Actually no, you can play NW and never touch the PvP of the game and get everything from it, equipment, thresholds, gold, etc, that unfortunately does not happen if you play only PvP. The problem is not that people who like PvP don’t want to do PvE content from time to time, the problem is that NW forces you to be constantly doing PvE content to be able to keep up with other players due to the lack of rewards from the game in the PvP system that are rubbish.
2 Likes
Actually, you are right. It works the other way around.
And yes, I absolutely agree. There is little incentive to be playing PvP, especially when AGS struggles to add more than ONE damn map for OPR or Arena ever since its release.
I’m not doing much PvP anymore, although it is a shame to see people begging for OPR on my current FSS - and seeing AGS bringing further divide between PvPers and PvErs, thanks to their balance changes and glorifying one over another.
This weekend is the open beta of diablo 4, the first big test that the current NW will have if it continues at this pace. At the moment there are only 11k players connected, lowering the 5 digits and everything will be more complicated.
PS: rather than make a PvE/PvP forum, make a PvE server (the current ones) and another PvP server (always active) and we would all be happy.
1 Like
False
PvP servers will end up following FSS server pattern. Why? Without adding rulesets for a PvP server and using present build you will have grievers guaranteed. After you get a few toxic parties/companies established, when the newness wears off, it will create a server genocide.
Allow a toxic person to be toxic, they will be toxic.
Proof? Alpha 1
3 Likes
Freedom, means that those who do not want an always active PvP server simply do not enter and can continue playing on their current server, but with this, AGS can finally do something coherent and can take the necessary measures on the content to be developed in the future. Today in NW there are only PvE players playing, all of us who are interested in PvP have already left and we only have 12k active players.
1 Like
It will be a waste of resources.
You did not deny that the pvp server will self destruct. Why waste resources on a guaranteed waste? All the previous data proves it. You even have AG saying NO. And why.
Also, 14K active presently. Non-prime time.
If we went by your 12K CC, that averages out to be 144K daily total.
The final thing… The game is shifting to a 70% PvE and 30% PvP. The NWDB shows that prominent surges occur with PvE updates more than PvP. This info and the roadmap shows this split to be true.
I would not be surprised if they redid how territory ownership is contested.
Boy, I know it’s hard for you and it’s always been hard for you, but continuing with the denial over and over again is tiring.
You can continue using the alpha 1 excuse that was about 3 years ago, when the game was totally different from what it is today, I wish we had that game right now except for some small fixes.
What you think it was the success of the FSS and what do you think was its failure at the same time. The new content was not, because that same content already existed on the legacy servers, what ended up killing the FSS was again the amount of massive bots/hackers in the game without us being able to do anything about it, because AGS washes its hands with this issue, the lack of PvP in the open world (main attraction of the game), this was only seen when everyone was leveling up, but when everyone was already level 60 it ceased to exist for various reasons and one of those reasons is that you are forced to deactivate the PvP to occupy the group finder and how important the equipment and the GS end up being in this game like in no other game, in addition to the lack of rewards in participating in the PvP activities of the game.
1 Like
So you ignored this …
To say this?
Make up your mind. Present build or not?
And this is the other reason why. PvP servers would need core rule sets changed. Which will create a huge sink in resources cause they have to build a new foundation for something that is riskier than FSS.
Not a wise financial decision.
What is not smart financially speaking is to have servers with less than 10% active people of their total capacity and there are already several and every day that this remains the same, there will be more.
So you agree. PvP servers will be a mistake cause they are a worse idea than FSS.
Glad we cleared that up.
FSS saved this game for a period of time, without the FSS they would not have a game several months ago.
FSS are still a failure. And it doesn’t change the fact that PvP servers are a higher risk of failure than FSS. Especially since the ruleset changes that have to be done to a PvP server at the foundation of the coding.
You want them to spend additional money for a very high risk situation. And all the data proves this.
1 Like
What data? Please send the source where these data come from. It’s good that I’m talking to a data analyst here, tell me how you came to that conclusion and what methodology did you use for that.
I wait your answer.
-
NWDB - the surges shows what players come back for and how long they stay. It favors PvE more.
-
The Devs explained many times why and that it will cost to create an “alternate” core ruleset client.
-
You have NW’s article on how Alpha 1 failed due to the toxic players.
-
You have Steam to look at other games within the MMORPG genre. And even more specific, PvP based MMORPGs. That data show failure to retain sustainable numbers. As per the outcriers of CC base failure.
All this data is public knowledge. You choosing to ignore it is not our problem.
They were too dumb to have pvp only servers or zones in game. They are certainly not splitting the forums
2 Likes
I bought new world because of the trailer showing a glimpse of war. I assumed it was a pvp focused mmo. It looked like a mixture of chivalry with RPG elements. Looked fantastic. First week was an absolute blast. Then extreme server/client issues made pvp play terribly. This realization correlated with the mass exodus of players. Then tons of changes which made pvp worse, hundreds of balancing updates that made things worse for someone each time. I had buddies quit because of LS nerf, FS nerf, IG nerf, so on and so forth.
1 Like
Spot on assessment!
Yup. This is almost word for word what my friends said.
What they should have done was split PVE gameplay from PVP gameplay, allowing for different perks and abilities so that every time they nerf a weapon for PVP it doesn’t affect PVE and visa/versa. Most MMOs do this so they can maintain some type of balance. Not too bright AGS…
6 Likes
Yes, please. AGS, thanks in advance for making this happen.
Game was original suppose to be a PvP game. Pve and PvP don’t work together in this game, 2 different worlds. I’ve done both and I can honestly say the pve isn’t good in this game. The potential is the PvP… we tried the pve route and clearly that’s working out… has such a great combat system to be wasted on pve.