When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?

  • @jolly-ol-yep i've never red sea'd on purpose but you have no idea how many times i've done this exact thing minus alt f4 cause i'm xbox

  • Sorry what are the changes to the red sea? how is it changed in favour of attackers?

  • @kakaroto9766 said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Sorry what are the changes to the red sea? how is it changed in favour of attackers?

    they are popping the loot back out and adding birds to it

  • @mrestiercol you mean the same alliance servers people want shut down and shame people for using saying they aren't playing the "right way" or that it " ruins the game for everyone else " ironic

  • @subject-18-jord said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @mrestiercol you mean the same alliance servers people want shut down and shame people for using saying they aren't playing the "right way" or that it " ruins the game for everyone else " ironic

    To be fair, rare has stated in the past that the only reason they dont deal with externally formed alliance servers is because it is such a minimal part of the player base that it isnt worth the effort, but if people do join every time some one recommends one and they become more common, theres no guarantee that they will stay.

    So its not just players that shame alliance servers, even rare them selves have stated they dont like it as it goes against intent of the game and ruins balance.

  • @subject-18-jord said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @mrestiercol you mean the same alliance servers people want shut down and shame people for using saying they aren't playing the "right way" or that it " ruins the game for everyone else " ironic

    Alliance servers and xbox servers are probably carrying the game these days. Far more consistent activity on both than on shared servers that aren't locked down.

    Alliance servers and xbox server are both quiet, regularly active, and emporium purchase heavy. Alliance and xbox servers also seem to have for more content players in their circumstances.

    I don't get surprised too often but I would be genuinely surprised if they do anything to substantively nerf alliances, pretty much ever, going forward. That's one thing I doubt the partners will ever pull off.

  • @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @kakaroto9766 said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Sorry what are the changes to the red sea? how is it changed in favour of attackers?

    they are popping the loot back out and adding birds to it

    Like out of the red sea?
    Because it has always popped back out IN the sea, so you could take a rowboat to retrieve it or swim to it.

  • @kakaroto9766 said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @kakaroto9766 said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Sorry what are the changes to the red sea? how is it changed in favour of attackers?

    they are popping the loot back out and adding birds to it

    Like out of the red sea?
    Because it has always popped back out IN the sea, so you could take a rowboat to retrieve it or swim to it.

    yeah it brings it back out to safe water and gives it birds

  • @goldsmen never be in one i've just heard people trash them and imo a little to unfairly as i think would make a good compromise to have servers to chill in without fear of getting ganked by the ship on the horizon "i just want to make more friends in the game is what i'm trying to say" but it's just my opinion it'd be nice if players got along more often i can number on my hand how many freindly ships i've seen i want more of that less kill on sight

  • @subject-18-jord said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @goldsmen never be in one i've just heard people trash them and imo a little to unfairly as i think would make a good compromise to have servers to chill in without fear of getting ganked by the ship on the horizon "i just want to make more friends in the game is what i'm trying to say" but it's just my opinion it'd be nice if players got alone more often i can number on my hand how many freindly ships i've seen i want more of that less kill on sight

    Doesn't much matter what people say, if people on alliance servers are happy and get along that's really all that is relevant

    people cheese this game so much in so many ways there are few that can criticize them without being hypocritical about it

    Hopping pvp operations and alliance operations are essentially doing the same thing, the only difference is the coordinated hopping pvp drives out activity and the alliances benefit from it by getting more people that want to avoid pvpers. Hopping pvpers are the loudest about alliances...sooo

    A lot of the resentment was formed because some pvpers got themselves in trouble vs ToS while infiltrating alliance servers and it largely built up from there. It's mainly just a click getter topic now for content creators when they use it for engagement.

  • @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    LOL, now the Red Sea runners are the ones complaining, justice if you ask me.

  • It's a PVPVE game. Being a "non-PVP" player isn't viable and shouldn't be accommodated. Be a PVPVE player and improve your PVP skills.

  • @dr-sweendog said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    It's a PVPVE game. Being a "non-PVP" player isn't viable and shouldn't be accommodated. Be a PVPVE player and improve your PVP skills.

    Meanwhile in reality most activity is PVE, most content is PVE, and that content isn't designed in a way that can be done with constant harassment from PVPers.

    So like every other PVP game, if PVPers always get their way, they'll destroy the content that enables their playstyle, ultimately ruin the game, and move on to other games to ruin.

    PVPers would be wise to recognize they rely on PVErs tolerating them in order for the game to be playable.

  • @scheneighnay said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @dr-sweendog said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    It's a PVPVE game. Being a "non-PVP" player isn't viable and shouldn't be accommodated. Be a PVPVE player and improve your PVP skills.

    Meanwhile in reality most activity is PVE, most content is PVE, and that content isn't designed in a way that can be done with constant harassment from PVPers.

    So like every other PVP game, if PVPers always get their way, they'll destroy the content that enables their playstyle, ultimately ruin the game, and move on to other games to ruin.

    PVPers would be wise to recognize they rely on PVErs tolerating them in order for the game to be playable.

    With HG PVP, PVP is no longer reliant on PVErs stacking loot. The PVE population of sea of thieves could disappear tomorrow and PVPers would still earn gold from hourglass. So PVP does not exist as a consequence of PVErs "tolerance". PVP was never really reliant on PVErs stacking loot anyways since emissary flags are highly valuable, regardless if the ship is empty of not.

    Lets be real though. Part of what makes this game so exciting is that at any point during your PVE journey, a player could come along and disrupt to monotonous game loop of killing mobs and selling loot for cosmetics. The game would be incredibly dull without the interaction between PVP and PVE and the stakes that ensues. A Fort of Fortune or FOTD would be incredibly boring without the tuckers or even the risk of an approaching galleon on the horizon.

    Correct, most of the content in this game is PVE focused. Veils, Sovereigns, world events etc. etc. etc are all QoL updates for PVE players. Really shows how deranged the premise of this post is. "When will non-PVP players get some QoL win condition in PVP? .....This is the first PVP update since reapers emissary and OP is complaining about lack of PVE updates.

    Equally deranged is the idea of identifying yourself as a pure "PVE" player in a pirate PVEVP game!! Why would you pigeon hole yourself like that and not get to experience all the game has to offer. My advice to any "PVE" players is do some hourglass for the lols and improve.

  • It's never your loot until its handed in, anyone and everyone is a target in open waters around the map. Your best tool is your head and learning how to juke other ships and lay in the damage when you have the shot. The best defense is a good offense when you have the supplies and chance and learning when its in your favor so you don't get boarded.

  • @personalc0ffee
    I just tested it to be sure I wasn't saying wrong things.

    Buried some loot at K-9, sailed all the way to golden sand to post the map on the quest board, sailed back at K-9 without the map, I was still able to dig back my loot.
    I am sure the same thing will happen if the map bundle sink/despawn.
    Buried loot stay available until the server shut down regardless of what happen to the maps.

    So it is a valid strategie to hide your loot.

  • @ardyason said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @personalc0ffee
    I just tested it to be sure I wasn't saying wrong things.

    Buried some loot at K-9, sailed all the way to golden sand to post the map on the quest board, sailed back at K-9 without the map, I was still able to dig back my loot.
    I am sure the same thing will happen if the map bundle sink/despawn.
    Buried loot stay available until the server shut down regardless of what happen to the maps.

    So it is a valid strategie to hide your loot.

    I think there is a risk of losing it when you're getting server merged and don't have the map(s).

    While @PersonalC0ffee was wrong I think about posting it to a board would lose the treasure, the "I am sure the same thing ", is based on nothing though as you didn't test that.

    Will you still see the markings of buried treasure when someone picks up the voyage ?

  • @dr-sweendog said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @scheneighnay said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @dr-sweendog said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    It's a PVPVE game. Being a "non-PVP" player isn't viable and shouldn't be accommodated. Be a PVPVE player and improve your PVP skills.

    Meanwhile in reality most activity is PVE, most content is PVE, and that content isn't designed in a way that can be done with constant harassment from PVPers.

    So like every other PVP game, if PVPers always get their way, they'll destroy the content that enables their playstyle, ultimately ruin the game, and move on to other games to ruin.

    PVPers would be wise to recognize they rely on PVErs tolerating them in order for the game to be playable.

    With HG PVP, PVP is no longer reliant on PVErs stacking loot. The PVE population of sea of thieves could disappear tomorrow and PVPers would still earn gold from hourglass. So PVP does not exist as a consequence of PVErs "tolerance". PVP was never really reliant on PVErs stacking loot anyways since emissary flags are highly valuable, regardless if the ship is empty of not.

    Lets be real though. Part of what makes this game so exciting is that at any point during your PVE journey, a player could come along and disrupt to monotonous game loop of killing mobs and selling loot for cosmetics. The game would be incredibly dull without the interaction between PVP and PVE and the stakes that ensues. A Fort of Fortune or FOTD would be incredibly boring without the tuckers or even the risk of an approaching galleon on the horizon.

    Correct, most of the content in this game is PVE focused. Veils, Sovereigns, world events etc. etc. etc are all QoL updates for PVE players. Really shows how deranged the premise of this post is. "When will non-PVP players get some QoL win condition in PVP? .....This is the first PVP update since reapers emissary and OP is complaining about lack of PVE updates.

    Equally deranged is the idea of identifying yourself as a pure "PVE" player in a pirate PVEVP game!! Why would you pigeon hole yourself like that and not get to experience all the game has to offer. My advice to any "PVE" players is do some hourglass for the lols and improve.

    The game has no equivalent, or else PVErs would have left a long time ago.

    Saying "you need to do PVP to enjoy the game" is as ignorant as saying "you need to do Pirate's Life to enjoy the game"

    Not all of the content appeals to everyone. Especially PVP where you have to deal with people who spend 12 hours a day on the game and use every exploit under the sun, as that's how PVP games always go down.

  • @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @ardyason said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @personalc0ffee
    I just tested it to be sure I wasn't saying wrong things.

    Buried some loot at K-9, sailed all the way to golden sand to post the map on the quest board, sailed back at K-9 without the map, I was still able to dig back my loot.
    I am sure the same thing will happen if the map bundle sink/despawn.
    Buried loot stay available until the server shut down regardless of what happen to the maps.

    So it is a valid strategie to hide your loot.

    I think there is a risk of losing it when you're getting server merged and don't have the map(s).

    While @PersonalC0ffee was wrong I think about posting it to a board would lose the treasure, the "I am sure the same thing ", is based on nothing though as you didn't test that.

    Will you still see the markings of buried treasure when someone picks up the voyage ?

    You won't see the markings once the map is lost or posted but you'll be able to see the loot buried in the sand.

    Likewise you don't need to pick a map off of the board to stumble across treasure.
    My crew has found npc quest board treasure before without taking a map, just by coincidence of stumbling across it while on another dig quest.

    I've heard it claimed before that once a server closes you get credit for all of your unrecovered buried treasure just like if someone found it, but I'm not sure if that's the case.

  • @lem0n-curry
    I have no idea on the server merging so I will need to make some testing. Same thing with maps sinking, I need to test it but since it take ~20min for the bundle to sink that require patience and time.

    As for the marking, yes you'll still be able to see them even if someone take the map. Buried treasures doesn't work the same way than normals treasures. When you bury something, anyone can see the spot and dig it up regardless of the state of the map.
    Even more, if someone take one of the randomly generated map of the board, anyone can dig them up if they find the spot before the crew who took the map (Happened to me to randomly find a dig spot and when I pick it up it's one of the pre-generated names of the board that appear).
    Basically if you have the map you can see it,
    if you place it on the board you can see it,
    if someone take it you can see it,
    and if a random pirate happen to go at the same place he will be able to see it too.

    Of course you will not throw away your map bundle at the ocean as soon as you have buried something, you'll throw it in a hidden spot if someone start chasing you so they can't take your map and go to your stash of buried loot.
    Not a fullproof way to keep treasures hidden but an effective one for those who do not want the risk of losing it on the waves.

  • @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    Red sea-ing didn't protect your loot. It literally puts loot out of the map so that no one can get it. It's the definition of an "if I can't have it then no one can." negative attitude.

    It has no impact on the survivability rate of attacked players. The survivability of players is largely down to skill and getting lucky with the hit-reg roulette wheel.

  • @vakrisone said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    Red sea-ing didn't protect your loot. It literally puts loot out of the map so that no one can get it. It's the definition of an "if I can't have it then no one can." negative attitude.

    It has no impact on the survivability rate of attacked players. The survivability of players is largely down to skill and getting lucky with the hit-reg roulette wheel.

    It didn't kill the loot it made it annoying to get

    which is no different than when people hide loot during a chase, let it sink somewhere, put it in a spot that is hard to grab or not possible to grab/harpoon

    They just served a party the win condition in a specific scenario, that's all it was

    It is interference, it is picking a winner that did not earn what they are being given, and devs are free to make that decision it's their game, but that is what the decision is. It's not something else.

  • Fix the double gunning animation exploit and adjust the brig speed against the wind.

  • @wolfmanbush You're right, honestly. I probably just am overthinking.

  • @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @vakrisone said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    Red sea-ing didn't protect your loot. It literally puts loot out of the map so that no one can get it. It's the definition of an "if I can't have it then no one can." negative attitude.

    It has no impact on the survivability rate of attacked players. The survivability of players is largely down to skill and getting lucky with the hit-reg roulette wheel.

    It didn't kill the loot it made it annoying to get

    which is no different than when people hide loot during a chase, let it sink somewhere, put it in a spot that is hard to grab or not possible to grab/harpoon

    They just served a party the win condition in a specific scenario, that's all it was

    It is interference, it is picking a winner that did not earn what they are being given, and devs are free to make that decision it's their game, but that is what the decision is. It's not something else.

    No it isn't. Getting your ship sunk or despawned because you're out of bounds means you lost the chase.

    When a ship sinks, the loot (and supplies as well) floats up - for others to pick up (or for yourself if you are lucky and sail quickly to the location). Just like when a ship scuttles or sinks in the seas for whatever reason.
    As no loot is yours until you turn it in, why should have a crew that sunk their ship out of bounds have any say in the removal of the loot they had on board ?

    Loot that ended up outside of the game boundaries was an unintended effect of the despawning of the ship when out of bounds mechanic.

    It was used by some as an exploit, just like, for example, waiting to get attacked in an Hourglass battle by defending within the red sea of Shores of Gold.

    In the next update this exploit will be fixed, just as they fixed the Hourglass one - only difference is, is this took way too long to get addressed, while they were quick with the initial fix for Hourglass (which needed a 2nd fix in a later update). Let's hope they address it properly in one go this time.

  • @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @vakrisone said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    Red sea-ing didn't protect your loot. It literally puts loot out of the map so that no one can get it. It's the definition of an "if I can't have it then no one can." negative attitude.

    It has no impact on the survivability rate of attacked players. The survivability of players is largely down to skill and getting lucky with the hit-reg roulette wheel.

    It didn't kill the loot it made it annoying to get

    which is no different than when people hide loot during a chase, let it sink somewhere, put it in a spot that is hard to grab or not possible to grab/harpoon

    They just served a party the win condition in a specific scenario, that's all it was

    It is interference, it is picking a winner that did not earn what they are being given, and devs are free to make that decision it's their game, but that is what the decision is. It's not something else.

    No it isn't. Getting your ship sunk or despawned because you're out of bounds means you lost the chase.

    When a ship sinks, the loot (and supplies as well) floats up - for others to pick up (or for yourself if you are lucky and sail quickly to the location). Just like when a ship scuttles or sinks in the seas for whatever reason.
    As no loot is yours until you turn it in, why should have a crew that sunk their ship out of bounds have any say in the removal of the loot they had on board ?

    Loot that ended up outside of the game boundaries was an unintended effect of the despawning of the ship when out of bounds mechanic.

    It was used by some as an exploit, just like, for example, waiting to get attacked in an Hourglass battle by defending within the red sea of Shores of Gold.

    In the next update this exploit will be fixed, just as they fixed the Hourglass one - only difference is, is this took way too long to get addressed, while they were quick with the initial fix for Hourglass (which needed a 2nd fix in a later update). Let's hope they address it properly in one go this time.

    "unintended" is just the narrative now

    if people were to look through old threads about the red sea there was a different tune in them

    That's what they are going with after they gave in, in the past it was always similar to my position which is it was a skill issue and was an established possibility and that changing it would be serving one and against the other.

    just like how anchor stacking became "unintended" after they gave in

    These things are years old, they just gave in to loud voices with some pull and now it's "unintended"

    Red sea dumping was pretty much the only thing similar to risk that hoppers were taking, if they failed with their chain shots and their tdm and their ambushing they might have to deal with the red sea, apparently multiple safety nets that were already in place weren't enough. Now the loot gets delivered with some birdies

  • @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @vakrisone said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @arch-ideall said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Red Sea being changed in favor of attackers means that non-pvp player lost another tool that helped them protect their loot. Not just by sinking it, which was more of fake draw, but also by creating pressure for attackers that the loot had been at risk of being denied, which with some luck could had been used to gain distance to escape. This tool is gone so the survivability rate of attacked players has yet again decreased.

    My question is, when will we get some QoL changes that would go in the opposite direction to improve the survivability of defending crews?

    Red sea-ing didn't protect your loot. It literally puts loot out of the map so that no one can get it. It's the definition of an "if I can't have it then no one can." negative attitude.

    It has no impact on the survivability rate of attacked players. The survivability of players is largely down to skill and getting lucky with the hit-reg roulette wheel.

    It didn't kill the loot it made it annoying to get

    which is no different than when people hide loot during a chase, let it sink somewhere, put it in a spot that is hard to grab or not possible to grab/harpoon

    They just served a party the win condition in a specific scenario, that's all it was

    It is interference, it is picking a winner that did not earn what they are being given, and devs are free to make that decision it's their game, but that is what the decision is. It's not something else.

    No it isn't. Getting your ship sunk or despawned because you're out of bounds means you lost the chase.

    When a ship sinks, the loot (and supplies as well) floats up - for others to pick up (or for yourself if you are lucky and sail quickly to the location). Just like when a ship scuttles or sinks in the seas for whatever reason.
    As no loot is yours until you turn it in, why should have a crew that sunk their ship out of bounds have any say in the removal of the loot they had on board ?

    Loot that ended up outside of the game boundaries was an unintended effect of the despawning of the ship when out of bounds mechanic.

    It was used by some as an exploit, just like, for example, waiting to get attacked in an Hourglass battle by defending within the red sea of Shores of Gold.

    In the next update this exploit will be fixed, just as they fixed the Hourglass one - only difference is, is this took way too long to get addressed, while they were quick with the initial fix for Hourglass (which needed a 2nd fix in a later update). Let's hope they address it properly in one go this time.

    "unintended" is just the narrative now

    if people were to look through old threads about the red sea there was a different tune in them

    I don't think Rare has ever said removing loot due to despawning outside of the boundary was intended.

    That's what they are going with after they gave in, in the past it was always similar to my position which is it was a skill issue and was an established possibility and that changing it would be serving one and against the other.

    just like how anchor stacking became "unintended" after they gave in

    These things are years old, they just gave in to loud voices with some pull and now it's "unintended"

    When an exploit has longevity in a game, more people will be aware of it (everytime a crew uses it against a crew that wasn't aware before, more chance of seeing it on a stream &c) and thus the number of crews that use it will increase.
    This will come to the attention of the devs either by them encountering it themselves, watching streams or possibly reports - hey they even read these forums.
    This again will put the issue on the agenda or higher at their agenda if they were already aware of it.

    Just like pre-made alliance servers - they have said it's only an insignificant part of the players who do this gold farming and won't act upon it for now (I might disagree on what they call insignificant though 😁), on which I deduce that if that population grows to a certain "significant amount" , they will do something about it.

    Not everything is to blame on a small, disliked by you, population of the game.

    Red sea dumping was pretty much the only thing similar to risk that hoppers were taking, if they failed with their chain shots and their tdm and their ambushing they might have to deal with the red sea, apparently multiple safety nets that were already in place weren't enough. Now the loot gets delivered with some birdies

    Now, are you arguing that Red Sea dumping was only a means against portal hoppers or only a determent for them ?

    "Organic PvPvE" players also encountered crews that did Red Sea dumping - I know: I'm one of those.

  • @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Not everything is to blame on a small, disliked by you, population of the game.

    I don't criticize (in a negative way) or attack individuals I criticize effects of actions specifically on the environment and those that have the least power and/or are carrying the most weight within the environment.

    I generally don't attach myself to thinking negatively about individuals as I don't think it's healthy for me or productive overall.

    Plenty probably don't like me lol but I don't dislike them.

  • @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Not everything is to blame on a small, disliked by you, population of the game.

    I don't criticize (in a negative way) or attack individuals

    Did I accuse you of that ?

    I criticize effects of actions specifically on the environment and those that have the least power and/or are carrying the most weight within the environment.

    I generally don't attach myself to thinking negatively about individuals as I don't think it's healthy for me or productive overall.

    You do seem to be negative about a subset of players though - that shines through in your posts, at least to me.

  • @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @wolfmanbush said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    @lem0n-curry said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Not everything is to blame on a small, disliked by you, population of the game.

    I don't criticize (in a negative way) or attack individuals

    Did I accuse you of that ?

    I criticize effects of actions specifically on the environment and those that have the least power and/or are carrying the most weight within the environment.

    I generally don't attach myself to thinking negatively about individuals as I don't think it's healthy for me or productive overall.

    You do seem to be negative about a subset of players though - that shines through in your posts, at least to me.

    Critical of how actions effect the environment specifically related to hopping pvp and within that a part is content creation. I have been open and transparent about why I post here, to support the organic environment including risk/reward balance and bettering the quality of life for those that don't have power in the community.

    Some of the things I criticize are popular, very popular in this community and that is going to cause some to focus on that because some will take it personal, and that is understandable, they are passionate about things I may criticize.

    I don't bring grudges to topics. I criticize dev decisions and I regularly post positive things about them and always support a belief that they are not being malicious in decision.

    If you read the entirety of how I communicate you would know that.

    Just as I don't think streamers are malicious for playing how they play and pvpers that hop. I've always stated that and when they do things or suggest things that I agree with I support it entirely.

    I strongly believe in personal accountability though and welcome the opinion you have stated as something for others and for myself to consider about my posts.

  • @subject-18-jord

    Seems curious that people want to shut down that servers but then uses it to get commendations xD

    Let me give you some info. Alliance Servers + Xbox Only Servers are the reason why SoT still having players active. Season 8 killed the game due to the huge amounts of cheaters on PC lobbies and Hourglass, using Keg teleporting and speedhacks.

    Shut that servers down, and check steamcharts/ microsoft LFG a week later, the players amount will be close to critical numbers ;)

    Don´t get me wrong, I used to love PvP, when arena was a thing, I got all the commendations and cosmetics. But I will not join a Crossplay Session or Hourglass knowing that I have high chances of facing cheaters, sorry . Until Rare decides to put some anticheat, people will use Xbox servers and Ally servers to play, if you want, you can check it by yourself, find some of this discord channels and look how long queue is for a spot... 3-4 hours.... even more during event or community days.

    Is a matter of pure logic xD

  • @mrestiercol said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    Let me give you some info. Alliance Servers + Xbox Only Servers are the reason why SoT still having players active. Season 8 killed the game due to the huge amounts of cheaters on PC lobbies and Hourglass, using Keg teleporting and speedhacks.

    Cheating has little impact on organic activity.

    Season 8 improved organic activity, not a major shift but a noticeable improvement in activity, specifically because of separating a lot of pve and pvp and people that pve and pvp could find both

    Alliance servers and xbox servers are more consistent in activity but 8 overall was an improvement, it may be temporary, we shall see, but an improvement for a few months.

    Nerfing alliance servers isn't worth it at this point, they would just be chipping away at their own activity after the "damage" is already done. They know that, unless some massive drama happens that completely shifts the situation it'll likely be more of the same.

    Overall and longterm HG has far more positive effects than negative on the organic environment.

    Hg itself is an eh experience and had a lot of early flaws and lack of interest but the effects of it existing are quite positive overall and it did help bring down toxicity during combat quite a bit because of it being consenting combat and because of bouncing people out after a fight.

  • @dr-sweendog

    Isn’t that cute, but it’s WRONG!

    If you separated PvP and PvE then the PvP players would die out and the PvE would flourish!

    Allow me to explain, without PvP a player could play their session without interruption. Alliance Servers are proof of this! They don’t play for gold, they play for a risk free environment. Take away the alliance flag, the server alliances will still continue. I agree that the threat of PvP can be a bit exciting but in the end, most players don’t think so. Why do you think there are so many posts asking for private servers or the separation of PvP from PvE?

    As for PvP, yes with the hourglass players can still earn gold but most PvP players enjoy the hunt and chase of players. With no PvE, there is nothing for the PvP players to hunt. The hourglass feature would become boring after a while with no variety. There are many different events that PvE can enjoy without PvP.

    In short, PvE will keep the game alive without PvP. Why do you think there are so many PvE updates and only 1 major PvP update?

  • @coffeelight5545 said in When will non-pvp players get some QoL win condition in pvp?:

    In short, PvE will keep the game alive without PvP. Why do you think there are so many PvE updates and only 1 major PvP update?

    Because pve updates are pvp updates in reality

    new content is new interest and more activity in theory

    pvers produce for reward, pvpers hunt that new production for reward, and those that play both engage in both

    For example season 9

    Ideally pvers and pve/pvpers will produce and pvpers will invest in defense Hg while hunting a server. If this happens this way season 9 will do alright for pve, pvp and those that do both.

    Ideally the appeal for pve in season 9 will be the qol improvements and world event tinkering which not only will make the experience of pve more enjoyable but the losses less severe, in theory. Higher production means higher activity for pvpers and now with defense HG they have an option to improve their sessions, in theory.

77
Posts
26.1k
Views
68 out of 77