You said a lot more than "I can understand why." You made a number of claims that aren't backed up with any evidence and created a theory based on them. I responded to those claims and your response is that other people are making things up.
For example, the OP has not said, "well ANet gutted the sort of PvP I like, so I think it's only fair to gut the sort of PvE that I don't like. Instead, and as stated in the actual Original Post, the request was made because the OP believes...
This option will give more liveliness to the game...
Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"
You said a lot more than "I can understand why." You made a number of claims that aren't backed up with any evidence and created a theory based on them. I responded to those claims and your response is that other people are making things up.
For example, the OP has not said, "well ANet gutted the sort of PvP I like, so I think it's only fair to gut the sort of PvE that I don't like. Instead, and as stated in the actual Original Post, the request was made because the OP believes...
This option will give more liveliness to the game...
They weren't claims. They were my personal opinions for starters in regards to "why all the threads lately". As for the rest of your arguements Im not going to bother responding because then you'll argue that one and then next one.
do you see what I mean?
Its like you're looking for an arguement where there is none and being to the point about this, you're not usually one to do this sort of edgy stuff. I dont know if you were preheated from some one else before reading and responding but trust me man, youve read this situation wrong.
Usually you're good with your english and dont overlook the key words, I feel like you missed those key words this time.
If your goal is to explain why there are so many PvP-in-PvE threads, you could have just said, "because there are still people hoping to see more opportunities for PvP." Preferences don't need to be justified.
Its like you're looking for an arguement where there is none
As I said, you wrote a lot more than, "I can understand why." You seem to confuse my challenging the claims you made in the "a lot more" with "looking for an argument."
If someone prefers the real world sky to be green, I see no problem with them asking for it, as often as they like.
If they suggest that we should dye the oceans to make the sky green, then I'm going to point out that the color of the sky comes from light scattered by particles in the air, that coloring the ocean wouldn't help (not to mention it's dangerous and expensive). And I might suggest that they look into contact lenses to change what they see, rather than try to get the rest of the world to have the same preference.
The OP, to their credit, primarily has stuck to their original suggestion on the basis that it would liven things up. The OP isn't trying to justify the idea because of hating the Warclaw or any theories regarding its introduction.
Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
Aaaand we're back to "we need to force people to my preferred playstyle until they like it".
I can hold my own when being ganked on pretty much any character I step into WvW with, but I still don't enjoy it any more than I did when I first stepped into the mode almost seven years ago. Being forced to duell people built specifically with cheesy ganker builds just isn't my thing. And before you ask, I'm not into zerg karma training either, but much prefer smallscale gameplay, just not with the objective to gank unprepared players.
If you can't unmount people with a specialized ganking build that's on you, but the excuse of "warclaw killed wvw roaming" is a lame one, since it's simply not true. Try adapting instead of forcing people to play your way, and you might just find that it's much easier to bond with a team and actually have fun.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
Aaaand we're back to "we need to force people to my preferred playstyle until they like it".
I can hold my own when being ganked on pretty much any character I step into WvW with, but I still don't enjoy it any more than I did when I first stepped into the mode almost seven years ago. Being forced to duell people built specifically with cheesy ganker builds just isn't my thing. And before you ask, I'm not into zerg karma training either, but much prefer smallscale gameplay, just not with the objective to gank unprepared players.
If you can't unmount people with a specialized ganking build that's on you, but the excuse of "warclaw killed wvw roaming" is a lame one, since it's simply not true. Try adapting instead of forcing people to play your way, and you might just find that it's much easier to bond with a team and actually have fun.
If your goal is to explain why there are so many PvP-in-PvE threads, you could have just said, "because there are still people hoping to see more opportunities for PvP." Preferences don't need to be justified.
Its like you're looking for an arguement where there is none
As I said, you wrote a lot more than, "I can understand why." You seem to confuse my challenging the claims you made in the "a lot more" with "looking for an argument."
If someone prefers the real world sky to be green, I see no problem with them asking for it, as often as they like.
If they suggest that we should dye the oceans to make the sky green, then I'm going to point out that the color of the sky comes from light scattered by particles in the air, that coloring the ocean wouldn't help (not to mention it's dangerous and expensive). And I might suggest that they look into contact lenses to change what they see, rather than try to get the rest of the world to have the same preference.
The OP, to their credit, primarily has stuck to their original suggestion on the basis that it would liven things up. The OP isn't trying to justify the idea because of hating the Warclaw or any theories regarding its introduction.
And thats your opinion. I wont sit here and argue it like youre doing to me. If you felt like I should have said this or should have said that, they are your personal opinions just as mine was "I can understand"... you gave reasoning to your opinion just as I gave to mine but I wont argue every word or look for a loop to start an arguement to catch you out.
Oh and I love Warclaw by the way... using 5 people to herd a mounted player makes me feel like an old western cowboy herding cattle... just an example of why youre way off.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
Forget it. There can be nothing good that comes from injecting PVP into an area of the game where it's not wanted, even if it's a fraction of the people. There are just some things that we already know and they are only more relevant as this game gets older and it's core group of players solidifies in the market.
Maybe at most, an area specifically designed for PVP, but then again, what's the point of having that area in PVE area? It's just not a value add.
If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
ganking is an action like walking that every player partakes in when they enter WvW and PvP.
its not a playstyle or a sub group of players, its an action. Its basically the ground basis for those 2 modes, to "gank" and kill each other.
so no, I dont think that killing people in open world pvp is killing the game mode... Because thats what youre meant to do..
I think the ones who force more pve and less player engagements are. The ones who wanted and recieved indemnity from PvP when signing up to open world PvP.. The inexperienced ones who belittle and put down players for killing people in an open world pvp. the ones who go around labelling players as "gankers" forgetting that is exactly the action that is supposed to take place continuously while in WvW by all players including themselves.
like, cmon, basic English applies here with Verbs and Nouns.
but that wasnt the point of my post and you know it, but I still answered your question about "gankers" anyway.
personally... I would love PvE to have some player engagements available.. But I would like it in the Black Citadel arena or something alike. a place where I could eat and watch a show at the same time. (and knowing myself, would organise a betting ring out of it too)
Ganking refers to killing a player while outnumbering the player. It came from "gang killing." There are some instances in which the term is used to refer to killing players who are drastically under-powered (in level and gear). Ganking is very much a play-style.
Sure, "ganking" can and does occur in WvW/sPvP. It is something that every player who enters those modes can engage in. It is not something every player who enters those modes engages in by default.
I'm with you that players who complain about being killed in a PvP mode are out of line. I would rather they abstain from going to such a game mode and leave it to those who want to use the mode as it is intended. However, I prefer that we not try to make a term that means one thing mean something else.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
ganking is an action like walking that every player partakes in when they enter WvW and PvP.
its not a playstyle or a sub group of players, its an action. Its basically the ground basis for those 2 modes, to "gank" and kill each other.
so no, I dont think that killing people in open world pvp is killing the game mode... Because thats what youre meant to do..
I think the ones who force more pve and less player engagements are. The ones who wanted and recieved indemnity from PvP when signing up to open world PvP.. The inexperienced ones who belittle and put down players for killing people in an open world pvp. the ones who go around labelling players as "gankers" forgetting that is exactly the action that is supposed to take place continuously while in WvW by all players including themselves.
like, cmon, basic English applies here with Verbs and Nouns.
but that wasnt the point of my post and you know it, but I still answered your question about "gankers" anyway.
personally... I would love PvE to have some player engagements available.. But I would like it in the Black Citadel arena or something alike. a place where I could eat and watch a show at the same time. (and knowing myself, would organise a betting ring out of it too)
Ganking refers to killing a player while outnumbering the player. It came from "gang killing." There are some instances in which the term is used to refer to killing players who are drastically under-powered (in level and gear). Ganking is very much a play-style.
Sure, "ganking" can and does occur in WvW/sPvP. It is something that every player who enters those modes can engage in. It is not something every player who enters those modes engages in by default.
I'm with you that players who complain about being killed in a PvP mode are out of line. I would rather they abstain from going to such a game mode and leave it to those who want to use the mode as it is intended. However, I prefer that we not try to make a term that means one thing mean something else.
I can understand that point of view... Having a zerg gank you at a sentry can be quite frustrating. I wouldn't label them as such but that's me.
yesterday was a prime example for me... I "Ganked" a fellow Reaper on route from Pang to OW... once he was down and I got the stomp, 2 Soulbeasts jumped out of the tower and "ganked" me with a double Rapid Fire.... it happens. I was ganked fair and square. it was the action or verb that took place that resulted in my respawn.... (then I went back to get revenge and was ganked again by a thief but eh, it happens, completely my fault for dismounting and trying a reaper vs DE battle.)
So I do understand that point of view as I was "ganked" repeatedly yesterday in situations that were both fair and extremely unfair. I'm actually quite often ganked near the Veloka sentry by masses of people or zergs gliding in from Red Keep.
@Gopaka.7839 said:
PvE players on the other hand will get used to seeing players getting killed by other players
What makes you think that people want to get used to that? Personally I play this game precisely because I don't have to watch people bash in each others' heads if I don't want to.
I do my fair share of WvW roaming if I feel like it, spending roughly half my gametime on the borderlands these days. I don't want the competition, the aggressiveness, the general stressful athmosphere that any kind of pvp breeds when I'm in PvE. And yes, I do avoid farm maps as well as new living story maps, too, to find peaceful, relaxed PvE maps when I feel like it. I don't want to get used to the stress and aggression pvp breeds, I just want that to stay in its place, and leave the relaxed, peaceful PvE as is.
That is something PvPers will never understand. I have seen this debate since the early days of Ultima Online. Open world PvP nearly killed that game, it never fully recovered because Everquest came out and took UOs dissatisfied customers.
WvW already has PvP & PvM. No need to ruin the main maps, just to try and get players to magically decide they like PvP. It does not work that way.
This is just the same ages old cry "we need to force people to my preferred playstyle until they like it".
Ganking evolved from the term to 'gang up on'. Ie large group attacking small group. Later in games with out of control power curves it was sometimes used to represent high level players ganking low players.
This is only really a design issue where a zone is primarily designed with pve but with no option to opt out of pvp.
So ganking is not desirable, but its not the gankers fault, they are doing what is natural in a pvp enabled zone. Dedicated pvp zones that have pve can be a lot of fun, as can pve zones with opt out/in. A good game offers all types of zone.
"Any path that narrows future possibilities may become a lethal trap. Humans do not thread their way through a maze; they scan a vast horizon filled with unique opportunities." - The Spacing Guild Handbook.
This is the first time I see this issue being proposed with a philosophical layer to it: progress, history, moving forward the same way we've been doing since we left the caves...
I'll give you credit for adding something new to an old, repeated, uncreative, wishful, rebuked suggestion - but frankly, it's a video-game design by a company. It's both hilarious and clueless to throw philosophy in the mix.
As for the suggestion itself, it's already implemented. They call it Lineage 2, for example.
@Gopaka.7839 said:
Open world wont kill gw2. PvP/WvW players will have something to do in the open world and thus learn more about PvE on the way. PvE players on the other hand will get used to seeing players getting killed by other players and maybe learn more about the PvP/WvW community a little bit more while communicating with some WvW/PvP players. And thus go do some PvP and WvW. What my idea is basically bringing all the community together around all the contents that this game is providing, not splitting them apart. I know WvW players playing the game doing only WvW, not knowing what a guild hall is even. I know PvE players who havent played WvW a single time. I know PvP player that does only tournaments. Why all of you think splitted community is a good community ? WvW struggle for fresh blood ? How do you suggest they do that ? Go out in LA spreading the good word and putting posters on the bank and trading post ?
Because the main obstacle is how hard it is to learn about the other game modes? It's 2 clicks away.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
Besides roaming/havoc are integral part of WvW. Flipping smaller objectives, preventing reinforcements, defending, scouting... all of these are important for WvW, it is part of strategy. It really sucks when there are not enough scouts or roaming groups that can handle these skirmishes and a blob has to go defend a keep even though a small group could handle it.
If WvW would be all blob play it would just get more boring. Blobs are fun from team coordination point of view, that is where the skill is in blob play. Personal, mechanical skill, not so much. For some quite boring.
I don't really understand "pvpers" that are afraid of pvp. If you have problems with a ganker that is cutting your reinforcements (which is a sound strategy just like tagging respawns) you should send a gank squad to take care of it.
@Gopaka.7839 said:
An idea that is coming to my mind is make an Undergroud City where there are no rules.
That sounds like a pretty large developement project. Wouldn't those resources be better used to develop more content for the existing pvp modes (sPvP and WvW)?
Wait there are resources for WvW?!
Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
Besides roaming/havoc are integral part of WvW. Flipping smaller objectives, preventing reinforcements, defending, scouting... all of these are important for WvW, it is part of strategy. It really sucks when there are not enough scouts or roaming groups that can handle these skirmishes and a blob has to go defend a keep even though a small group could handle it.
If WvW would be all blob play it would just get more boring. Blobs are fun from team coordination point of view, that is where the skill is in blob play. Personal, mechanical skill, not so much. For some quite boring.
I don't really understand "pvpers" that are afraid of pvp. If you have problems with a ganker that is cutting your reinforcements (which is a sound strategy just like tagging respawns) you should send a gank squad to take care of it.
This is fine for WvW and is exactly why PvP does not belong in the open world play. GW is a coop game, and open world PvP would take away from the coop play. It would end up like WoW... everyone uninterested in PvP would toggle to ignore duel requests. So really a useless addon.
People trying to entice others into PvP just makes it sound like PvP cannot stand on its own. If it is popular - people will be there. If it is not popular - they will be elsewhere. Really quite simple.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
Besides roaming/havoc are integral part of WvW. Flipping smaller objectives, preventing reinforcements, defending, scouting... all of these are important for WvW, it is part of strategy. It really sucks when there are not enough scouts or roaming groups that can handle these skirmishes and a blob has to go defend a keep even though a small group could handle it.
If WvW would be all blob play it would just get more boring. Blobs are fun from team coordination point of view, that is where the skill is in blob play. Personal, mechanical skill, not so much. For some quite boring.
I don't really understand "pvpers" that are afraid of pvp. If you have problems with a ganker that is cutting your reinforcements (which is a sound strategy just like tagging respawns) you should send a gank squad to take care of it.
This is fine for WvW and is exactly why PvP does not belong in the open world play. GW is a coop game, and open world PvP would take away from the coop play. It would end up like WoW... everyone uninterested in PvP would toggle to ignore duel requests. So really a useless addon.
People trying to entice others into PvP just makes it sound like PvP cannot stand on its own. If it is popular - people will be there. If it is not popular - they will be elsewhere. Really quite simple.
it was very popular until recently... theres no real difference between WvW and PvE anymore which backtracks to my previous comment towards another user about the influx of these threads lately... I can understand why, They were meshed together and I can understand the want to have it seperated or completely meshed together properly across both game modes.
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
@Danikat.8537 said:
Anyone know why there's been so many PvP in PvE topics recently? We used to get one every few months at most, then for the last few weeks it seems like we've had a new one every other day.*
Because the PvP options we had were gutted.
For the most part, it's not the PvP players that are asking for Open PvP/Duelling options in PvE. In most games i have seen, it's usually the players that play both modes but are primarily PvE that seem to insist on it the loudest. And they are interested (more often than not) in fights that are unfair from the beginning, where the chances are heavily skewed in their favour. It can thrive only as long as majority of participants are prey - players that are unprepared for it and exist only so the predators can kill them. If that group is gone (for example, because they weren't interested in being preyed on and left for other game/pve server/toggled pvp option off), interest in the mode starts to plummet until only a small number of players are left in it.
Hint: even in games that are purely open world pvp, those that actually want to engage in it are usually in minority.
I understand that PvE players dont want PvP in thier maps, I just wish PvE players gave the same respect to other game modes but instead we ended up with things like Warclaw.
Blame Devs for that one. I'm prety sure that Warclaw was not something PvE players wanted (because, seriously, why any PvE player would want to have more content of any kind in a mode they weren't planning to visit in the first place?)
@Draco.9480 said:
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
What is the game population for albion online? Around few hundred players logged in on average? Yes, i'm pretty sure it's way more popular than gw2...
The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.
@Draco.9480 said:
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
What is the game population for albion online? Around few hundred players logged in on average? Yes, i'm pretty sure it's way more popular than gw2...
According to steam charts Albion Online is now at 4585 average for the month of August. If you compare the numbers with other popular mmorpgs like FFXIV (30359) and ESO (23212) for August, it looks like full loot open world pvp isn't very popular indeed.
@Draco.9480 said:
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
Albion Onlines total population is tiny.
No strike that, calling Albion Onlines population tiny would be an insult to any game with a tiny population.
Oh and the game is hemmoraging players like no tomorrow: https://steamcharts.com/app/761890
ever since its discount sale in April. Within the next 2 months it will be back to its original player size of close to 0.
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
roam/havoc groups are integral. But gankers waiting in front of spawn to 3:1 everyone coming out are not INTEGRAL. They are TOXIC. They are killing the mode.
If a player has to chose as a option to be interacted with other players combat wise I see this as only adding more dynamics and flavor to pve. If it's not for u than dont chose the option but would be great for other like me if we could chose to, I'd be a blast lol
@Danikat.8537 said:
Anyone know why there's been so many PvP in PvE topics recently? We used to get one every few months at most, then for the last few weeks it seems like we've had a new one every other day.*
Because the PvP options we had were gutted.
For the most part, it's not the PvP players that are asking for Open PvP/Duelling options in PvE. In most games i have seen, it's usually the players that play both modes but are primarily PvE that seem to insist on it the loudest. And they are interested (more often than not) in fights that are unfair from the beginning, where the chances are heavily skewed in their favour. It can thrive only as long as majority of participants are prey - players that are unprepared for it and exist only so the predators can kill them. If that group is gone (for example, because they weren't interested in being preyed on and left for other game/pve server/toggled pvp option off), interest in the mode starts to plummet until only a small number of players are left in it.
Hint: even in games that are purely open world pvp, those that actually want to engage in it are usually in minority.
I understand that PvE players dont want PvP in thier maps, I just wish PvE players gave the same respect to other game modes but instead we ended up with things like Warclaw.
Blame Devs for that one. I'm prety sure that Warclaw was not something PvE players wanted (because, seriously, why any PvE player would want to have more content of any kind in a mode they weren't planning to visit in the first place?)
@Draco.9480 said:
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
What is the game population for albion online? Around few hundred players logged in on average? Yes, i'm pretty sure it's way more popular than gw2...
I don't blame PvE players at all... we covered this earlier (or tried too anyway but some were too keen on farming likes)
@sephiroth.4217 said:
WvW says its open world PvP but open world PvP should have dangers, even more so when alone to encourage people to group up in safety from the people who sustain the mode for years (the ones ganking you).. Teamwork like that helps players bond and learn until eventually they are that "ganker"/roamer, which means you would have played long enough to help sustain the mode....
The "Im not a 1v1 build" is just an excuse to me... I do fine when ganked on my Staff Tempest, Necro or FB (zerg classes).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
roam/havoc groups are integral. But gankers waiting in front of spawn to 3:1 everyone coming out are not INTEGRAL. They are TOXIC. They are killing the mode.
Use the Waypoint or the other 2 exits?
mount up and literally run past them?
if 3 people have you backed up at spawn with all the available resources at your disposal, they are doing an incredible job at disrupting you guys.
if you mean 3:1 odds... then sounds like population issues and absolutely nothing at all to do with ganking.
population issues can kill a game mode, but that has nothing to do with the Verb or Action of killing someone.
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
Did you not even read my post? Where do I opt all the toxic PVP chat out of map chat? Block every single one? Oh wait, turn off map chat and miss meta stuff. Nope.
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
Did you not even read my post? Where do I opt all the toxic PVP chat out of map chat? Block every single one? Oh wait, turn off map chat and miss meta stuff. Nope.
So other players shouldn't have their pve enjoyment raised by adding pvp components to it because u dont want to possibly see toxic words in chat? U serious? Lmao. What a trivial thing to stress about seriously. Ok than turn ur map chat off but if u really need to see what rando's are chatting about than I gues there could be a separate chat as well but seems kinda silly. I don't mean to sound rude in anyway.
@Gopaka.7839 said:
I gave the WoW example for a reason. People enjoy open world PvP, if not, the game wouldn't be so popular.
Last I checked, it was a few years ago, open PvP servers in WoW aren't nearly as popular as no PvP servers in WoW. In fact when I checked a lot of the PvP servers had major population issues. I don't think enough people enjoy open world PvP in mmorpgs anymore. And there are korean games that fill that need well.
Then why WoW Classic is a thing now? As far as I remember WoW's servers at start were open PvP full mode on. Also I'm not saying to have the one or the other... I'm saying to have both in the same time coexisting.
Was it? Are you sure WoW Classic will only be open PvP? If that's the case I don't see it surviving long. There is a reason why even Blizzard decided against having open PvP and split them up. Then open PvP servers mostly died. It's why open PvP is no longer needed in games.
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
Did you not even read my post? Where do I opt all the toxic PVP chat out of map chat? Block every single one? Oh wait, turn off map chat and miss meta stuff. Nope.
So other players shouldn't have their pve enjoyment raised by adding pvp components to it because u dont want to possibly see toxic words in chat? U serious? Lmao. What a trivial thing to stress about seriously. Ok than turn ur map chat off but if u really need to see what rando's are chatting about than I gues there could be a separate chat as well but seems kinda silly. I don't mean to sound rude in anyway.
But the majority of PVE people don't WANT PVP in PVE. You already have PVE/PVP in WVW. You can play there. If that's dead, complain about that, but don't try to mess up PVE for the rest of the player base. We stay out of PVP/WVW for a reason. And it's not a few toxic words. I was very glad when guild halls came along so I no longer needed to use the PVP lobby for AFKing/ sorting inventory. I don't need to see a bunch of teenagers waving their e-peens around.
@maddoctor.2738 said:
Was it? Are you sure WoW Classic will only be open PvP? If that's the case I don't see it surviving long. There is a reason why even Blizzard decided against having open PvP and split them up. Then open PvP servers mostly died. It's why open PvP is no longer needed in games.
Fortnite
Not an mmorpg. And doesn't have "open pvp" either.
@Psycoprophet.8107 said:
If it's an option either way how does it effect u as I'd assume ud not use the option to enable it.
The game is built around events, events often require multiple players and maps have limited capacity. Having a few of these pvpers fighting in a corner, or even worse in the middle of an active event, taking important map slots can and will affect everyone else playing on the same map regardless if they have an option to enable the feature or not.
@Psycoprophet.8107 said:
If it's an option either way how does it effect u as I'd assume ud not use the option to enable it.
The game is built around events, events often require multiple players and maps have limited capacity. Having a few of these pvpers fighting in a corner, or even worse in the middle of an active event, taking important map slots can and will affect everyone else playing on the same map regardless if they have an option to enable the feature or not.
roam/havoc groups are integral. But gankers waiting in front of spawn to 3:1 everyone coming out are not INTEGRAL. They are TOXIC. They are killing the mode.
Use the Waypoint or the other 2 exits?
mount up and literally run past them?
and now you just gave the no. 1 reason why warclaw was a much needed and valid addition to wvw.
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
Did you not even read my post? Where do I opt all the toxic PVP chat out of map chat? Block every single one? Oh wait, turn off map chat and miss meta stuff. Nope.
So other players shouldn't have their pve enjoyment raised
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
it is 'an option' that would even interfere with people who opt out. From newbies being trolled out of the game (reducing player population) to meta maps suffering because some people can not be a* to go to pvp arena or guild hall.
You want to fight? Go wvw, go pvp, go guild arena. There are your options. Have fun.
even if most people wanted world pvp it wouldnt work. core maps too small, no way to separate teams without returning to race wars other than dividing players up into mercs and factions. the game would just be flooded with the same top 3 meta builds (just like now lul). no one would really be able to DO anything because NPCs would either be constantly dead or camped. this game would actually be a s***show and the population would flatline
@XenoSpyro.1780 said:
even if most people wanted world pvp it wouldnt work. core maps too small, no way to separate teams without returning to race wars other than dividing players up into mercs and factions.
This is a good point. Any good MMO that has offered an open world PvP option has provided a lore-based reason why players are fighting each other. This usually means factions. If ANet were motivated to add open world PvP and avoid the inevitable comparisons to games like Rappelz that offer PvP with no real rhyme or reason to it, they'd want to recreate the lore. This would require a ton of work. Not only would they need to rework how players and NPC's can interact with each other, they'd have to rewrite the game's basic story. They could use existing factions (Inquest, Flame Legion, Sons of Svanir, etc.) but they's have to create an alliance between them, otherwise an Asura who opted to join the Inquest would not have a lore-based reason to attack players who opted for the normal Norn allegiance on Shiverpeaks maps.
They could add factions in a new area (like they did with Luxons and Kurzicks in Cantha -- though that was just for Alliance Battles and the Ft. Aspenwood/Jade Quarry maps). However, if they did, open PvP would only be possible there. Even that would require them to revise the rules of engagement on PvE maps, and probably rethink zone metas, which are most of what provides needed replay value to open PvE.
The truth is that we as players are myopic. We tend to assume that most people will share our preferences, even though that might not be so. None of us can assume whether open PvP would add to the game's appeal or detract from it. The people who might be in a position to know a bit more about what would fly -- ANet -- opted to sequester PvP away from the PvE masses from launch. All options to duel which have been added since are also out of sight of PvE-only players. To me, those facts speak to ANet's intent.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana
@whoeverxwins.1279 said:
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
Please don't use "we PVE people" like you are in charge of them or you asked them all one by one. Every player is different and has different opinion. Your opinion is yours and cannot speak for the mass even if many of the players agree with you. I am a PvE player and I created the topic and gave the suggestion. And for me something like "it's going to hurt my eyes to see a fight" or "don't want to see my precious chat filled with hate" is not a valid point. My idea was simply to improve the gaming experiance for those who seek something more in the open world... no matter new or old player. My idea was simply for the sake of the game. I tried to put my idea on a measuring scale and figure out is this idea going to hurt more the game or help it more. I came to the conclusion that is going to improve it even by little and thats why I started the discussion. It's sad to see so much hate for the idea just because of someone being afraid of something new or something that is going to hurt your eyes. If it's fear you are having.... don't be...Anet won't add something that is going to ruin the game or hurt the community in any way so if they consider adding OW PvP in the future it's going to be added extra careful, tested etc. Just see the mounts... many ppl said mounts will ruin the game because of the WP system going useless, events will be passed by etc. Now we see mount actually help the events.
Anet has added and augmented areas for PvP encounters. Obsidian sanctum had rework. EOTM was added. PVP lobby has a battle area. Guild halls have arenas. There lots of spots. The real issue, I believe, is that the player who want PVP in PVE just can't find enough other pvp fighters and want a new source of them. Maybe Anet could add a LFG option for LOOKING FOR FIGHT and someone accepts and off they go to some flat, featureless instanced battle field where they duke it out until someone decides to leave.
If it's an option either way how does it effect u as I'd assume ud not use the option to enable it. Very petty to turn down a option for other when there's an option for it to have zero effect on ur gameplay. The chat thing is petty as well. By ur rediculouse e-kitten comment as a 38 yr old family man who happens to like pvp AND pve I say to u grow up
The point is that there already exists a game mode for PvP. It would be a waste of development time/resources to set up PvP in PvE including a toggle switch. PvP in PvE is simply redundant.
If it's an option either way how does it effect u as I'd assume ud not use the option to enable it. Very petty to turn down a option for other when there's an option for it to have zero effect on ur gameplay. The chat thing is petty as well. By ur rediculouse e-kitten comment as a 38 yr old family man who happens to like pvp AND pve I say to u grow up
The point is that there already exists a game mode for PvP. It would be a waste of development time/resources to set up PvP in PvE including a toggle switch. PvP in PvE is simply redundant.
I don't agree that it would be redundant as wvw isn't pve and is far from it but I do understand ur arguement about whether or not I'd be worth the resources to implement in which case it probably wouldn't.
Comments
You said a lot more than "I can understand why." You made a number of claims that aren't backed up with any evidence and created a theory based on them. I responded to those claims and your response is that other people are making things up.
For example, the OP has not said, "well ANet gutted the sort of PvP I like, so I think it's only fair to gut the sort of PvE that I don't like. Instead, and as stated in the actual Original Post, the request was made because the OP believes...
The OP also is not a PvPer
Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"
They weren't claims. They were my personal opinions for starters in regards to "why all the threads lately". As for the rest of your arguements Im not going to bother responding because then you'll argue that one and then next one.
do you see what I mean?
Its like you're looking for an arguement where there is none and being to the point about this, you're not usually one to do this sort of edgy stuff. I dont know if you were preheated from some one else before reading and responding but trust me man, youve read this situation wrong.
Usually you're good with your english and dont overlook the key words, I feel like you missed those key words this time.
If your goal is to explain why there are so many PvP-in-PvE threads, you could have just said, "because there are still people hoping to see more opportunities for PvP." Preferences don't need to be justified.
As I said, you wrote a lot more than, "I can understand why." You seem to confuse my challenging the claims you made in the "a lot more" with "looking for an argument."
If someone prefers the real world sky to be green, I see no problem with them asking for it, as often as they like.
If they suggest that we should dye the oceans to make the sky green, then I'm going to point out that the color of the sky comes from light scattered by particles in the air, that coloring the ocean wouldn't help (not to mention it's dangerous and expensive). And I might suggest that they look into contact lenses to change what they see, rather than try to get the rest of the world to have the same preference.
The OP, to their credit, primarily has stuck to their original suggestion on the basis that it would liven things up. The OP isn't trying to justify the idea because of hating the Warclaw or any theories regarding its introduction.
Hype is the path to the dark side. Hype leads to unfulfilled expectations. Disappointment leads to anger. Anger leads to disgust. Disgust leads to "oh, new shinies! I'm back!"
Try me.
Just as glad it is not a feature.
Silly creature, I wont let you die.
Already did.
And thats your opinion. I wont sit here and argue it like youre doing to me. If you felt like I should have said this or should have said that, they are your personal opinions just as mine was "I can understand"... you gave reasoning to your opinion just as I gave to mine but I wont argue every word or look for a loop to start an arguement to catch you out.
Oh and I love Warclaw by the way... using 5 people to herd a mounted player makes me feel like an old western cowboy herding cattle... just an example of why youre way off.
in many games i played this model of Pve with Pvp enabled the maps become empty.
main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).
seriously? you are arguing that gankers are good for the mode, while gankers are a very big reason why people avoid it altogether?
Maybe you should sit back and think about what you are writing for a moment? Gankers do not 'sustain' the mode. Gankers are killing it.
YES PLEASE
dup post delete
Forget it. There can be nothing good that comes from injecting PVP into an area of the game where it's not wanted, even if it's a fraction of the people. There are just some things that we already know and they are only more relevant as this game gets older and it's core group of players solidifies in the market.
Maybe at most, an area specifically designed for PVP, but then again, what's the point of having that area in PVE area? It's just not a value add.
If you think balancing is only driven by performance and justified by comparisons to other classes then prepare to be educated:
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/balance-updates-the-heralds-near-future-and-pvp-league-season-13/
Ganking refers to killing a player while outnumbering the player. It came from "gang killing." There are some instances in which the term is used to refer to killing players who are drastically under-powered (in level and gear). Ganking is very much a play-style.
Sure, "ganking" can and does occur in WvW/sPvP. It is something that every player who enters those modes can engage in. It is not something every player who enters those modes engages in by default.
I'm with you that players who complain about being killed in a PvP mode are out of line. I would rather they abstain from going to such a game mode and leave it to those who want to use the mode as it is intended. However, I prefer that we not try to make a term that means one thing mean something else.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana
I can understand that point of view... Having a zerg gank you at a sentry can be quite frustrating. I wouldn't label them as such but that's me.
yesterday was a prime example for me... I "Ganked" a fellow Reaper on route from Pang to OW... once he was down and I got the stomp, 2 Soulbeasts jumped out of the tower and "ganked" me with a double Rapid Fire.... it happens. I was ganked fair and square. it was the action or verb that took place that resulted in my respawn.... (then I went back to get revenge and was ganked again by a thief but eh, it happens, completely my fault for dismounting and trying a reaper vs DE battle.)
So I do understand that point of view as I was "ganked" repeatedly yesterday in situations that were both fair and extremely unfair. I'm actually quite often ganked near the Veloka sentry by masses of people or zergs gliding in from Red Keep.
No. No again. And the devs have even said it's too complex an issue to do. It would also wreck what's left of the player count. No.
Many alts! Handle it!
"A condescending answer might as well not be an answer at all."
-Eloc Freidon.5692
That is something PvPers will never understand. I have seen this debate since the early days of Ultima Online. Open world PvP nearly killed that game, it never fully recovered because Everquest came out and took UOs dissatisfied customers.
WvW already has PvP & PvM. No need to ruin the main maps, just to try and get players to magically decide they like PvP. It does not work that way.
This is just the same ages old cry "we need to force people to my preferred playstyle until they like it".
Ganking evolved from the term to 'gang up on'. Ie large group attacking small group. Later in games with out of control power curves it was sometimes used to represent high level players ganking low players.
This is only really a design issue where a zone is primarily designed with pve but with no option to opt out of pvp.
So ganking is not desirable, but its not the gankers fault, they are doing what is natural in a pvp enabled zone. Dedicated pvp zones that have pve can be a lot of fun, as can pve zones with opt out/in. A good game offers all types of zone.
"Any path that narrows future possibilities may become a lethal trap. Humans do not thread their way through a maze; they scan a vast horizon filled with unique opportunities." - The Spacing Guild Handbook.
Beware the meta!
This is the first time I see this issue being proposed with a philosophical layer to it: progress, history, moving forward the same way we've been doing since we left the caves...
I'll give you credit for adding something new to an old, repeated, uncreative, wishful, rebuked suggestion - but frankly, it's a video-game design by a company. It's both hilarious and clueless to throw philosophy in the mix.
As for the suggestion itself, it's already implemented. They call it Lineage 2, for example.
This is not that game.
Because the main obstacle is how hard it is to learn about the other game modes? It's 2 clicks away.
I disagree. There are plenty of gank/roam/havoc groups on every server willing to have some action all the time. Even on servers that can hardly get together a good blob even in prime time usually have roaming groups all the time.
Besides roaming/havoc are integral part of WvW. Flipping smaller objectives, preventing reinforcements, defending, scouting... all of these are important for WvW, it is part of strategy. It really sucks when there are not enough scouts or roaming groups that can handle these skirmishes and a blob has to go defend a keep even though a small group could handle it.
If WvW would be all blob play it would just get more boring. Blobs are fun from team coordination point of view, that is where the skill is in blob play. Personal, mechanical skill, not so much. For some quite boring.
I don't really understand "pvpers" that are afraid of pvp. If you have problems with a ganker that is cutting your reinforcements (which is a sound strategy just like tagging respawns) you should send a gank squad to take care of it.
REEEeeeee
MAKE THIS HAPPEN ANET. WVW IS DEAD AND MY GS HUNGERS FOR BLOOD OF PVE SCRUBS
Wait there are resources for WvW?!
Dont look a gift Asura in the mouth.
No seriously, dont. Shark teeth.
This is fine for WvW and is exactly why PvP does not belong in the open world play. GW is a coop game, and open world PvP would take away from the coop play. It would end up like WoW... everyone uninterested in PvP would toggle to ignore duel requests. So really a useless addon.
People trying to entice others into PvP just makes it sound like PvP cannot stand on its own. If it is popular - people will be there. If it is not popular - they will be elsewhere. Really quite simple.
it was very popular until recently... theres no real difference between WvW and PvE anymore which backtracks to my previous comment towards another user about the influx of these threads lately... I can understand why, They were meshed together and I can understand the want to have it seperated or completely meshed together properly across both game modes.
meanwhile you have albion online which have open world pvp full loot, if get killed, lose all yer loot to the person who killed you. while in gw2 players want safe space.
gw2 community never wants any surprise nor challenges, it's just sad.
For the most part, it's not the PvP players that are asking for Open PvP/Duelling options in PvE. In most games i have seen, it's usually the players that play both modes but are primarily PvE that seem to insist on it the loudest. And they are interested (more often than not) in fights that are unfair from the beginning, where the chances are heavily skewed in their favour. It can thrive only as long as majority of participants are prey - players that are unprepared for it and exist only so the predators can kill them. If that group is gone (for example, because they weren't interested in being preyed on and left for other game/pve server/toggled pvp option off), interest in the mode starts to plummet until only a small number of players are left in it.
Hint: even in games that are purely open world pvp, those that actually want to engage in it are usually in minority.
Blame Devs for that one. I'm prety sure that Warclaw was not something PvE players wanted (because, seriously, why any PvE player would want to have more content of any kind in a mode they weren't planning to visit in the first place?)
What is the game population for albion online? Around few hundred players logged in on average? Yes, i'm pretty sure it's way more popular than gw2...
The whole point of a social game is to play with the people you want to play with, not be forced to play with the people you don't.
According to steam charts Albion Online is now at 4585 average for the month of August. If you compare the numbers with other popular mmorpgs like FFXIV (30359) and ESO (23212) for August, it looks like full loot open world pvp isn't very popular indeed.
Albion Onlines total population is tiny.
No strike that, calling Albion Onlines population tiny would be an insult to any game with a tiny population.
Oh and the game is hemmoraging players like no tomorrow: https://steamcharts.com/app/761890
ever since its discount sale in April. Within the next 2 months it will be back to its original player size of close to 0.
roam/havoc groups are integral. But gankers waiting in front of spawn to 3:1 everyone coming out are not INTEGRAL. They are TOXIC. They are killing the mode.
If a player has to chose as a option to be interacted with other players combat wise I see this as only adding more dynamics and flavor to pve. If it's not for u than dont chose the option but would be great for other like me if we could chose to, I'd be a blast lol
I don't blame PvE players at all... we covered this earlier (or tried too anyway but some were too keen on farming likes)
Use the Waypoint or the other 2 exits?
mount up and literally run past them?
if 3 people have you backed up at spawn with all the available resources at your disposal, they are doing an incredible job at disrupting you guys.
if you mean 3:1 odds... then sounds like population issues and absolutely nothing at all to do with ganking.
population issues can kill a game mode, but that has nothing to do with the Verb or Action of killing someone.
The ones who like this idea keep insisting how 'fun' it would be but ignoring that we PVE people don't want PVP toxicity in map chat. Sure, we could toggle off PVP, but we can't toggle off trolls on important points. And our block lists would become huge. If I wanted PVP in PVE, I'd go back to Aion. (Another NCSoft game, go try it if you want this so much.)
The ones that dislike the idea keep somehow missing the "it as a option" part of the equation. If it's a option for players to opt in or out of pvp in pve areas than how does it effect pve players who chose to opt out of it?
Did you not even read my post? Where do I opt all the toxic PVP chat out of map chat? Block every single one? Oh wait, turn off map chat and miss meta stuff. Nope.
So other players shouldn't have their pve enjoyment raised by adding pvp components to it because u dont want to possibly see toxic words in chat? U serious? Lmao. What a trivial thing to stress about seriously. Ok than turn ur map chat off but if u really need to see what rando's are chatting about than I gues there could be a separate chat as well but seems kinda silly. I don't mean to sound rude in anyway.
Fortnite
But the majority of PVE people don't WANT PVP in PVE. You already have PVE/PVP in WVW. You can play there. If that's dead, complain about that, but don't try to mess up PVE for the rest of the player base. We stay out of PVP/WVW for a reason. And it's not a few toxic words. I was very glad when guild halls came along so I no longer needed to use the PVP lobby for AFKing/ sorting inventory. I don't need to see a bunch of teenagers waving their e-peens around.
Not an mmorpg. And doesn't have "open pvp" either.
this already exists, and is very rare seem someone using it,, it was just waste of resources. https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Costume_Brawl
main pvp: Khel the Undead(power reaper).
The game is built around events, events often require multiple players and maps have limited capacity. Having a few of these pvpers fighting in a corner, or even worse in the middle of an active event, taking important map slots can and will affect everyone else playing on the same map regardless if they have an option to enable the feature or not.
That is a solid argument that I cannot argue.
and now you just gave the no. 1 reason why warclaw was a much needed and valid addition to wvw.
lowered. Lowered a lot.
it is 'an option' that would even interfere with people who opt out. From newbies being trolled out of the game (reducing player population) to meta maps suffering because some people can not be a* to go to pvp arena or guild hall.
You want to fight? Go wvw, go pvp, go guild arena. There are your options. Have fun.
even if most people wanted world pvp it wouldnt work. core maps too small, no way to separate teams without returning to race wars other than dividing players up into mercs and factions. the game would just be flooded with the same top 3 meta builds (just like now lul). no one would really be able to DO anything because NPCs would either be constantly dead or camped. this game would actually be a s***show and the population would flatline
This is a good point. Any good MMO that has offered an open world PvP option has provided a lore-based reason why players are fighting each other. This usually means factions. If ANet were motivated to add open world PvP and avoid the inevitable comparisons to games like Rappelz that offer PvP with no real rhyme or reason to it, they'd want to recreate the lore. This would require a ton of work. Not only would they need to rework how players and NPC's can interact with each other, they'd have to rewrite the game's basic story. They could use existing factions (Inquest, Flame Legion, Sons of Svanir, etc.) but they's have to create an alliance between them, otherwise an Asura who opted to join the Inquest would not have a lore-based reason to attack players who opted for the normal Norn allegiance on Shiverpeaks maps.
They could add factions in a new area (like they did with Luxons and Kurzicks in Cantha -- though that was just for Alliance Battles and the Ft. Aspenwood/Jade Quarry maps). However, if they did, open PvP would only be possible there. Even that would require them to revise the rules of engagement on PvE maps, and probably rethink zone metas, which are most of what provides needed replay value to open PvE.
The truth is that we as players are myopic. We tend to assume that most people will share our preferences, even though that might not be so. None of us can assume whether open PvP would add to the game's appeal or detract from it. The people who might be in a position to know a bit more about what would fly -- ANet -- opted to sequester PvP away from the PvE masses from launch. All options to duel which have been added since are also out of sight of PvE-only players. To me, those facts speak to ANet's intent.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. -- Santayana
Please don't use "we PVE people" like you are in charge of them or you asked them all one by one. Every player is different and has different opinion. Your opinion is yours and cannot speak for the mass even if many of the players agree with you. I am a PvE player and I created the topic and gave the suggestion. And for me something like "it's going to hurt my eyes to see a fight" or "don't want to see my precious chat filled with hate" is not a valid point. My idea was simply to improve the gaming experiance for those who seek something more in the open world... no matter new or old player. My idea was simply for the sake of the game. I tried to put my idea on a measuring scale and figure out is this idea going to hurt more the game or help it more. I came to the conclusion that is going to improve it even by little and thats why I started the discussion. It's sad to see so much hate for the idea just because of someone being afraid of something new or something that is going to hurt your eyes. If it's fear you are having.... don't be...Anet won't add something that is going to ruin the game or hurt the community in any way so if they consider adding OW PvP in the future it's going to be added extra careful, tested etc. Just see the mounts... many ppl said mounts will ruin the game because of the WP system going useless, events will be passed by etc. Now we see mount actually help the events.
Anet has added and augmented areas for PvP encounters. Obsidian sanctum had rework. EOTM was added. PVP lobby has a battle area. Guild halls have arenas. There lots of spots. The real issue, I believe, is that the player who want PVP in PVE just can't find enough other pvp fighters and want a new source of them. Maybe Anet could add a LFG option for LOOKING FOR FIGHT and someone accepts and off they go to some flat, featureless instanced battle field where they duke it out until someone decides to leave.
The point is that there already exists a game mode for PvP. It would be a waste of development time/resources to set up PvP in PvE including a toggle switch. PvP in PvE is simply redundant.
I am a very casual player.
Very.
Casual.
I don't agree that it would be redundant as wvw isn't pve and is far from it but I do understand ur arguement about whether or not I'd be worth the resources to implement in which case it probably wouldn't.