[Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion

@mferr11 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

You've hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I don't think there's enough balance between friendly and hostile encounters. Simply because there's no reason to team up. Don't get me wrong, I love a good naval battle as much as the next guy, but there's no real reason to team up. You get a little bit more gold and rep from alliances and that's about it. There should be more things that require teaming up. World events so powerful that it would be unreasonable to attempt it as only one crew. Alliance specific quests that require two crews. Just things to encourage teaming up. Right now I'd say it's like 80% hostile 20% friendly. I'd like to see that change to 60% 40%.

I'd love stronger threats, but I think people would end up complaining about being forced to ally, and being unable to participate because social anxiety this, not enough friends that, hell some people already complain about not being able to do regular events because they insist on playing by themselves and refuse to crew up.

I am sure it might lead to more friendships and more social interactions, but I am willing to bet there will be still as many betrayals, and saltiness ensuing. In the end, no matter how strong a threat is, once it's defeated and loot is up to grab, what remains is the other crews. You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mrbadabing said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The whole vision of Rare for this game was the Unknown of what would happen. That boat on the horizon if they are friends or foe.

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

The thing is, people always polarize things into 2 piles, the friends and the foes. It's not so much a black and white situation when it comes to crews, it's not good vs evil people, but a whole D&D range of alignments.

There will be aggressive players, there will be friendly players. There will be neutral players doing their things, their will be neutral players who will run, neutral people who will defend themselves. There will be aggressive players who will say GG and ally with the people they just sank, there will be friendly players that will proceed to betray others when the opportunity arises. That's plenty of unknown. Hell, even within the aggressive category, you don't know how good they are, you don't know what is their play style. Are they naval aces, are they boarders, tuckers?

There are more factors than just friend or foe, and that's part of the shared world concept, devs are putting all these different types of players in the same pot on purpose.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mferr11 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

You've hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I don't think there's enough balance between friendly and hostile encounters. Simply because there's no reason to team up. Don't get me wrong, I love a good naval battle as much as the next guy, but there's no real reason to team up. You get a little bit more gold and rep from alliances and that's about it. There should be more things that require teaming up. World events so powerful that it would be unreasonable to attempt it as only one crew. Alliance specific quests that require two crews. Just things to encourage teaming up. Right now I'd say it's like 80% hostile 20% friendly. I'd like to see that change to 60% 40%.

I'd love stronger threats, but I think people would end up complaining about being forced to ally, and being unable to participate because social anxiety this, not enough friends that, hell some people already complain about not being able to do regular events because they insist on playing by themselves and refuse to crew up.

I am sure it might lead to more friendships and more social interactions, but I am willing to bet there will be still as many betrayals, and saltiness ensuing. In the end, no matter how strong a threat is, once it's defeated and loot is up to grab, what remains is the other crews. You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mrbadabing said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The whole vision of Rare for this game was the Unknown of what would happen. That boat on the horizon if they are friends or foe.

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

The thing is, people always polarize things into 2 piles, the friends and the foes. It's not so much a black and white situation when it comes to crews, it's not good vs evil people, but a whole D&D range of alignments.

There will be aggressive players, there will be friendly players. There will be neutral players doing their things, their will be neutral players who will run, neutral people who will defend themselves. There will be aggressive players who will say GG and ally with the people they just sank, there will be friendly players that will proceed to betray others when the opportunity arises. That's plenty of unknown. Hell, even within the aggressive category, you don't know how good they are, you don't know what is their play style. Are they naval aces, are they boarders, tuckers?

There are more factors than just friend or foe, and that's part of the shared world concept, devs are putting all these different types of players in the same pot on purpose.

I mean... it pretty much is 2 categories. People that will interfere with me and people that won't. Whether they do it via being sneaky, throwing their bodies at me over and over, or pretending to be friendly only to betray me, that's one single category of people - people who are playing the game in a way intended to interfere with my playing. PvP is the "name" given that category.

The unknown of how that crew is going to interfere with me is irrelevant to the known of "that crew is going to interfere with me, so I'll just avoid them."

The friend vs. foe imbalance I pointed out earlier isn't solved by making more enemies that require teaming up to beat, because that doesn't actually make more friendly players - it shifts the unfriendly players from outright aggression to sneaky aggression. There's a million and a half (hyperbole, obviously) ways to interfere with other players, and far less ways to help them.

Obviously the alliance system gives some incentive to help, but that incentive apparently isn't enough given how many people aren't in it for gold, they just want to fight.

The fact remains that when you see a ship on the horizon there is no reason (outside of a desire to fight) to approach or let them approach you. There isn't a balance of encounters where sometimes you run into friends and sometimes you run into foes. In the 7 months I've been playing I can count on one hand the number of friendly crews I've encountered. [Edit: that includes the crews that sank me, but were cordial afterwards]

Regarding this: "You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share."

That's actually not true. Rare can set up systems that force you to share, but they have chosen not to. Systems that reward sharing (not replacing existing things) would be an interesting mechanic. Maybe a loot type that is worth less stolen, or a loot type that rewards allies more than the crew that turns it in.

Imagine a specific event reward (akin to Ashen Skull) that you get from doing an event where the allied crews get double money from it, or the commendation is earned by having an allied crew turn it in - not your own crew. The incentive shifts from stealing it to helping someone else turn it in.

Rare can set up systems that force you to share. Rare hasn't, but that doesn't mean they can't.

@yetanotherfox said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@lady-aijou 70 hours in the game, I would love a PvE option. I'm not interested in PvP at all, and I don't have time to spend 20 minutes running into a headwind in a solo sloop when a brig crew just won't quit trying to catch up. They can't, it's not fun for anyone.

At least give the solo sloop players an advantage for those wanting to avoid PvP. Like, ditch the cannons for a big speed boost.

Running into the headwind is that advantage, and as you noted it's not enough to evade a dedicated crew. What you are likely to run into here (on the forums) are experienced players who could care less that the game churns through new players, as long as they have a steady supply of ships to attack.

It sucks, and I think a PvE mode would be great - but it's not going to get a positive reception from most people here.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mferr11 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

You've hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I don't think there's enough balance between friendly and hostile encounters. Simply because there's no reason to team up. Don't get me wrong, I love a good naval battle as much as the next guy, but there's no real reason to team up. You get a little bit more gold and rep from alliances and that's about it. There should be more things that require teaming up. World events so powerful that it would be unreasonable to attempt it as only one crew. Alliance specific quests that require two crews. Just things to encourage teaming up. Right now I'd say it's like 80% hostile 20% friendly. I'd like to see that change to 60% 40%.

I'd love stronger threats, but I think people would end up complaining about being forced to ally, and being unable to participate because social anxiety this, not enough friends that, hell some people already complain about not being able to do regular events because they insist on playing by themselves and refuse to crew up.

I am sure it might lead to more friendships and more social interactions, but I am willing to bet there will be still as many betrayals, and saltiness ensuing. In the end, no matter how strong a threat is, once it's defeated and loot is up to grab, what remains is the other crews. You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mrbadabing said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The whole vision of Rare for this game was the Unknown of what would happen. That boat on the horizon if they are friends or foe.

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

The thing is, people always polarize things into 2 piles, the friends and the foes. It's not so much a black and white situation when it comes to crews, it's not good vs evil people, but a whole D&D range of alignments.

There will be aggressive players, there will be friendly players. There will be neutral players doing their things, their will be neutral players who will run, neutral people who will defend themselves. There will be aggressive players who will say GG and ally with the people they just sank, there will be friendly players that will proceed to betray others when the opportunity arises. That's plenty of unknown. Hell, even within the aggressive category, you don't know how good they are, you don't know what is their play style. Are they naval aces, are they boarders, tuckers?

There are more factors than just friend or foe, and that's part of the shared world concept, devs are putting all these different types of players in the same pot on purpose.

I mean... it pretty much is 2 categories. People that will interfere with me and people that won't. Whether they do it via being sneaky, throwing their bodies at me over and over, or pretending to be friendly only to betray me, that's one single category of people - people who are playing the game in a way intended to interfere with my playing. PvP is the "name" given that category.

The unknown of how that crew is going to interfere with me is irrelevant to the known of "that crew is going to interfere with me, so I'll just avoid them."

The friend vs. foe imbalance I pointed out earlier isn't solved by making more enemies that require teaming up to beat, because that doesn't actually make more friendly players - it shifts the unfriendly players from outright aggression to sneaky aggression. There's a million and a half (hyperbole, obviously) ways to interfere with other players, and far less ways to help them.

Obviously the alliance system gives some incentive to help, but that incentive apparently isn't enough given how many people aren't in it for gold, they just want to fight.

The fact remains that when you see a ship on the horizon there is no reason (outside of a desire to fight) to approach or let them approach you. There isn't a balance of encounters where sometimes you run into friends and sometimes you run into foes. In the 7 months I've been playing I can count on one hand the number of friendly crews I've encountered. [Edit: that includes the crews that sank me, but were cordial afterwards]

No matter how many categories, the fact remains that having all kinds of different playstyles, player intentions and motivations within the same server is absolutely on purpose and by design. Up to you to find those with similar ones or flee the ones that don't.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

Regarding this: "You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share."

That's actually not true. Rare can set up systems that force you to share, but they have chosen not to. Systems that reward sharing (not replacing existing things) would be an interesting mechanic. Maybe a loot type that is worth less stolen, or a loot type that rewards allies more than the crew that turns it in.

Imagine a specific event reward (akin to Ashen Skull) that you get from doing an event where the allied crews get double money from it, or the commendation is earned by having an allied crew turn it in - not your own crew. The incentive shifts from stealing it to helping someone else turn it in.

Rare can set up systems that force you to share. Rare hasn't, but that doesn't mean they can't.

They actually have via events like Stronghold Sharefest, some daily bounties, christmas gift commendations, etc. Those are simply events and not something they chose to keep permanently. Again, by design and on purpose. Also, you are given the opportunity to share, you are not forced. As always, the design philosophy is tools, not rules.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@yetanotherfox said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@lady-aijou 70 hours in the game, I would love a PvE option. I'm not interested in PvP at all, and I don't have time to spend 20 minutes running into a headwind in a solo sloop when a brig crew just won't quit trying to catch up. They can't, it's not fun for anyone.

At least give the solo sloop players an advantage for those wanting to avoid PvP. Like, ditch the cannons for a big speed boost.

Running into the headwind is that advantage, and as you noted it's not enough to evade a dedicated crew. What you are likely to run into here (on the forums) are experienced players who could care less that the game churns through new players, as long as they have a steady supply of ships to attack.

It sucks, and I think a PvE mode would be great - but it's not going to get a positive reception from most people here.

New players that are willing to learn the game are always welcome. The ones that have buyers remorse after getting a game which 50% is not interesting to them, and ask for changes that will impact the whole playerbase, slightly less.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

New players that are willing to learn the game are always welcome. The ones that have buyers remorse after getting a game which 50% is not interesting to them, and ask for changes that will impact the whole playerbase, slightly less.

Obviously we disagree on pretty much this entire topic, and that's ok. But in a games as service (which this is) model a steady influx of new players is essential. Without it, the game dies. When they churn through too many players too fast it's not good.

The game is not advertised as constant PvP, as much as people like to pretend that it is. Adventure mode, for the new and inexperienced adventurer can be incredibly furstrating. The PvP community (and they DO exist, whether you want to break them into subcategories or not) refuses to adapt to a playstyle that is more friendly, which is fine. They are allowed to do that. But they ARE the reason why people are constantly asking for PvE servers. THEY are the reason why people constantly run. They are the ones most adamantly opposed to any ideas to make the game more welcoming to new players.

The reason people want a PvE mode is because they think that is the only way they will get friendly interactions with other players. The reason they think that is because that's what their experience in the world has shown them.

I would way rather have adventure mode change to include more cooperative elements alongside the competitive elements. The question should not be "when will my alliance betray me" the question should be "will my alliance betray me".

I would much rather have Adventure mode include that than have a PvE mode, but I would rather have a PvE mode than what adventure mode is currently.

Edit: The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

How do you know they are exclusively PVP players?

The majority of players are PVEVP players, they do whatever comes their way. I can be doing a whole night of voyages, forts, Tales, and if you happen to be on my way at the very end of my session and I sink you, will you consider me as an exclusively PVP player because you ended up at the wrong end of my canons?

You mention PVP (I guess PVEVP too?) players not adapting their playstyle for friendship, but it seems like it's the exclusively PVE players who refuses to do so and be prepared to any eventuality, friendly or not. as the game always advertised.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

How do you know they are exclusively PVP players?

The majority of players are PVEVP players, they do whatever comes their way. I can be doing a whole night of voyages, forts, Tales, and if you happen to be on my way at the very end of my session and I sink you, will you consider me as an exclusively PVP player because you ended up at the wrong end of my canons?

You mention PVP (I guess PVEVP too?) players not adapting their playstyle for friendship, but it seems like it's the exclusively PVE players who refuses to do so and be prepared to any eventuality, friendly or not. as the game always advertised.

From what you've said here, no I wouldn't consider you exclusively PvP. You know who I would? The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they've never dug up an athena chest. The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they NEVER turn in loot they acquired outside of stealing. The players who sink a ship and leave the loot floating because they weren't interested in. You can say "well how do you know THAT person is one of those players"? And the answer is... it doesn't matter, because the saturation of that type of players is high enough that it causes problems.

Bloviate all you want, those players exist, and they are the reason why people want PvE servers.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

How do you know they are exclusively PVP players?

The majority of players are PVEVP players, they do whatever comes their way. I can be doing a whole night of voyages, forts, Tales, and if you happen to be on my way at the very end of my session and I sink you, will you consider me as an exclusively PVP player because you ended up at the wrong end of my canons?

You mention PVP (I guess PVEVP too?) players not adapting their playstyle for friendship, but it seems like it's the exclusively PVE players who refuses to do so and be prepared to any eventuality, friendly or not. as the game always advertised.

From what you've said here, no I wouldn't consider you exclusively PvP. You know who I would? The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they've never dug up an athena chest. The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they NEVER turn in loot they acquired outside of stealing. The players who sink a ship and leave the loot floating because they weren't interested in. You can say "well how do you know THAT person is one of those players"? And the answer is... it doesn't matter, because the saturation of that type of players is high enough that it causes problems.

Bloviate all you want, those players exist, and they are the reason why people want PvE servers.

Feel free to take shelter from these omnipresent imaginary boogeymen inside custom servers when they become available. In the meantime, fair winds, and try not to trip over all those wasteful bullies hiding under every rock and every blade of grass of every island.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@mferr11 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.

You've hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I don't think there's enough balance between friendly and hostile encounters. Simply because there's no reason to team up. Don't get me wrong, I love a good naval battle as much as the next guy, but there's no real reason to team up. You get a little bit more gold and rep from alliances and that's about it. There should be more things that require teaming up. World events so powerful that it would be unreasonable to attempt it as only one crew. Alliance specific quests that require two crews. Just things to encourage teaming up. Right now I'd say it's like 80% hostile 20% friendly. I'd like to see that change to 60% 40%.

I'd love stronger threats, but I think people would end up complaining about being forced to ally, and being unable to participate because social anxiety this, not enough friends that, hell some people already complain about not being able to do regular events because they insist on playing by themselves and refuse to crew up.

I would totally be one of those people to complain. Well you know how I feel about allying up lol. I am more than happy to help someone, like other week I was on I helped a new pirate with a skull captain mission but I have no desire to make anything official.

I remember when the ally thing first came out. Tried it because of some commendation for part of an event you needed it and couldn't find one ally we didnt have to end up murdering due to being annoying and you know what a lovely person I am so yes they were that big of nuisance. Final straw was when we were stocking up at a fort to do the event and our ally decided to blow our ship up, ended up having to kill them too. After that we said never again.

If people want to ally whatever but not me!

I'm going to say this as many times as I have to. NOTHING SHOULD BE ONE SHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I haven't met a single person who disagrees. Nothing other than a straight up keg should kill anyone immediately. Blunderbuss should never do anything more than 80% damage.
I swear, if they don't change this, they're messed up.

If you refuse to change this for some reason, at least make it so you won't respawn RIGHT IN FRONT OF SOMEBODY WITH YOUR BACK TURNED SO THEY HAVE A PERFECT BLUNDERBUSS SHOT.

Either of these work.

I'm going to say this as many times as I have to. NOTHING SHOULD BE ONE SHOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I haven't met a single person who disagrees. Nothing other than a straight up keg should kill anyone immediately. Blunderbuss should never do anything more than 80% damage.
I swear, if they don't change this, they're messed up.

If you refuse to change this for some reason, at least make it so you won't respawn RIGHT IN FRONT OF SOMEBODY WITH YOUR BACK TURNED SO THEY HAVE A PERFECT BLUNDERBUSS SHOT.

Either of these work.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

How do you know they are exclusively PVP players?

The majority of players are PVEVP players, they do whatever comes their way. I can be doing a whole night of voyages, forts, Tales, and if you happen to be on my way at the very end of my session and I sink you, will you consider me as an exclusively PVP player because you ended up at the wrong end of my canons?

You mention PVP (I guess PVEVP too?) players not adapting their playstyle for friendship, but it seems like it's the exclusively PVE players who refuses to do so and be prepared to any eventuality, friendly or not. as the game always advertised.

From what you've said here, no I wouldn't consider you exclusively PvP. You know who I would? The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they've never dug up an athena chest. The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they NEVER turn in loot they acquired outside of stealing. The players who sink a ship and leave the loot floating because they weren't interested in. You can say "well how do you know THAT person is one of those players"? And the answer is... it doesn't matter, because the saturation of that type of players is high enough that it causes problems.

Bloviate all you want, those players exist, and they are the reason why people want PvE servers.

Feel free to take shelter from these omnipresent imaginary boogeymen inside custom servers when they become available. In the meantime, fair winds, and try not to trip over all those wasteful bullies hiding under every rock and every blade of grass of every island.

Comments like this make it clear you weren't ever discussing this in good faith. You assume that what I'm saying is my personal experience is made up or imaginary. It's not.

You can argue that the game shouldn't have a PvE mode without pretending that the current game isn't skewed extremely heavily toward PvP.

@ajm123 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

I run exclusively reapers. I have almost ever commendation in the game. Yet I'd probably be lumped into the "toxic PvP group" strictly based on me enjoying combat.

If the servers were to be made stop whining about how you want them.

Offer suggestions on how it would work

I'm Pro PvPvE this is what the game I bought was. Everything else is debatable.

I personally can't see it working. To say ships should be invincible to other players cannons players should be invincible to other players Is down right crazy when 99.8% of all people enjoy the mix of pvp and pve which is the game we bought

Like I said earlier - you aren't interested in why people want a PvE server, you just want to shoot down ideas. Incessently asking for "well how could it work" is a red herring designed to not talk about the real issue.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The issue isn't that PvP players exist, the issue is that there are far too many exclusively PvP players for the games ecosystem to stay healthy.

How do you know they are exclusively PVP players?

The majority of players are PVEVP players, they do whatever comes their way. I can be doing a whole night of voyages, forts, Tales, and if you happen to be on my way at the very end of my session and I sink you, will you consider me as an exclusively PVP player because you ended up at the wrong end of my canons?

You mention PVP (I guess PVEVP too?) players not adapting their playstyle for friendship, but it seems like it's the exclusively PVE players who refuses to do so and be prepared to any eventuality, friendly or not. as the game always advertised.

From what you've said here, no I wouldn't consider you exclusively PvP. You know who I would? The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they've never dug up an athena chest. The players who take explicit pride in the fact that they NEVER turn in loot they acquired outside of stealing. The players who sink a ship and leave the loot floating because they weren't interested in. You can say "well how do you know THAT person is one of those players"? And the answer is... it doesn't matter, because the saturation of that type of players is high enough that it causes problems.

Bloviate all you want, those players exist, and they are the reason why people want PvE servers.

Feel free to take shelter from these omnipresent imaginary boogeymen inside custom servers when they become available. In the meantime, fair winds, and try not to trip over all those wasteful bullies hiding under every rock and every blade of grass of every island.

Comments like this make it clear you weren't ever discussing this in good faith. You assume that what I'm saying is my personal experience is made up or imaginary. It's not.

You can argue that the game shouldn't have a PvE mode without pretending that the current game isn't skewed extremely heavily toward PvP.

I simply reminded that a solution to your perceived problem is already in the works and will fix your issue. (In a reasonable and balanced way on top of it too)

Is over-exaggerating a problem and pretending the game is overly saturated by a very fringe and specific type of players to try to justify wrecking a game's balance and designed ecosystem appreciated by a majority who understands what game they bought any better faith? Not really no.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@ajm123 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

I run exclusively reapers. I have almost ever commendation in the game. Yet I'd probably be lumped into the "toxic PvP group" strictly based on me enjoying combat.

If the servers were to be made stop whining about how you want them.

Offer suggestions on how it would work

I'm Pro PvPvE this is what the game I bought was. Everything else is debatable.

I personally can't see it working. To say ships should be invincible to other players cannons players should be invincible to other players Is down right crazy when 99.8% of all people enjoy the mix of pvp and pve which is the game we bought

Like I said earlier - you aren't interested in why people want a PvE server, you just want to shoot down ideas. Incessently asking for "well how could it work" is a red herring designed to not talk about the real issue.

Neither are you interested to talk about how it can be done, besides saying "I don't care how it can works or how much work it takes, or how many issues it can cause, just make it so".

Again, I hope you will find what you seek in the custom servers, they will surely provide you what you seek, without messing up the game balance for the rest of the community that appreciates the dev's vision.

@bloodybil said in [[Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion]

Is over-exaggerating a problem and pretending the game is overly saturated by a very fringe and specific type of players to try to justify wrecking a game's balance and designed ecosystem appreciated by a majority who understands what game they bought any better faith? Not really no.

The fact that the forums were overwhelmed with the request enough that the needed to make a mega thread about it, and the fact that the subreddit is also overwhelmed with threads about it is evidence that It's not an over exaggeration.

Like I've said before, I would rather they implement more things (like the stronghold sharing loot days) that encourage cooperative play over a complete segregation of servers, and if they did segregate I'd rather it be a tall tale server with its own progression similar to sea dogs, instead of a full "PvE adventure mode".

But, if the only options are "PvE adventure mode or keep it as it currently is" I would rather have the PvE adventure mode. 9 out of 10 times I wouldn't play in the PvE mode, but that 1 out of 10 times where I just want to log in and do a skeleton captain voyage and some jerk hole in an all black ship won't stop harassing me for the literally zero skulls I have are incredibly frustrating and makes it hard to want to log back in to the game.

@bloodybil said in [[Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion]

Neither are you interested to talk about how it can be done, besides saying "I don't care how it can works or how much work it takes, or how many issues it can cause, just make it so".

I have talked about how it could be done, and what it could look like. Questions like this aren't interested in refining the concept of PvE mode to a workable option, they are interested in flatly shutting down a PvE mode as completely unworkable.

What is unworkable about a tall tale server? Nothing, which is why that suggestion is ignored by the people demanding to know how a PvE server could work so that they can shut down the suggestion.

Edit: Sidenote, while I recognize that you and people who side with you see the suggestion as one that will "wreck the game's balance" you need to recognize that people on my side, or who side with me think that the games current balance is wrecked because it skews too heavily toward PvP.

Isnt PvE coming in the form of custom servers though?

So that users cant cheese and subvert the main balance?

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

The fact that the forums were overwhelmed with the request enough that the needed to make a mega thread about it, and the fact that the subreddit is also overwhelmed with threads about it is evidence that It's not an over exaggeration.

Debatable, seems to me like a flood of spam by unrully forumites and their alts, encouraged by certain communities to try to amplify a loud minority is what prompted this thread to tidy up the forum.

Like I've said before, I would rather they implement more things (like the stronghold sharing loot days) that encourage cooperative play over a complete segregation of servers, and if they did segregate I'd rather it be a tall tale server with its own progression similar to sea dogs, instead of a full "PvE adventure mode".

We can agree on that, a separate mini-mode akin to arena that would be appealing to everyone via exclusive rewards would be a cool and non-redundant addition to the game.

But, if the only options are "PvE adventure mode or keep it as it currently is" I would rather have the PvE adventure mode. 9 out of 10 times I wouldn't play in the PvE mode, but that 1 out of 10 times where I just want to log in and do a skeleton captain voyage and some jerk hole in an all black ship won't stop harassing me for the literally zero skulls I have are incredibly frustrating and makes it hard to want to log back in to the game.

Custom servers will be a boon for sure for people who wants to take a night off and quietly sail in peace that 1 out of 10 times.

I have talked about how it could be done, and what it could look like. Questions like this aren't interested in refining the concept of PvE mode to a workable option, they are interested in flatly shutting down a PvE mode as completely unworkable.

Questions like these are pointing out the fact that fixing things that aren't broken and rebalance a whole mode will most likely bring more problems than fix them, and divert a lot of production time that could go on adding actual new stuff to the game that everyone can enjoy.

What is unworkable about a tall tale server? Nothing, which is why that suggestion is ignored by the people demanding to know how a PvE server could work so that they can shut down the suggestion.

Taking the current tales and working them into a separate mode don't seem to be on the table, especially since the recent addition of tall tales checkpoints by the devs, clearly showing that they don't intend to rip that content off the main mode. A separate mode with new cooperative tales and new faction like talked about earlier would sure be cool though.

Edit: Sidenote, while I recognize that you and people who side with you see the suggestion as one that will "wreck the game's balance" you need to recognize that people on my side, or who side with me think that the games current balance is wrecked because it skews too heavily toward PvP.

The thing is, for some people on "your side" (we are all part of one community really, once again this isn't a black and white issue), any PVP is too much PVP. And the game always advertised the mix of both from the start. It's up to people to use the existing tools everyone has access to to make the playstyle they want happen.

Believe me, as long as the rate is reasonable I intend to pay for a custom server. Mostly so I can use it as a sandbox for teh 50 Fathoms RPG that I GM :D.

With regards to tall tales and checkpoints, even setting aside the PVP implications checkpoints were necessary for some of the tall tales - allowing people to play in shorter segments is huge. Not everyone sits down for a 3-6 hour session.

@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
"It's up to people to use the existing tools everyone has access to to make the playstyle they want happen."

I'm fine with that, assuming they provide more tools - there are far more tools for enabling PvP than there are for enabling friendly player interactions. Friendly interactions require both crews to want it, PvP interactions only require one crew to want it. This would speak in favor of providing more tools to enable friendly interactions.

I think a fair solution would be having a server where you can do Tall Tales on, fish, combat with friends and sail around on. You could do ship wrecks, look for random treasure on islands and I wouldnt even mind skelly captains randomly spawning on those islands. Maybe can even find and do messages in a bottle. I would make this in an invite only type server though not a PvE type where anyone can join. Also I would say a fraction of the gold you would get and either no XP or a small fraction(kinda leaning towards none though). Nothing like voyage work or skull forts could be done, I think its fair to leave the high risk and high reward to the public server like many other games do aswell.

I think that would be a nice option for days just want to sail around with friends because you could invite multiple friends ideally to this session. Also a good option for people who just want to take a break from seeing others.

Just my thoughts on a possible option. I know we are getting custom servers soon but still not sure all of what we can do on them.

@combatxkitty nah in my opinion there should rightfully be zero rewards or progression.

@troubled-cells said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty nah in my opinion there should rightfully be zero rewards or progression.

I think I agree with you on the XP because I do think reaching PL should be done on a public server. However I really do not care if someone gets a small fraction of gold for cashing in loot. Why should I? Unless they progress in main adventure what will they spend it on? Nothing too special, as in wont be able to get everything if never bothered to progress in main adventure.

Im just thinking of ways to be fair.I am in no way in favor of PvE servers prob one of the loudest voices against it here lol but I mean Im not so stubborn that not willing to compromise at all. If its not high risk and high reward I could careless to be honest. However with that said again XP prob is best left completely out. Also when I say a small fraction of gold I mean a very small fraction like make a captains chest worth less than a castaway.

@combatxkitty said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@troubled-cells said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty nah in my opinion there should rightfully be zero rewards or progression.

I think I agree with you on the XP because I do think reaching PL should be done on a public server. However I really do not care if someone gets a small fraction of gold for cashing in loot. Why should I? Unless they progress in main adventure what will they spend it on? Nothing too special, as in wont be able to get everything if never bothered to progress in main adventure.

Im just thinking of ways to be fair.I am in no way in favor of PvE servers prob one of the loudest voices against it here lol but I mean Im not so stubborn that not willing to compromise at all. If its not high risk and high reward I could careless to be honest. However with that said again XP prob is best left completely out. Also when I say a small fraction of gold I mean a very small fraction like make a captains chest worth less than a castaway.

Honestly, at that point it would be better to just disable loot spawns and make it tall tale based. The loot from tall tales (outside of the skull at the end of gold hoarder) isn't contested on live servers so it wouldn't hurt anything and would give players something "meaningful" to do if they just wanted a chill sailing session.

The farther I go in this conversation, the more convinced I am that it's the only solution that would make most PvE players happy without angering most PvP players and most PvPvE players.

Edit: A tall tale server doesn't have to remove the tall tales from the main game, they could be available on both just like the arena mode didn't remove PvP combat from the main game.

@combatxkitty nah way I see it is they want zero PvP risk the trade off is zero rewards and progression.

Imagine just being able to rinse the FOTD over and over without any PvP risk.

It's not fair to the players that do risk it in normal adventure.

@troubled-cells said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty nah way I see it is they want zero PvP risk the trade off is zero rewards and progression.

Imagine just being able to rinse the FOTD over and over without any PvP risk.

It's not fair to the players that do risk it in normal adventure.

There's plenty of reasonable arguments against progression on PvE servers, but "it's not fair to people who don't play on PvE servers" isn't reasonable. It's fair because everyone has the same opportunity and access to that mode of play. Just because they don't want to do it doesn't make it not fair.

Instead, argue that allowing that progress would unreasonably destabilize the PvP/PvE balance on regular servers. I disagree with that, but it's logical and a sound argument. Saying a mode that everyone would have access to isn't "fair" isn't.

@troubled-cells said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty nah way I see it is they want zero PvP risk the trade off is zero rewards and progression.

Imagine just being able to rinse the FOTD over and over without any PvP risk.

It's not fair to the players that do risk it in normal adventure.

How would they be able to rinse the FOTD over and over again in a session that doesnt have it? Maybe you are misunderstanding me, I am not advocating for any voyage, forts (including FOTD), skelly fleets, boss fights or any event for that matter. I would even say leave the kraken and meg in but disable loot rewards.

All im saying is if there is a session that spawns a random ship wreck here and there or loot on beach or a random skelly captain that only drops a foul bounty skull here and there what is really the big deal? I could also careless if Tall Tales are done not in a public server.

I am a player who has done lots of risk and I would not feel cheated at all by that . I mean really why would I care if someone invites a few friends for fun to a private server and makes a few bucks in gold?

Without progression and events its really not a threat to main adventure is it? That is my main concern , the balance of PvPvE being thrown off. Im not so sure that a private server with such small gain and not all that much to do would ruin that balance. I see it more as a fun break with friends than an alternative to main adventure mode.

@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@troubled-cells said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@combatxkitty nah in my opinion there should rightfully be zero rewards or progression.

I think I agree with you on the XP because I do think reaching PL should be done on a public server. However I really do not care if someone gets a small fraction of gold for cashing in loot. Why should I? Unless they progress in main adventure what will they spend it on? Nothing too special, as in wont be able to get everything if never bothered to progress in main adventure.

Im just thinking of ways to be fair.I am in no way in favor of PvE servers prob one of the loudest voices against it here lol but I mean Im not so stubborn that not willing to compromise at all. If its not high risk and high reward I could careless to be honest. However with that said again XP prob is best left completely out. Also when I say a small fraction of gold I mean a very small fraction like make a captains chest worth less than a castaway.

Honestly, at that point it would be better to just disable loot spawns and make it tall tale based. The loot from tall tales (outside of the skull at the end of gold hoarder) isn't contested on live servers so it wouldn't hurt anything and would give players something "meaningful" to do if they just wanted a chill sailing session.

The farther I go in this conversation, the more convinced I am that it's the only solution that would make most PvE players happy without angering most PvP players and most PvPvE players.

Edit: A tall tale server doesn't have to remove the tall tales from the main game, they could be available on both just like the arena mode didn't remove PvP combat from the main game.

True, that could work aswell instead of having a private server with loot at a fraction of gold. Maybe have it so if you do a Tall Tale in a private session you get abit less gold and rep than if you do it with the dangers of other players in main adventure? Just to kinda give someone motivation to do it in main adventure?

@cptphteven

The game is not advertised as constant PvP, as much as people like to pretend that it is.

Whenever I hear complaints that SoT is this constant PvP fest, I wonder if we are still talking about the same game. For being a non-stop PvP fiesta, there sure is a lot of down-time between fights. Down-time that can include multiple hours of non-contact. I struggle to see what they see on my end of things.

@nabberwar said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

@cptphteven

The game is not advertised as constant PvP, as much as people like to pretend that it is.

Whenever I hear complaints that SoT is this constant PvP fest, I wonder if we are still talking about the same game. For being a non-stop PvP fiesta, there sure is a lot of down-time between fights. Down-time that can include multiple hours of non-contact. I struggle to see what they see on my end of things.

The game is a weird quantum state where people looking for PvP complain they can never find it, and the people looking to avoid PvP complain it's non-stop.