Full loot forced pvp would kill the remaining playerbase. Far more pve only players that would quit than pvpers willing to come back.
1 Like
It is a viable system that can work. Other games have proven this. The issue is if it is implemented correctly.
UO Outlands has a consistent playerbase higher than the max of any one server in New World and has been consistently running since 2018. They also run entirely off of cosmetic sales and donations. This means you have over 2k players consistently, and it’s open world PVP even allowing you to PVP in town (with consequences…). It can be successful, and it doesn’t necessarily mean everyone is forced to PVP all day and that’s it. It just means there’s a lot more risk in each activity.
The way I see it, open world pvp means more gear expires and/or moves in and out of the economy, and it helps crafters because people will constantly need to re-gear. Crafting in New World is not perpetual because once your BIS all you need is the consumables. I’m not saying this game should be UO, just that more of a “risk/reward” system should be in place and the risks should be more detrimental to help other professions be worthwhile.
Also, with the server limits in place, we already see that there is a very limited number of people because server capacity is so small. We just saw a huge spike in players (relative to server size) and now there are more posts about increasing server limits.
that’s not true you don’t need full server to have a full game experience, you can do every dungeon wars and everything else in game and actually have a lot better chance to experience the game on smaller servers. Larger server you have to do 9 interviews and sit at top of war boards to even get in war. So actual reality people get more on small to med pop, over high pop servers that usual sweats control…
1 Like
Mmo should not have small servers. That’s not a mmo. A little q during peak hours is fine and not a reason to make another server.
@Shadow_Fox I’m sorry, but I feel like you pulled a fast one on us.
When you asked this question you did not give us the caveats.
You did not tell us that waiting in a queue would also mean that we would have to revisit the desync era and deal with slow motion abilities.
I want to change my answer to the former. Emptier servers are obviously better if a full server cannot even handle its own capacity.
Please ask the devs to make more servers and just add cross server matchmaking for OPR, Arenas and Expeditions when they can. GG.
2 Likes
I would personally prefer an emptier server.
i prefer no bug.
plz we need some dead servers this que every day is very annoying and the amount of people is too much make my game lag so much i haven’t been able to do an expedition since merge to laggy on berri
I would prefer full server (full town) without queue.
Just separate PVP and PVE already. It’s obvious that the need for both groups are different. Some want more nodes, more free gathering while the others want to battle all the time. Super Company - Territory Earning stuff is still awful in this game and creating a hugely unfair wealth gap and you still havent done anything about it… And if you think merging servers is the way to go, let me give you a spoiler: you will end up with 1 server with 2-3k players at most, which will be hardcore pvp players only. All the remaining casual players and pvers will have already gone to other games by then… You keep losing casuals/semi-casuals => servers get emptier => you merge the servers => more gatherers and people who dont have time to wait awful queues quit the game => You keep losing casuals/semi-casuals => servers get emptier… you see the pattern here?
1 Like
If there is a queue, I am going to play another game tbh. I am not going to sit twiddling my thumbs. I have played since launch and the launch queues were horrendous. With the amount of people that have left the game I don’t understand why its either queue, or empty barren wasteland. Though I think people would definitely prefer to have the option of empty vs full server than being forced into queues.
3 Likes
I don’t like queues but I prefer a crowded city.
I would love to have a transfer for each merge regardless of if you merge to or get merged into. They cause too much disruption.
I agree with everything past your first two sentences. I think there isn’t enough territories for the amount of end-game level characters. Yes, characters. Alts, shell companies…they just exploit what AGS is turning a blind eye, and slowly losing the base to. I think along with significantly increased cooldowns on server and company transfers, along with more nodes, and toss in more PvP modes to quench the PvP thirst of the playerbase AGS is so bent on catering to, the game could slow the bleed of players. OPR and 3v3s are nice, but I think the game could benefit from a CTF/TDM (and DM?) and some extra maps…and slow down on the merges!
1 Like
Server queues mean I don’t play the game that night. I have limited play time and won’t waste it on bad design choices.
2 Likes
I think a mid pop works best. Somewhere between 1000-1500 peak where OPR is still running throughout most of the day and wars are decently competitive. Much higher or lower and the content people want to play becomes inacessible (not enough for OPR or wars becoming too exclusive since under the current system only 150ish players per server get to participate regularly).
For the question, I prefer a queue. But for me I prefer the best of both worlds, a full server with low or no queue.
Actually Im on Devaloka, it has 800 player queue on the day peak, its almost a half server in the queue sadly. I know that in the moment it will be problematic to create a new server but IMO needs to increase the player limit for 250 or maybe 500 player if possible.
if they can fix the things i mentioned without separating PVP and PVE, i would be okay with that. It’s just that i dont get the feeling that they can fix those problems, and they dont seem to be bothered with it, so separating PVE and PVE seemed like a more realistic solution with what i see, thats all 