its so unfair that i dont get legendary fishes from killing pvp players! i hate fishing… but i need the fish for the buff food. why am i as a pvp player left out from getting fish without fishing? this game is so horrible! i pvp all day and i dont get fish! whos idea was it that you can only get fish from fishing? its a complete dissapointment. pvp will leave if you dont change it! getting fish from killing pvp players is a MUST HAVE! horrible game. they really want to force pvp players into pve! all the npcs and animals attack me when i do my pvp stuff! WHY? im only here for the pvp why is this game so bad!
What I think will happen? Some predictions I would put a bet on it?
-
unbalanced factions/company servers will only have the strongest company/faction run flagged in Endgame content aka Elite zones as everyone else will get zerged so they do not even bother
-
some pve guys will sneak to the nodes and mine them while the others are pvping hence pvpers will demand that pve guys cannot mine or something like that.
-
people will flag for pvp just to farm and run from anyone trying to kill them, hence pvp people then will start complaining that people flag but run away from fights
-
people will flag on dead server times to gather in peace but not flag in prime time (depends a bit on the population of the server)
-
pvp hyped people will group and zerg certain points on the map constantly
-
everyone below lvl 60 will not flag at all because of constant zergs/flagged people on low tier nodes (due to the change in the crafting leveling people will either give up on it or even farm more low tier stuff to be able to craft through their stockpile of high tier stuff).
In the end nothing changes. Just the complaints will be sounded a bit differently than they were until now.
so I setup my pve/pvp bingo on that change… lets see how it turns out 
3 Likes
but they are giving the bonus to everyone - everyone that chooses to flag. your rejection of the offer of the bonus is on you - not on the devs.
I disagree. It was added because there are some players taking more risk and this reaping a reward. Nobody has stopped you from flagging except yourself.
If you want the luck, flag. If you don’t care, don’t. Similarly, if you don’t want to PvP, don’t. Just don’t expect the same bonuses for taking no risk. The risk is that you have the threat of being stopped from mining your route and walking back, and taking minor durability damage. The reward is some luck.
What exactly is your problem with this?
Is it the fact that you are afraid of PvP-ing, so you will never benefit from the bonuses associated? Or is it the fact that you think nobody should have the right to risk more for slightly higher potential reward? You need to elaborate further on your stance.
Once again.
You are reducing the argument to one pvp player vs one pve player.
At this point it is deliberately disingenuous.
Look at the arguments for the entire system not just your one example.
There has always been a huge advantage to PVP players for this game. I really do not care if they have the luck and gathering luck bonus to be honest. I will gather the nodes and laugh at them if they are trying to run along side me and that bonus does not mean beans if they do that, seeing as I am invulnerable to PVP attacks and they will be attacked by other PVP players out gathering, meanwhile, the PVE player will just skip along gathering more goodies!
1 Like
Answer me this question. If you did not go out and gather materials to harvest and level your crafting, would you expect to be able to craft the best gear and weapons, or would you understand you do not have the prerequisite to craft said items?
Similarly, if a prereq to get a buff to your gathering is that you must take on additional risk, and you did not take on additional risk, would you expect to get that buff?
You are arguing because you think it’s unfair that someone is trying harder than you and being rewarded for it. That’s not an argument. Fairly certain in the political world, that’s called socialism. Before you say “flagging is not hard”, why don’t you try staying flagged and doing your same daily tasks for a few days and let me know how it goes for you and if you still feel the same way.
It’s tough to have a valid opinion on a topic you have zero experience with.
I really dont get the PvE whines. PvPer’s get a 30% luck bonus but will be consistently forced to fight, killed, and have to respawn. This will cut the amount of gathering per minute way down vs a PvE’r who will gather uninhibited. Ultimately it is likely a wash and quite frankly a non issue.
1 PvP player vs 1 PvE player is literally the entire argument. The argument is that it’s not fair for PvE only players to not get the same buff in PvE content as someone who is simultaneously engaged in PvP content.
Even if we dumb this down, let’s say PvE = 1 “efforts” mathematically, and PvP = 1 “efforts”
If you are doing 1, while I am doing a total of 2, why would you expect to have the same outcome? Granted, that’s very dumbed down, but clearly the devs weighted it somehow to come up with 30% additional. There is likely rationale behind it you and I will never know, but the principle of you doing less, so you getting less is the same.
So in my previous arguments, I have explained that I am not against a concept of players getting boosted for being pvp flagged.
In a perfectly balanced world, what you are saying is correct, although the numbers are a bit inflated for my particular tastes, I can live with that.
My argument is with this specific iteration of it.
This is not a situation of one person flags and gets bonus for risk vs the person that doesn’t
This situation is one of server balance. It reads as this:
Dominant faction A gets to freely flag with no risk and gains extra bonuses for doing so. accelerating their gearing and power away from the weaker factions.
-that- is my problem with the system that has been brought in.
And everyone trying to tell me that my argument is about reward for effort is just playing with a straw man.
I am happy enough for people to address my actual argument, but you, have not done so.
I think the issue with your argument is you’ve gone nuclear with it, and have also not accounted for the fact that dominant faction A or B, even with full gear score 600 gear and insane luck, is not winning because of gear alone. There are already a multitude of threads about how GS doesn’t even matter for armor or resistance. The only thing you get from it is a few more stat points. If you’re losing in pvp, when you are at 580 gear score (which is easily purchased for literally every item on the market), to someone that is 600, and you’re not BARELY losing, as in they’re extremely close tod ying too, then their gear bonus is not what’s causing them to beat you. They are simply better with the game mechanics.
My argument is that you are saying that the 30% luck is some massive bonus, when in reality, it’s not that insane. Especially given that gear doesn’t hold as much value as people thought in PvP.
If one faction is dominating a server, it’s not just because their gear is a few levels higher than yours. You not taking accountability for your own game knowledge will cause you to lose far more fights than 20-30 gear score.
Edit: what I mean by going nuclear is you’re claiming one faction will dominate inherently every server, with zero hope for competition. This is only the case I’d you’re on a completely dead server where one faction is heavily favored population wise. Thankfully, there are mechanics to help that, but with server transfers, it’s an issue as of now.
If they got rid of server transfers, I don’t think you’d see this as as big of an issue as you currently do. It’s more because of the ability to just leave a server I’d you lose a fight that is causing the wide scale imbalances in faction control. Why stay and try if you can transfer and just be on the winning side? See what I’m getting at?
The tradepost is not a singleplayer experience, you are competing with others for the stuff you sell. And since you are now producing 40% less worth of ressources competing with pvp players that does not get this penalty maybe you can see how you are at an advantage selling your stuff on the tp.
On the bright side bots also wont benefit, but unfornately the same is still also true for non pvp’ers. It really does kinda suck. This pvp bonus should perhaps have been reserved for specific special pvp zones and not a blanket bonus for the entire world.
If that’s what you think your very ignorant on the subject and PvE players in general.
I am not claiming that they will dominate every server, I am saying that it is a flaw in the system.
I am on Lerna, this is not a dead server, however the pvp is completely dominated by one faction - Marauders, and more than that, by one set of companies, that are all under the banner of a toxic streamer. Their entire aim being griefing other players and intentionally trying to kill the server.
This is not the only server that the situation is true on, there are a multitude of threads about faction imbalance and one faction dominating an entire server. This is not an isolated complaint.
Claiming that I am not taking accountability for my game knowledge, is not addressing the argument, it is attacking the person behind it, so I am not going to respond beyond pointing out the logical flaw.
Stating that server transfers are exacerbating the issue is correct, it means that people feel free to leave or join servers and that can further upset balance problems. However asserting that without transfers it would not be an issue is not something I agree with.
Regardless of that, server transfers are not going away, and another round of them will be coming towards the end of the year.
Factions don’t dominate a server by gear you are correct, they do it mostly in numbers, which supports my argument that it is a free bonus for the dominant faction, as they will be free to engage in the activity without any risk.
And this is the crux of my disagreement with your argument, you are asserting that by pvp flagging you are taking more risk and therefore should get more reward, but if you belong to the dominant faction on a server, you are not taking any more risk.
If your server is not low pop, you will probably gather way more than PvPer and you won’t have to pay 100g to repairs your armors each death.
I disagree that it is a flaw. the game is set up to be competitive. If you are not competitive, of course one team will flatout dominate. I believe the intention was that people would fight instead of quit and transfer servers. Before you say it, I know that is a lot of faith that the devs put into the playerbase to be competitive and not just quit and go elsewhere that they should not have.
Actually, it is part of the argument. What could you be doing right now other than debating what is ‘fair’ in a forum? You could be online, grinding quests to throw places into conflict. Could be trying to recruit, could be trying to set up a team for a war to take a zone. There are a multitude of things you could do to help your situation. So yes, your accountability is hurting you. It is not an insult. Take it as motivation to improve, instead of motivation to complain.
If you don’t want your server dominated by (1), either A. find a server that’s more balanced, B. Quit the game, or C. Find a way to improve your server and give yourself a better purpose to fight on and try to take territories. That’s the entire point of the game.
Sounds like we agree here.
You don’t have to have more people to win a war and take a territory. Thankfully, wars are limited to 50. Just by starting to take territories in general and putting up a fight you will attract more attention to your faction and company. If you never put up a fight because you’ve quit, then you will lose all credibility in the server. Think of it like this: Would you want to be on the underdog team, if the underdog didn’t actually show up to the game to at least try hoping for that one lucky homerun?
Regardless of the faction you are a part of, you are taking a risk by flagging, even if you are the ‘dominant’ faction currently. If you are fighting alone, there are mechanics setup to allow you to wait for lone wolves to engage and kill. There are mechanics set up for you to group up and go defend an area and drive mat farmers out. There’s ways for you to fight, and since we agree that the gear doesn’t really matter, it’s more numbers, it sounds like you just need to find a group of active individuals to go raise hell with. The only reason you think it’s not fair, is because you aren’t taking advantage of certain things. Even if there are 80% marauder on a server, all of those 80% are not in every area at one time. I’m willing to bet you could grab 5-6 people, and easily go stir up trouble and take further advantage of the 30% luck somewhere. If people are NOT out farming mats, and are out farming, throw their territory into conflict, and then go farm mats while they get ready to defend.
It doesn’t seem like your argument is about PvP. It sounds like your argument is more based on your server and others like it that are imbalanced in terms of players.
What would your solution be to the imbalance, if you had complete creative control? Would you force players to choose a certain faction? Would you randomize it? Would you reset all factions with percentage limits for each per server?
I had thought of a solution earlier to limit the bonus that you got from flagging. Hear me out:
What if there was a certain zone they create that is 100% full-loot pvp once you enter (aside from, let’s say, 3 items (Maybe they set this as your chest piece, legs, and weapon, or any other combination; maybe they let you choose?). In this zone, there are much higher density of resources, but there are no mobs. So maybe there’s more starlight, more orichalcum, whatever it may be. In order to enter, and get your 30% harvesting luck, you have to be OK with that risk of losing EVERYTHING you’ve farmed if you get ganked. When you are in areas OUTSIDE of this zone, while flagged, maybe that luck turns to 10%, instead and it’s not full loot. So then the luck bonus scales based on the amount of risk you take. You could even add in very high level monsters that are seen no where else in the world that hit you harder the longer you’re in the zone, so you’re limited to how long you can stay there before you have to run out and reset the debuff (Thus limiting your ability to endlessly abuse the bonus just because you’re faction is dominating currently).
Would a system like that be more acceptable in your eyes? This would isolate the luck bonus, restrict it’s use a bit, but still give you a tiny leg up if you choose to take that risk. In that case though, the risk would be stronger mobs that can eventually just kill you instantly if you don’t leave in time, so the risk is far higher than just encountering an unfriendly group of people. Thoughts?
very manipulative and controlling. Not at all the atmosphere I like.
There’s a lot to unpack here, but I will attempt address the points that you have raised, forgive me if I miss some nuances.
You disagree that it is a flaw, and when it comes down to it, this may just end in a position of opinion, so I will state why I think it is so and go from there.
Having a system to encourage PvP in the game should take into account all of the factors that restrict people from flagging, not just tack an arbitrary bonus onto being flagged. The potential issues with having one set of people get the benefit and nobody else is a serious problem with the design, whether that happens to be all the time, or even a rotating situation on more even servers where at specific times of the day one faction has the advantage.
What it encourages is not specifically flagging to engage in PvP. It encourages flagging to go and farm when you have the advantage on your server. That is why I believe this is a flawed iteration.
Asking what I could be doing right now to address the issue?
I am not simply doing nothing and sitting unflagged, I run a company, we do daily activities of elite farming in order to progress our gear, we have several times a week where we all flag and run missions to attempt to put zones into conflict, we have created discord servers to converse with other members of our faction to coordinate this sort of activity in an attempt to address the problems we have on our server.
All of which is failing.
We are up against a streamer company that is determined, by their own words, to kill the server. They have used every exploit they can get their hands on, they openly and gleefully grief people at every opportunity. If you have suggestions for how they can be dealt with. Move to Lerna, and deal with them.
Just because I am against this system, does not mean I am doing nothing about the problems our server is facing, and stating that I lack accountability is completely incorrect, hence me brushing off the comment before, I should not have to justify my activities in game for the argument I bring to be valid or invalid. Attack the argument as it stands please.
Regarding wars and territory pushing.
Pushing territories against a company that will muster a force greater than yours to defend at every single time of the day, makes it incredibly difficult, we are trying ways around this, and as they gain more territory it will be harder for them to defend all of it, but they already own EF and WW and therefore have had access to far above 50% of the server income to just themselves. I’m not going to go too much into this because it has been covered before, but put simply, they have the numbers that even when five of our companies teamed up to push WW, they were able to push us back, based on respawn camps near the intel points, and the fact that they don’t have to run the missions.
You can’t win a war, if you don’t get to fight a war.
I personally don’t particularly like the idea of a PvP only zone, unless that PvP only zone rewards things that are only usable in PvP. its not an elegant solution, and the discussion surrounding a pvp zone has been played out on the forums before so I don’t really feel we are going to add any value to that commentary here. However, at the end of the day I find that idea less problematic than the one they have implemented.
What would I do?
I would have the bonus not apply if you are a member of the dominant faction. That way it would encourage the people that are not already in the lead to flag, and therefore bring more people from the other factions into the PvP scene
As for addressing server balance in it’s entirety? that one I do not have a solution for. It is a serious issue that is going to require widespread changes, and I do not know how to achieve that
Edit:
One other thing I would do. Put real rewards behind killing players, have the luck bonus apply to that and that alone, then make it whoever is not the dominant faction gets the luck. So it actively encourages people to engage in PvP. make fighting other players a viable and strong gearing strategy, and boost the factions that are underrepresented, and finally, deposit that gear directly to your inventory, so you don’t die and leave it on the ground
1 Like
I didn’t understand how dire that situation was. Truly sorry to push that button. That blows. As it currently stands, I do not know what the solution would be for over-populated servers being able to endlessly prevent war, only based on numbers, but perhaps the solution is something along the lines of the more territories a faction owns, the less each person doing quests actually contributes to stopping war and the less your faction owns, the more impact it has when you finish a quest? Some sort of balancing act like that?
I like this idea, but I don’t think completely negating it would sit well with the community. After-all if you’re winning, there should be some sort of reward, no? What if the luck bonuses scaled based on the percentage of territories you owned? So if you own 100% of territories, you get 0%, if you own 50% you get 15%, etc.? This would actually promote some balance in large factions not wanting to own everything because it ends up biting them in the butt.
I do like that idea that killing a player would have an actual reward. What if instead of the reward was from killing the player, they introduced “PvP gear” that gave increased bonuses the more people you killed while wielding it, and the only way to get it was to flag (Instanced PvP did not count, but the bonuses could be used in Instanced PvP). This would incentivize world PvP to help be stronger during Instanced PvP. You could also take out the luck entirely from the incentive, and leave PvE alone entirely.
Thoughts?
PvP gear has a bunch of issues with it as well, because they have to be balanced against pve gear, this has been a consistent issue in wow since its inception.
as for based on territory? that is one way of doing it but i am not sure if it is the most accurate way. they already have influence bonuses if you do not own any territories