Curse

Pandora's box · Mar 19, 2006, 01:49 PM // 13:49

Reading the many posts about Factions, one thing is clear: Many players have problems with the idea that they won't have access to high level maps if their alliance does not win in PvP (alike) matches/missions. My suggestion:

Consider a number of high level maps war area. Fill them with lots of traps, spell casting towers, etc. These have an allignment: The allignment of a Faction (or alliance, this should be worked out later). This is calculated by the number of wins and losses in the PvP Faction games. After a certain period of time (6, 12, 24 hours?) allignments are recalculated.
So if you pass a map of your own allignment you find the traps dissabled and the spellcasting towers may help you when attacking monsters in the neighbourhood. If you pass a map with the allignment of an opposing Faction everything will work against you, and the map becomes very hard. Neutral players will find the 'normal' map, no traps, and towers that don't do anything.

I'd call it 'dynamic mapping'. Such a system can be used in many occasions, e.g. with special events or to reduce running. Keyfactor is that everyone has access all of the time, but the level of difficulty (or rewards, whatever) are differend depending on the actual stage of the game.

Almighty Zi · Mar 19, 2006, 02:05 PM // 14:05

From what I understand, control of a particular area is determined by both PvP and PvE play. I am sure there will be co-op missions for PvE folk that will influence the overall battle between the 2 warring factions. In fact, Gaile Gray(I think it was her) mentioned that the strongest guilds/alliances will have a combination of both successful PvP and PvE players.

WasAGuest · Mar 19, 2006, 02:13 PM // 14:13

Or allow neutrality (did I spell that right? can't spell anything this early in the morning). Neutral characters have access to ALL content whether it's under faction Xs' or Ys' control.
This would allow players not wanting to partake in the new system to play the game as they want.
Before I get jumped by someone saying "But then no one would choose a faction and stay neutral so they can get access to everything"; consider that very statement. If no one or few people choose a faction, that means the player base doesn't want to be forced into choosing a side, they want access to the content.
This would also show Anet how many players want to play in the new system. Too many neutrals would show Anet that there is a lack of interest in the new system; too few neutrals would show Anet that there is more interest in the new system.

Xenrath · Mar 19, 2006, 02:46 PM // 14:46

To reiterate from the Riverside thread about the future of PvE, I think Anet should reconsider the notion of penalising the "losing" side. Let's face it, PvE is popular with the PvE crowd because it's CO-OP, not because people compete directly with each other (which is what the PvP mode is for)

With that in mind, controlling an area - gives bonuses to the area/faction. Not controlling an area - you can still play, but you don't get the bonuses.

That way nobody will find parts of the game that they paid for locked out. What I'd hate to see is if basically there's a huge imbalance between the factions and one side is always winning. Or worse, if people can change sides they keep hopping over to the winning side (and thus making the problem worse)

Eclair · Mar 19, 2006, 05:27 PM // 17:27

Just make it so that you have to pay whoever owns the area to access the mission, kind of like how you have to pay 500/1000 gold for Underworld/Fissure of Woe, except this time, you pay it to whoever owns the area.

Guardian of the Light · Mar 19, 2006, 05:32 PM // 17:32

Also remember the battles will control different areas so one faction might be controling the temple of something and the other faction might be controling the temple of something else.

I really really like how the PvE worlds and the PvP worlds are uniting. They must work together or else neither will get what they want.

shadowfell · Mar 19, 2006, 07:11 PM // 19:11

Based on the article mentioned in another thread, non allied/guilded people will have basic access to all areas, but still not the "elite" areas.... so still a high level of exclusion.

neoteo · Mar 19, 2006, 07:32 PM // 19:32

i think that main reason for veterans stop playing is the lack of high level stuff to do , with that inteligent dificulty system i think it will make the game last much longer , merged with pvp , endless.

if chosing a side means access to high level dificulty game play , im chosing a side.

Fantus · Mar 19, 2006, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoteo

i think that main reason for veterans stop playing is the lack of high level stuff to do , with that inteligent dificulty system i think it will make the game last much longer , merged with pvp , endless.

if chosing a side means access to high level dificulty game play , im chosing a side.

Chosing a side won't suffice, you'd need to be in an alliance that's strong enough to capture towns. If you are not, you might see a lot less high level stuff than you might think.

Rogier · Mar 19, 2006, 08:49 PM // 20:49

i like the idea on the one hand, but on the other, that would suck a bit, just like ToA and the UW but then almost the whole map, it would be cool, but only if it's balanced, if like the whole top 200 guild dicided, like: ok guys lets take that god and we'll win all the time!

Fantus · Mar 19, 2006, 09:00 PM // 21:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rogier

i like the idea on the one hand, but on the other, that would suck a bit, just like ToA and the UW but then almost the whole map, it would be cool, but only if it's balanced, if like the whole top 200 guild dicided, like: ok guys lets take that god and we'll win all the time!

20 towns, each to hold for an alliance of 10 guilds with 100 members each = 20,000 people (at max) who can and probably will hold those towns all the time. The 1,980,000 other players can go play Random Arena then...

And OF COURSE, good guilds will band up and lock the others out - that's the most logical thing for them to do. Average players can't win HoH, average players won't hold Towns in factions, too. Only this time it will lock them out from a very large portion of the content.

Awesome Nuke · Mar 19, 2006, 09:36 PM // 21:36

Hmm, some people got infos wrong. Towns wont be locked from people not controlling them. Its just that people controlling them will have access to elite missions within the towns. You can still access the town all the times, controlling it or not. IMO, each town will have a leader that you can talk to to gain entrance to a new area if you control the town. Then maybe there will be one or two exculsive NPCs and a mission to accomplish.

And not that only half of the towns will be controllable. So you wont be 'locked' from everything that can be done in factions

Shanaeri Rynale · Mar 19, 2006, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Ummm you will be locked out from elite missions, which will contain the highest value drop and the greatest challenges. Think how annoying it is when you can't get to FoW/UW due to dumb ass World at War, now multiply by 20(number of cities) by in most cases 24 and then by 7...

WasAGuest · Mar 19, 2006, 11:25 PM // 23:25

Simply put, no areas (cities, missions or quests) should be locked from anyone - it creates strife amoungst the players. It also creates a rift amoung the PvP and PvE players (those that do not enjoy playing in each).
PvE players want the best items for their characters. They will farm hundreds of hours to get those items, go on countless cap runs to get all the skills they want or need. These are parts of the PvE game content. Locking these players from this in anyway shape or form is to take away the game from them.
PvEers could go play PvP or join the PvP-mini games that is being masqueraded as PvE content, but that's not fun for everyone, nor it is what they should have to do.
Alliances with locked up content will exploit the drops, selling them for un-reachable costs forcing yet more farming. PvEers, for the most part, are not going to take part in the PvP to win back the areas. They (we) will simply either stop playing for reasons of boredom or frustration.
The locking of any areas, gear or in game content = a bad move on Anets part, made worse by making all areas only unlockable by PvP or PvP-mini games.
What is the PvP-mini game? Borders are re-drawn by players winning in battle. This will be done by arenas (HoH, GvG type play) or in players competing with others via score instead of killing each other (see videos on the net for examples of these). All PvP isn't a death match type game, PvP is simple players vs players, and PvEers are being literally pushed into it with the possiblity of unlocking content - a double stab to the gut.

zoozoc · Mar 19, 2006, 11:36 PM // 23:36

speculation, speculation, speculation. Thats all many of this is, its speculation about a bunch of previews done by people who have never played this game, except for the preview. Plus there is still the open beta that i am sure anet will use to change anything that is unwanted. Anet has been very responsive to the gaming community as a whole, so there is no reason they would make it so only a very select few could play these elite missions.

Awesome Nuke · Mar 19, 2006, 11:49 PM // 23:49

Word to that

Fantus · Mar 20, 2006, 08:09 AM // 08:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoozoc

speculation, speculation, speculation. Thats all many of this is, its speculation about a bunch of previews done by people who have never played this game, except for the preview.

Much of that information comes directly from Anet, so it's a bit more than pure speculation:

Quote:

Originally Posted by ANet (Factions FAQ)

Elite Missions
The most powerful alliances have access to new areas that are designed to be the ultimate cooperative challenge.

Granted, they might have some aspects in Faction that are yet unknown to public so that Faction doesn't end up being accessible only for elite players. If I wouldn't have that hope, my pre-order would have been already canceled.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoozoc

Plus there is still the open beta that i am sure anet will use to change anything that is unwanted.

That's not a "beta", it's a "preview". Faction is finished and given that it's only 4 weeks away from release, it's WAY too late for them to change any major aspect of the game's design. IF Faction is what some of us fear it will become, it's already too late.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zoozoc

Anet has been very responsive to the gaming community as a whole, so there is no reason they would make it so only a very select few could play these elite missions.

Yes, in some cases, but not in others. After all, the Worlds at War concept didn't get changed, too, despite a great number of GW players hates it. Anet really DOES seem to like the concept of locking players out from game content...

Vermilion Okeanos · Mar 20, 2006, 09:18 AM // 09:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xenrath

I think Anet should reconsider the notion of penalising the "losing" side

I completely agree with that.

There are only ONE winner. How can Anet punish the rest of the entire world?
=============

Jeff from Anet had stated in an interview about that the players won't be missing much from the elite mission if they can't do it.

I hope that is true, but I am unsure how you can say "not much" when it is "ELITE" mission.

Edge Martinez · Mar 20, 2006, 09:45 AM // 09:45

Maybe it's just me, but with online gamers I think it's probably best to leave the word 'Elite' out of anything having to do with them. As long as it remains skill level > time played, I'm happy. Don't take that the wrong way though, ANet... just knowing there are special missions out there means myself and others will want to play them. If things are lopsided to where we can't, or to where PvE people end up relying even more on PvPers, chapter 3 just may not look all that interesting.

fallot · Mar 20, 2006, 12:47 PM // 12:47

Maybe you're considering the definition of "alliance" to be too narrow. It could refer to a small group of allied guilds or the entire Luxon and Kurzick factions. Until we get to play on Friday, everything posted is speculation regardless of information from ANet (since that can sometimes be ambiguous when no details are available).