Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghull Ka
Only if the playing field were level, would restrictions on content be fair or interesting...I don't believe that there is any way that content restriction which directly relates to the amount of time you spend farming Faction points (by using any of the available methods of Faction point farming) could ever be fair, balanced, or in line with Arena.net's "Skill, not time played" dogma.
|
I agree completely. My understanding is that control of cities was only recently added - perhaps it will be updated before release. But as is, you're right, only the biggest and most dedicated grinding guilds will have control of cities - the little guy is never going to even sniff that content.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghull Ka
I honestly don't think that a level playing field can be created; not with the "ingenuity" or "craftiness" of some of the more hardcore farmers out there.
|
Oh I think it's perfectly possible, depending on what their goals are. If they're looking to give some sort of reward to the biggest and most dedicated PvE alliances then what they have is fine. Those alliances will maintain the highest levels of faction reputation, and will control the largest cities constantly because of it. It's not a system that's remotely fair to the casual gamer, but (hopefully) it wasn't designed to be.
An alternative system that would spread access around more would involve alliances 'buying' control of a city or outpost. Alliance reputation would have to be spent, and control would be granted for a certain period of time before another alliance could buy it away again. This sort of system is a timeshare - instead of the top alliances holding cities all the time, each city will be held by alliances in rough proportion to how much reputation they're earning. Big alliances would have regular access to city control - smaller alliances would be able to buy control on occasion and experience the content. It's a completely different model though - sometimes a relatively unknown alliance would control a major city, and I don't know if that's something they want in the game.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghull Ka
I'll toss in my "omg anet doesn't care more about pvp than it does pve" line with the rest of you. Gaile said that it's easy to think that way, when you see the giant cash prizes that pvp has to offer sometimes, but she emphatically told me that it is not true at all.
|
I've said it before, but the biggest reason for that perception is the number of changes and tweaks for each group, and how they are recieved. Specifically, that rebalancing and skill tweaks are generally well recieved and encouraged by the PvP community, but are demonized by PvE.
Just look at the most recent major patch. A whole bunch of skills were rebalanced, revitalizing the PvP environement. At the same time only a single rebalance was made to PvE, a (rather creative) change to a grossly over-farmed and over-botted section of a single map, and people were up in arms, threatening to quit the game and demonizing A.Net for 'hating PvE.'
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bob of Maple Ave
You do get some PvE'ers sticking up for the game, as is the case here. But all-in-all, being able to get to the level cap in 1 day (as well as being able to equip the best items, etc.) speaks for itself.
|
Yes, it does. Perhaps what it says the loudest, is that the specific type of PvE content that a large segment of the gaming world wants, is not what A.Net is offering.
PvE in this game is far from perfect, no doubt about it - but if you're going to try and slam it for a lack of a leveling treadmill the people who get it are going to rightfully laugh in your face.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WasAGuest
Re-reading my posts I did ask where those repeatable quests were at. I seriously never noticed them, not sure how I missed them, but I did.
|
Well it isn't like those quests had a giant, neon 'THIS QUEST IS REPEATABLE' marker at the top of the description. You'd only notice them if you did the quest, then went back to the same part of the zone *again*, talked to the NPC with the !, and had a case of deja-vu. There was enough content in this event that you probably didn't spend much time re-entering the same zone over and over, especially if you were re-rolling. I only noticed that one quest was repeatable because that Fern zone was so huge and a lot of things were going on there, I passed by that NPC several times.
It would have been more clear that certain quests were repeatable if the NPCs that gave them were in towns. Those you'd pass by often enough to notice that something was up. I think those would be a good addition, NPCs in major towns with simple, repeatable quests that PvE players could work into their regular gameplay. Done right, those could give people some incentive to play PvE 'normally', instead of just power-farming whatever mob is easiest.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WasAGuest
I also don't mean that all content should be PvE only. What I was trying to say is, there could have been so much more added to the PvE side, but so much work was spent on these "new" mission types and then all the effort spent on "not calling them what they are".
|
I do think that it was a mistake to make the new, 'featured' content on the PvE side Asperwood and the Jade Quarry. As you said, those maps are really PvP in a clown suit. More specifically, it's random arena in a clown suit that only people with PvE characters could play. It was, in short, a recipe for disaster, a very niche map that was advertised as being much, much more.
I thought the gametypes were interesting myself, and they certainly did involve more killing of bots than other players, but it distinctly was a PvP experience.
After thinking about it a bit I'm pretty sure that those two maps really exist for the segment of the population that really enjoys random arena. They can take their W/Mo in there and run around killing NPCs and dueling people and all that. Actually I wouldn't be surprised at all if that crowd loved those maps. The problem, then, is marketing. The Jade Quarry was advertised as awesome new PvE content, not as the newest incarnation of random arena.
In any case that content certainly wasn't for either of us.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WasAGuest
With all the time spent on those game styles, all there is left is, as you said, Fed EX style games. Time could have been spent on multi-team coop missions. Example might be: Team one goes east and fights their way to the back of a gate house to open the gate for the other team. All the while, Team two fights towards the front. Missions like that could have been put in.
|
Do those gametypes explicitly need two teams, though? Or could you just form up your own 8 man squad and split it up yourself? What this sounds like is that there's a desire for PvE missions that aren't the same old linear monster-bashes, and I agree fully with that.
I'm just wary of my success in a mission being dependent upon some idiot with henchies managing to pull off his part without wiping.
I believe there were only two actual missions in the preview, and I only got to play one of them. I'll have to see what else they add before making judgments on whether PvE has evolved or not. Though I do have the caveat that anything more involved that a linear bash with henchies is likely going to be time sensitive (either through waves of enemies, or otherwise managing to keep busy while waiting for another squad to do their job), and thus something you wouldn't enjoy terribly...
Peace,
-CxE