AGS planned the pvp quests with the hope that the players, in small groups, would pvp during the pvp quests.
Unfortunately that’s not what happens. What happens is:
The guilds do not defend, because they want the enemies to make influence to be able to make a war, since the war is a fun content. So the attacking guild finds itself doing quests for hours, in a totally boring way, without finding any enemies. So the pvp quests become a very boring farming content without any rewarding (no money, no progress, no loot).
The defending guild decides to defend the dispute en masse, and then creates a beautiful open world pvp with fight 50+ vs 50+, unfortunately it doesn’t last long because the lag is so high when there are more than 50 people on the map , which becomes unplayable and really not fun at all. So in the end, one of the two contenders or both, decide to give up due to too much lag, and you end up doing the pvp quests as per point 1.
It would be much nicer if there was a different system to make a dispute, which is more incentivized to pvp. (if AGS can’t fix the performance for large-scale pvp, it can maybe put some limitations).
I don’t want to suggest any kind of solution, but I just want to bring to AGS’s attention that the current system of influencing is terribly boring. So I hope AGS will find a better way to make the contestation phase fun or much less long and boring.
I completely agree, yesterday I spent more than an hour back and forth for the pvp quests very useless and boring time…please think about a different way to accomplish this job…
Thats why I dont care about taking city I took part in ‚influence content’ twice and decided I will never do it again xd Anyway why should I take Everfall if I am not a company leader ? To make my company leader happy with gold selling which he will obtain from taxes ? Nosorry I will not take part in this.
This post nails the point.
The current system to contest territory is as far as humanly conceivable from PvP as it could be.
There are no incentives to gather up and fight, attacking guilds are slaughtered by boredom more than from enemies which, for the reasons stated above, are uninterested in defending since this is the only way to be able to join in wars which are, undoubtedly, one of the funniest content of the game.
We did express this before we do so yet again today:
AGS please review the way territorial control works and make it meaningful for the players.
I agree, I think it’s also wrong that a company with 10% influence has the same chance of declaring war as a company with 90%.
The quests then make even less sense than when you had to “kill turkeys and lynxes”, now I am forced to conquer the fort or kill enemies (that I will never find), forcing me to deliver 1-2 quests instead of 3.
This is absolutely another painful point and another of the big issues afflicting PvP in ita territoriale control form.
It would be incredibly nice to hear from @Luxendra and AGS if they have any insight to share about their plans to review this part or if they think it is fine as it is and no change is coming in the next future.
Truth be told Devs seemed to be kinda receptive so far especially on the endgame issues and communication was there to let the players know they were working on it, but on the PvP side this kind of comms are missing.
Up until now at least
We need more mods that provides more fun. Some kind of escord mission maybe? Game that would take let say 30+ min with small amount of tokens in case of failure and big one in case of sucess where u have to escort some kind of npc from point to point where multiple paths are always in play so other side has to scout first and then plan proper ambush?
This would add variety but not substance.
The entire point of my comment being that as of now people is encouraged not to PvP or defend a territory in order to be able to do PvP in wars.
Which is counter-intuitive imho.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.