can't retake the match with slightly changed build or slightly rethought approach/strategy/tactics. You can't try those 1vs1 or alike again to see if your refined approach is really an improvement, or if you missed something and things you thought really do not work.Without voice, without team, you have hard times to improve your situational awareness. It is really hard to read someone's mind to predict her/his intentions. It does not help that you get those 'F###ing idiot(s), s##tbag(s), moron(s), why weren't/were you in mid/far/near/cannon' - it is especially depressing in close losts when you even made some top stats and thought to be aware of the situation by saving some people / points for your team. Can't say it is any more inspirational even if your team wins a tight, hard match.

My suggestions to this problem would be half to community, half to game provider.

1 - As a community, it would be great to have some tighter or looser groups who somewhat regularly run few matches in custom arenas, and accept some new members to come in, too. Voice (discord, TS) would be close mandatory to explain what you'd want the members to do. I would like to see groups preparing for 5vs5 tournaments to advertise their group a bit more, and to keep some sort of 'sparring ring' for new potential recruits. Maybe this kind of activity already takes place, I am just not aware of this.

2 - Anet could take some actions to support this. Guilds could get permanent custom arenas for their people, so that you could create a guild entirely only for this purpose (taking custom arena matches regularly to try out team formations, strategies, new builds, new classes). There could be LFG (Looking For Guild) list that you could use to promote your guild, and to tell what kinds of actions the guild usually does. There could be some sort of custom arena lobby or such, where to go if you'd look for custom matches with permanent teams (that is, bunch of people playing matches on an arena). This would be something similar to WvW, you can go there hanging around and look for company. The current PvP lobby is only for MMR matches.

In general, my current feelings are that even that GW2 has players, guilds are pretty small. You would need close constantly 10 people online willing to take custom matches to try out new builds / strategies to have active PvP training in your guild, and that would need awful amounts of people online at any given moment (I'd say something like 100 players online in your guild). I don't know if Anet could help guilds to became larger, or if players want to keep them small, but some way to find people willing to try out PvP related things in more controlled environment would be extremely helpful to get a newbie to an intermediate PvPer.

Your big picture is focused on building a community when instead it should be focused on whether or not GW2 will ever be a decent game (more likely not). Communities do things; they share a common activity. That's what keeps them together. GW2 is dying not because of a lack of community support, but rather because the game is just outright bad. Age of Empires II has seen a recent renaissance in popularity and competitive matches despite it originally releasing in 1999. Team Fortress 2 competitive 6v6 has never had any direct, endorsed support from Valve, but it's been in ESEA league for nearly a decade and the players managed to crowd-fund multiple international LAN events. Super Smash Brothers Melee's competitive scene was outright denounced by its developers, and yet its players have lofted it up to main stage EVO. Those games have passionate, independent communities because those games are masterpieces in their own right. GW2 has no community because GW2 has no game to keep a community invested and passionate.

There are no tools for the players to use such as with TF2's open-source asset policy with which competitive-minded players made their own maps. There is no accidentally beautiful physics system with all sorts of weird bugs and processes such as we see in Smash or even games as far back as Quake; without a good physics engine, players have no means to express themselves. Players like Mang0 or Leffen will play the exact same character in extremely different ways. People will never forget Clockwork's legendary Scout play even though all he used was the stock loadout that every Scout gets baseline (because that loadout is meta). Whenever you see someone play GW2, it's the same buttons; the same styles and the same gimmicks countering the same match-ups with no room for identity. There is no sense of whacky playing and strategy as we see in the myraid of civilization match-ups in Age of Empires II. Everything in GW2 is just watching a minimap, running around, and playing super passively until you find a match-up which you know you can win with minimal effort.

You can say all you like about vague ideas which contribute to a bigger PvP population or a more thriving community, but you'll never see it because GW2 is just not a good game.

@"Swagg.9236" said:Your big picture is focused on building a community when instead it should be focused on whether or not GW2 will ever be a decent game (more likely not).

Not exactly. My "big picture" was/is just something I'd hope as a relatively new PvP player. Those two other points mentioned are out of my experience at the moment. But true - everything will fail, if the core, PvP playing itself is not fun. No matter about rewards and such.

You can say all you like about vague ideas which contribute to a bigger PvP population or a more thriving community, but you'll never see it because GW2 is just not a good game.

That we of course will see. At the moment, I am ready to give GW2 an opportunity.

@"Swagg.9236" said:You can say all you like about vague ideas which contribute to a bigger PvP population or a more thriving community, but you'll never see it because GW2 is just not a good game.

Whether or not a game is "good" isn't something you can state as fact. I play Guild Wars 2 because I think it is a genuinely good game and its PvP has lot's of untapped potential.

My suggestions revolve around facts that can be changed; concrete things Anet can do to further improve the game. You suggesting that GW2 is just "not a good game" is just your own opinion.

I rarely play PvP now, I never left HoTM before maybe June/July 2014, when it was a bit of a soft meta, players knew what didn’t work well in PvP, but the build variety was better because a wide variety of stuff did worked.Boons and conditions are thrown about like crazy now, there’s not much skill involved when you can spam buttons and still win.

But my main reasoning for not playing PvP much, even though the rewards are really good now, is because it is boring. The Achievements I’m glad they added, after many suggestions on the old forum. But variety in battlegrounds would make a big difference, damage and healing needs toning down in PvP, then it could be considered changing the ranked queue to 2v2 + 3v3 random arena, 5v5 as it is now(and 8v8 on new maps with 4-5 objectives which decay to neutral like a true resource race).

Get rid of traits that proc skills. This confuses people when learning the game and figuring out how to defend against classes.

Give unique skins.

Reduce the range of aoes in pvp or increase the size of caputre nodes. One aoe should not be able to cover an entire point. It is the primary reason aoe classes feel over powered.

Have a member of the balance team provide brief updates on their work. People may disagree with the direction, but at least the community will know the direction.

Limit class acess to boons and conditions.

Rework traits so each line is a coice of damage, defense, or support or each trait represents one of these three more clearly. This will create more hybrid build options. The more viable build options the better.

Either support Stronghold or nix it for another mode.

@Sultane.9150 said:

@"Swagg.9236" said:You can say all you like about vague ideas which contribute to a bigger PvP population or a more thriving community, but you'll never see it because GW2 is just not a good game.

When it's possible to identify other games and pinpoint which in-game mechanics or asset availability that keep them alive independent of direct developer support, it's easy to weigh those against GW2's lacking aspects. GW2 has no asset access (players can't make maps or custom servers with unique combat mods and modes), there are no universal physics gimmicks which all players can utilize (movement outside of WASD is entirely scripted and provides no room for self-expression or interesting play), and GW2 revolves entirely around hard-counters (players actively avoid certain class match-ups for entire games because that's what "good" GW2 players should do rather than just being objectively good and overcoming potential disadvantages with creative play). GW2 is critically flawed in ways which mock what has made other video games good for decades. It's a travesty of design which spits in the face of its franchise history and flagrantly ignores the lessons of developers and other good games which have existed for years. GW2 is not going to have a thriving playerbase because it is just not a game that is conducive to engaging and organic play. Everything is static and painfully straightforward.

Have Anet fixed the literal gut punch they give players every time they loose a match with 450+ points and multiple top stats just because the ranking system see individual player ranks as the absolute result of 5 players either winning or loosing?

Otherwise thats a pretty good place to start.

@"Swagg.9236" said:(players actively avoid certain class match-ups for entire games because that's what "good" GW2 players should do rather than just being objectively good and overcoming potential disadvantages with creative play). GW2 is critically flawed in ways which mock what has made other video games good for decades. It's a travesty of design which spits in the face of its franchise history and flagrantly ignores the lessons of developers and other good games which have existed for years. GW2 is not going to have a thriving playerbase because it is just not a game that is conducive to engaging and organic play. Everything is static and painfully straightforward.

GW2 combat, at least when it first came out, was revolutionary for the MMO genre because it relied so much on movement. I’m not sure what exactly you’re talking about when it comes to match-ups, because in PvP (if you ever want to get good) you have to learn how to hold your own even against bad match-ups. Also, bad match-ups isn’t unique to this game; I play in SSB4 tournaments regularly and I can tell you I definitely wouldn’t want to play Roy against a character like Bayonetta. Bad match-ups are inherent to every competitive game.

@Sultane.9150 said:

@"Swagg.9236" said:(players actively avoid certain class match-ups for entire games because that's what "good" GW2 players should do rather than just being objectively good and overcoming potential disadvantages with creative play). GW2 is critically flawed in ways which mock what has made other video games good for decades. It's a travesty of design which spits in the face of its franchise history and flagrantly ignores the lessons of developers and other good games which have existed for years. GW2 is not going to have a thriving playerbase because it is just not a game that is conducive to engaging and organic play. Everything is static and painfully straightforward.

This "GW2 movement" meme has got to stop. As fluid as the game's movement can be, it's ultimately incredibly sluggish in speed and WASD + dodge-jumping are incredibly limited when weighed against the general design of most maps (particularly in PvP). What players call "mobility" is entirely comprised of scripted movement which is entirely devoid of player personality, expression and mechanical skill (it's all just "click button" and/or occasionally "flick reticle to target location" both with instant-gratification, no-risk benefits). Ever notice how Necromancers have always asked for "more movement skills" since launch? Probably because base GW2 WASD movement is hot garbage (especially with "combat speed") and the only way that anyone ever accomplishes anything is if they can chain evades/immunities while walking or if they can just instantly cheat their way into "good positioning" by pressing a single button.

If you want smooth MMORPG movement, you could also look at Wildstar. That game's movement mechanics often directly complement WASD rather than completely overriding player orientation and control. Movement abilities are also distributed pretty well across all classes (despite how basic WASD will often suffice in a vast number of overworld and instanced PvE encounters thanks to the sprint and dodge mechanics). Given that both games were in development during the same time at one point and how both released within a year of each other, if GW2 never existed, people would have probably touted Wildstar as the "MMO with 'revolutionary' movement."

As for "bad match-ups," I'm talking more about hard counters rather than things which can't be addressed by player capability. Players in GW2 roll bad match-up classes all the time. Consider how nearly every class in the game (even in an even numbers situation) is a bad match up for a firebrand/scourge duo. What is the play there? Fight and win because we are better players? Nope. Out-rotate. Deliberately avoid direct confrontation. Player skill in GW2 cannot overpower tool tips, and hard counters rule the game.

Also, SSB4 is way too heavy on gimmicks. For the purpose of player self-expression alongside skill, it's easier to frame it within the context of how hundreds of players can play Fox or Falco differently, or how aggro or precise someone can be with Falcon; the latter has a pretty great skit:

. The point is, the simpler and more universally available that strong movement options are in a game, the more diverse and unique that play-styles and game-play encounter designs can become. Once those are established, then classes/characters can build around it. GW2 is too choked with gimmicks to allow play-styles to exist, and that's why top level play in GW2 is avoiding "bad" fights and +1'ing others. It's just rock-paper-scissors. It always has been.

@Daishi.6027 said:Kill conquest, balance for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 arenas and people will have a game that can draw players, and keep investment in.

Idk about straight up killing conquest but I’m pretty positive that if they made a 2v2 “arena” que it’d be way more popular than conquest in both people playing it and the viewership of it so long as it gave the same in game rewards and had its own ranked.

It would also create a less infuriating playstyle of vomit your AoEs on a point so no one can stand on it sort of playstyle. Which would likely make it easier for new players to get into it too.

2v2 Arenas. Play 2 immortal builds & cap 2 points first then camp on it. Clear condis, regen from dps & dont let them decap. Nice gameplay... Win..... EZ. snoozzzZZZzzz.

@Vieux P.1238 said:2v2 Arenas. Play 2 immortal builds & cap 2 points first then camp on it. Clear condis, regen from dps & dont let them decap. Nice gameplay... Win..... EZ. snoozzzZZZzzz.

No point capping, death match, and use the mechanic that’s used in the 2v2 map where after X time healing is turned off and there’s the death vortex.

@Durzlla.6295 said:

@Vieux P.1238 said:2v2 Arenas. Play 2 immortal builds & cap 2 points first then camp on it. Clear condis, regen from dps & dont let them decap. Nice gameplay... Win..... EZ. snoozzzZZZzzz.

Or was that a death match described???? ? kinda miss that.. Ok still, play only the meta..Scrouge & FB only.. EZZZ snoozzze

What brought players while lowering the skillbase was the introduction of rewards in spvp.

Currently the playerbase is that low that it's not possible to have the right challenge in order to get very skilled players.What I mean is that is definitely true that out of 3k players there will be the top 10.It's logic.

But because of the absent playerbase, the average level is definitely low ( the top 250 players is a joke, also because of traders and the absence of balance ).

GW2, because of its mechanics mostly, would have never been an e-sport, and it will never be a real one.

That said

1- The best way for me to answer this question was to look back and see what brought me to PvP in the first place: the wings of ascension. Legendary backpacks had just come out, and those wings looked glorious. I had to have them, so I started playing ranked.It's dumb, but what brought me-- and a lot of other players-- was a sexy backpack skin. It was unique to PvP, and served as a symbol that you as a player were truly competitive. Kind of like legendary armor with PvE.Today, PvP rewards are lackluster at best. No one wants to go PvP for the legendary armor because it lacks any significant skin. You get PvP legendary armor and no one can even tell. As of now, I have all the requirements to get a full set of legendary PvP armor. I tried, and got the chest piece. But it's useless, especially when I have 4 diff sets of ascended armor. You can't even tell its there. I know it sounds pretty dumb to say this, but if Anet wants new players to come to PvP they need to give them legendary skins. The skins give players something to strive for-- something that's unique to PvP. Of course this doesn't just apply to the legendary armor; the rewards in general are not worth it.

As stated before, rewards brought players but lowered also the skill ( as the current pip system, the wintrading, the afking/trolling unpunished and so on ), but it's definitely true that given the fact that SPvP is now casual, adding more rewards won't harm the game anymore ( people already farm ranked with no clue or spamming the low skill/high reward class of the moment ).

2- The longer I stay in PvP the more realize that this is becoming a bigger problem. Veterans keep leaving, the top ratings on the leaderboard decrease every season, and I myself have lost most of my PvP friends. This became especially noticeable last season when Anet prevented people from duo queuing above 1600 rating. It really put a dent in the veteran PvP community.That's not the only problem though. It's just always the same. Every season is the same-- same game mode with the same players. It gets repetitive and boring. People NEED new game modes. It just has to happen. Imagine playing Call of Duty with Domination as the only game mode. That'd be stupid, right? See what I mean.Maybe Anet can add an free-for-all mode. Team death match. There's a lot they could do here. Personally, I think it'd be cool if they added a map where it's free for all, with players being able to kill other players and loot the items they have equipped. Kind of like the wilderness in Runescape if anyone's ever played that.Another feature they could use to keep veterans playing is to insert how many times they've won a title into the title. For example, I've been in the top 100 for two seasons. My title could be: 2x Ruthless Legend.

Ranked should be only soloq since the beginning ( teams do have 4 tournaments per day and 1 monthly tournament ).New game modes would be fun, but i wouldn't dare to split the current community ( unfortunately, we don't have enough players ).Also you have to consider that giving new game modes is not enought, because after that people will start to complain about things like

• Why don't we have a ranked for 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, New mode 1, New Mode 2, New mode 3... etc...
• You can't work towards balance and e-sport ( even though i wouldn't consider it as said before ) and proposing different modes. The mode should be one, with maybe different maps ( like the current mode ).

Also we all have seen the mega fail called stronghold haven't we?

More than game modes we do need ANET to understand that SPvP, WvW and PvE must be separated from each other.Giving total control to SPvP team could change everything.

That said, they could give some maps or system for 1v1/2v2/3v3 just for fun ( custom obviously. Not ranked nor unranked ).

3- I used to look forward to PvP seasons. Now I look forward to the break I have in between the seasons so I can have fun in unranked. That's a big issue.PvP seasons are too frequent. They're meaningless now. How could you possibly call it a "season" when it's become the standard for PvP? Seasons are things athletes need to prep for. It's where you give the game your all-- there's supposed to be big hype around them. It shouldn't be a perpetual thing, like it is today. Don't call it a season if that's not what it is.E-Sports needs to come back. People need to look forward to watching competitive games-- to try to learn from them, to try to improve their own skills.

I got your point, but I doubt you will ever achieve something by reducing the number of seasons ( and i mean both new players and e-sport ).

@Vieux P.1238 said:

@Durzlla.6295 said:

@Vieux P.1238 said:2v2 Arenas. Play 2 immortal builds & cap 2 points first then camp on it. Clear condis, regen from dps & dont let them decap. Nice gameplay... Win..... EZ. snoozzzZZZzzz.

Scourge & FB combo become a whole lot worse when you’re allowed to completely avoid the scourges AoE without the penalty of forfeiting the point.

@Shirlias.8104 said:

E-Sports needs to come back. People need to look forward to watching competitive games-- to try to learn from them, to try to improve their own skills.

Ahhh no!

Anet does not care PVP, majority number of players are PVE only. I don't have solid proof, but based on my perception on forum and in game.My estimation is PVP players count on 10% maximum.As a business, it makes pure sense to just ignore pvp.