[Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion

  • 0

    @glannigan yeah but this way smaller crews or newer players are given improved odds in rematches, also others are encouraged to attack the cursed ship since it can't outrun anyone anymore and it's crew will be weaker, then maybe offer a reward for returning the loot to it's owner, to encourage multi dimensional player interaction, also maybe include a parlay system so players can offer to leave I.E. be banished from the current server for a while in exchange for some loot to avoid the long slow run and risk to your event only/real world money cosmetics that comes with actually engaging in a fight,

  • 6

    @thanotos-omega

    It is surprising that a new player expects to be a master of the seas the moment they finished the tutorial and has big words about others not caring about the health of the game.

    PvPers are at risk of sinking each time they engage in combat, most of the crews that attack me even when I am solo will end up at the bottom of the seas. The whole idea of handicaps is against the general rule that all pirates are equals. Solo sloops are not some weaklings, a good solo captain is a threat even for the all mighty galleons. You can head back and challenge those that sunk you, you would be surprised that many will actually have your treasure onboard, but beware they bested you once... they might do it again.

    Before you judge the pirates that roam the seas, learn to navigate them yourself, find yourself a crew and if you need some pointers just reach out. Many of these pirates that you claim are interested in bullying will actually help you out. Yes we will tell you to get good, but we also don't mind helping others also become good so you might one day surpass us and sink us. We are not out to bully, because nothing beats a good clash of steel and cannons roaring, a worthy opponent! There will always be better pirates out on the seas, become the pirate you want to be and master the skillset and use the tools to achieve it.

    A quick basic lesson of the seamanship:

    1. Do not sail with more than you are willing to lose, sell as often as required to achieve this.
    2. Watch that horizon like a hawk, even when engaged in PvE one must have one eye on the environment to spot others before they are near.
    3. When parked at an island, raise those sails and anchor as this will allow you to get a quick escape.
    4. Learn to sail and the differences between the ships.
    5. If you are struggling by yourself, find yourself a crew and a captain to teach you the ropes.

    You are entering the seas, a PvEvP environment and it is shared between the new and the old. Just because you are new or want to just head out on a voyage does not excuse you from learning to play the game. The seas can be a harsh place, but once you learn to navigate them and get your sea legs... it can also be a beautiful relaxing cruise. If you want to parlay, you need to use that speaking horn my dear man... not going to promise that they will respond in an honorable way, but there are those that do.

  • 0

    @cotu42 See this is exactly why i uninstalled, you aren't interested in discourse, you just want to be fed new victims the idea that you may actually risk more than a minor set back scares you because you want the victims to carry all of the losses,you want to gamble but only when you have no risk when you don't have to worry about a long hard fought effort coming to nothing, or losing a thing you worked hard for, because what? if risk is not needed for you to have fun then there is no reason for the other person to need to have it, so either call or fold, if you aren't ready to risk your real money/event exclusive items then don't demand others risk their time and effort for you, either make fair bets or no bets,

    Also i use gender neutral pronouns/terms,

  • 5

    @thanotos-omega said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    First, my very first interaction with other players was getting ganked right after the tutorial, it wasn't a big deal because no loot was on the line, but it was still kind of not encouraging,

    My first experience was being attacked and cussed out within the first few minutes and this was prior to there even being a tutorial so I had no clue what I was doing. I got over it, kept teaching myself how to play and ended up not doing so bad.

    second, i temperarily uninstalled the game after seeing this forum, it's so disheartening to see the loudest voices in the fandom seem to be people who are more interested in thinly veiled bullying then in the actual health and fun of the game,

    Really? You uninstalled the game over a forum? So because some people dont agree with a PvE mode that means they support bullying? They arent interested in health of the game because they do not support PvE mode? Im confused.

    third, the solution is simple, make PVP really risky so the aggressors question doing it, by putting their commendations and cosmetics on the line, if you engage in too ?one sided of a battle and loose, you can loose even event and real world money cosmetics to the victor, PVE players thus feel like they aren't just there to be victims for the bully whales, since they could save real world money getting a cosmetic if they score a lucky kill during a fight, while setting back their attackers,

    Seriously? You want people to lose real money cosmetics for PvP'ing in a PvPvE game? What? Can Rare even legally do that? After someone purchases an item with real money can they just take it without compensation? Im not so sure about that and even if they could who in the world would spend their real money on a game who takes your items back for PvPing? That would affect their extra income from the Europium. Also why would Rare punish PvP'ers and PvPvE'ers when they rely on them to be a threat in their game? And yes taking someone item they spent real life money on is punishing. How would Rare even know who the aggressor is?

    Also as far as the pursuer having no risk that isnt all true, they lose supplies and really what I find to be the worse "risk" of all is the risk of losing. I was just PvP'ing on a game other night the guy yelled out "I never lost to a girl before!". They didn't get one kill on me in our match up and the fact they lost was satisfying enough to me and emotionally turmoiling enough for them.

    I think the real issue is there isnt really much motive to get into a fight with a chasing ship since 9/10 there is nothing on their ship, one reason why me and my friend dont bother.

    Your suggestions however are abit over the top. Maybe there could be a gold bonus for sinking a player ship?That way there is more motive but of course that can increase the desire to PvP. I do not see how the game can punish someone for sinking a ship since as I asked, how would it know who the aggressor was?

    fourth, a sort of handicap system that makes revenge killing easier like when another crew kills you you can curse them making their ship slower giving them random effect like anchor dropping wheel turning and locking random holes ranged weapons misfiring and damaging the owner ect, and they can only sell their stolen loot at the most distant outpost, so that when a solo slooper get's ganked by a galleon, they become a raid boss for that crew and have a chance for some catharsis, and to reclaim their stuff,

    And what about people like me who kill or sink in defense majority of the time? Why should I be punished with a handicap for defending myself?

    Also why on this forum is it always sloopers getting ganked by a galleon? As a slooper who sunk galleons I find that rather dismissive of the capabilities of sloopers. The galleon is the easiest ship to sink. Also as someone who is sometimes on a galleon we get attacked by sloopers, once were were attacked by THREE, at the same time! Remember that @wagstr @BloodyBil ?

  • 0

    @combatxkitty If the game's community is mostly bullies desperate for others to do all the leg work so they can curbstomp them while hiding behind claims of risk vs reward that's not a community i am super into joining,

    And if they don't want to risk it they can go do some PVE so they have treasure to risk simple as that, also eve online laughs at this entire childish concept since they regularly loose hundreds of dollars in real world money over one bad fight,

    It's not hard to implement a system where you have to declare an attack before you are allowed to damage the other ship thus making it so you accept the responsibility of being the one to start the fight, represented by some extra flag flying to let the other team know you are fair game now,

  • 5

    @thanotos-omega said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    @combatxkitty If the game's community is mostly bullies desperate for others to do all the leg work so they can curbstomp them while hiding behind claims of risk vs reward that's not a community i am super into joining,

    That is very judgmental. I am all about no PvE servers and I PvE 99 percent of the time on this game. I actually much more enjoy helping others, especially if they seem new. It is 2020, judging people because they think different than you is not cool anymore.

    And if they don't want to risk it they can go do some PVE so they have treasure to risk simple as that, also eve online laughs at this entire childish concept since they regularly loose hundreds of dollars in real world money over one bad fight,

    Eve online laughs? I care why? How does one lose hundreds of dollars over one bad fight?

    It's not hard to implement a system where you have to declare an attack before you are allowed to damage the other ship thus making it so you accept the responsibility of being the one to start the fight, represented by some extra flag flying to let the other team know you are fair game now,

    Declare an attack? So if I am doing a fort and a ship is coming over to attack I have to wait till they declare an attack and get the jump on me before I can make a move to defend myself? Had a slooper once chase me and my friend for an hour swearing at us, if we declared an attack on him we would be punished for it? Seems abit silly to me.

    Also again why should someone be punished for PvP'ing in a PvP game? There is griefing and there is PvP'ing, people do not need to be punished for PvP'ing.

  • 0

    @combatxkitty everyone here is all about the risk vs reward makes the game fun until the idea that they have to risk comes up, so i believe them without evidence about as much as i believe busty teens in my area want to chat with me, so yeah if all their talk amounts to either "Other people need PVE players to give them victims to loot," or "i'm not a PVPer but i am totally on their side and i think they are the only ones we should listen too" while also only caring to brag about how extreme l33t they are at the game, well the conclusions draw themselves,

    like i said either PVPers need to add to the game or they need to stop whining like entitled brats because others refuse to be seals for them to club without protest,

  • 6

    @thanotos-omega Where does this idea come from that SOT is divided between bumbling incompetent potatoes who have never won a battle in their life, and 9999+ hours double gunning vets who never ever miss a shot and have never sunk in their life?

  • 0

    @scarecrow1771 I was addressing how one of the other users kept bragging about their achievements as if that was important to a discussion about the nature of the relationship between players,

    Another simple option would be PVE only rewards that can't be acquired through PVP thus forcing the PVPers to engage with the whole game,

    Also maybe making outposts neatural ground where if you attack others AI shore canons and guards agro on you and you can't use that outpost for several in game hours, this could relive the outpost camping issue,

  • 2

    @thanotos-omega said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    @combatxkitty everyone here is all about the risk vs reward makes the game fun until the idea that they have to risk comes up, so i believe them without evidence about as much as i believe busty teens in my area want to chat with me, so yeah if all their talk amounts to either "Other people need PVE players to give them victims to loot," or "i'm not a PVPer but i am totally on their side and i think they are the only ones we should listen too" while also only caring to brag about how extreme l33t they are at the game, well the conclusions draw themselves,

    Risk vs reward is the crux of many PvPvE games, not just this one. The risk you are bringing up is people losing cosmetics they paid for with real money as punishment for PvPing, that is over the top. That risk would cost Rare money.

    Also how exactly does one lose hundreds of dollars in one Eve online PvP fight gone wrong? Also is it the game developers taking their cosmetics they spent real life money on that was non battle related because they lost a PvP fight or is it something like lets say you build something you spent real life money on and it gets destroyed? That is different situation.

    Example: If we had an option to build a ship on SOT and we could use real life money for material. We enter battle and that ship gets destroyed. That is different than getting into a fight, losing and then having Rare take your pet monkey Captain Banana's away as punishment for PvPing.

    Also like I said in that sloop situation who was harassing me and my friend, I would be mighty annoyed if lets say we finally did decide to fight and lost and then Rare took Grumpy McFluff from me or a ship set I spent 30 bucks on because I tried to sink someone who was harassing me but didnt succeed.

    like i said either PVPers need to add to the game or they need to stop whining like entitled brats because others refuse to be seals for them to club without protest,

    You are really splitting the base arnt you? PvE'ers , PvP'ers, you do realize there are plenty of PvPvE'ers, right? Also these gamers you accuse of being entitled purchased a PvPvE game. How are they entitled because they would like the PvPvE game they purchased to be a PvPvE game? Is a gamer who purchases Call Of Duty entitled because they expect there to be PvP? I think its slightly more entitled to buy a PvPvE game and complain about it having PvP and demanding a PvE server , no?

  • 3

    @scarecrow1771 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    @thanotos-omega Where does this idea come from that SOT is divided between bumbling incompetent potatoes who have never won a battle in their life, and 9999+ hours double gunning vets who never ever miss a shot and have never sunk in their life?

    Right. We all sink. Everyone on this thread has most likely been sunk. I been sunk. We all have had treasure we were at risk of losing, a good percent of us have cleared a fort we were at risk of losing, I mean seriously. Some people come here and act like people who are against PvE servers magically play with no risk!

  • 0

    This has probably been said before but it would make the game so much more enjoyable if you added boss health bars. You wouldn’t even need to add them to all enemies, just to the boss skeletons and whatnot. One example of how this could make the game better is the fact that with ghost captain greymarrow from the new event, i spent 4 and 1/2 hours whaling on him until i just gave up and had to get a friend to help me. I probably would’ve kept at it if there had been a health bar but at the end of the fight i just felt annoyed and dissatisfied with the fight. Also, the shadows of fate. During the greymarrow fight, he spawns 2 different colors at the same time. This means that you have to tank damage from 1-3 shadows of fate and greymarrow while you try to kill the weakened ones. It gets really annoying really fast. I get that you want players to work together on these but it seems like every time i try to get help, the other person gets bored and leaves or they destroy my ship and then leave. That is all for now. Thank you for your time.

  • 0

    @combatxkitty Because they only ever argue that PVE players need to be used as their victims, their only argument over and over is "if the people who prefer PVE leave we will have no one to bully and mooch off of," none of them seem to care about anything bur preserving the current PVP favoring status quo, and then show that it's all about bullying and stealing when they whine at the mere hint that they should be expected to play both halves of the game themselves, they don't care about figuring out how to balance things, they care about having someone whose new enough to be easy to beat and are scared of risking it themselves or worse losing the easy wins if they are stuck with only the other bullies to fight,

  • 3

    I think that it would be nice to have a private lobby option (even if there are reduced rewards) so that people can play the game without having others attack them. I play with my wife who is terrible at video games and she loves sailing around and finding treasure but anytime we get killed by players it ruins the fun. We have no loot most of the time but people still kill anyway. I would cast a vote for a PvE mode. That is all.

  • 1

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

    I never said "everyone", I said certain gamers. Coming here to merely discuss the possible idea of it is one thing and even I have discussed ideas about how to have a PvE mode however I see many post by people who demand a full adventure mode because they have zero interest in PvP and do not want to even bother trying to learn it. I mean really? Give me a break! They bought a game with PvP in it! That would be like me buying Forza and complaining there are no bike races, where are the bike races? I hate racing cars, bike races now!

    Yes. The thing is, we need to try to stop responding on the idea of a pure full adventure mode PvE server. It seems to me that there are a lot of reasonable people who think that there is a reasonable middle ground which would do nothing but improve the game. But whenever we get close to talking about the possibility of what that would look like a comment along the lines of "PvE servers must happen, I died once while stacking loot, that was totally unfair and unexpected and I will sue Rare unless they capitulate and call the new server after my cat" or "If you don't like getting spawn camped in the tavern on your first load up while I shout insults at you, you shouldn't have bought a game" and then someone says something that's a bit too much of a generalization in response, and then someone else feels the need to correct the generalization and we spend the next few pages talking about something that no-one involved in the discussion even really cares about that much. I know that's forums, and I know I'm King Canute here, but let's try maybe? A full adventure mode PvE server is not the best idea, I honestly don't think that any reasonable person disagrees with that, can we talk about what the line between that and doing nothing at all looks like?

    Tall Tale server. I actually lean the most heavy to this idea. I think that would be a fair addition and not split the base. I think making it its own faction would be fair aswell.

    You know, this is the one I'm most 'meh' about. I think that a little bit of tweaking with the checkpoint system would work just fine. Firstly, a teeny little tutorial in Maiden Voyage about how checkpoints and the captain's table actually physically work would go a long way. I know the info is there if you look it up outside of the game, but if you're making a tutorial make sure it tutors all the things that are happening, because its not 100% intuitive. Secondly, one of the issues seems to me to be that each of the three branching missions, which are quite early tall tales, each have non-checkpointed three island runs attached to quite complex puzzles. Its a different thing, but I had to re-run one of them multiple times due to technical and life issues and the checkpoint system could have been better employed.

    A PvE mode like arena however issue with that is it makes no business sense to Rare. PvE modes are more expensive to up keep than a mode that relies on PvP. If they made a condensed PvE mode ,lets say where there are boss fights and made its own faction it would be more resources because unlike the PvP type mode a PvE mode can not rely on players as a cheap threat. Rare would actually have to develop new threats to keep that mode interesting which equals money and time.

    As I've said, there can be a non-violent PvP mode. For example, and this is just off the top of my head, an area where you make timed speed runs sailing slalom around the rocks of shipwreck isle with no-one else around. The challenge and life span is still provided by other players, it teaches vital long term game skills, you can't have what you've earnt ripped from your hands and you can load up for a short session and still get something achieved without wanting to engage in the direct PvP side of the game. Similarly if there are sets of copies of the large islands with empty chests and treasure maps where fastest claim wins. You can use PvP to fuel the challenge of the game without forcing the pain of an endowed loss.

    Also like I said in another post here a chill session where you can just hang out and find random spawn treasure,shipwrecks or whatever while cruising with friends or solo but no voyages or forts or events. I would say no RP and some gold because I dont care if someone makes abit of gold. I cans see that as a just want to chill with friends night type of thing, a break from main adventure not a replacement.

    I think that for some people this is over the line of a PvE server. I'm willing to talk about pushing that line back and forth a bit, but I don't think there will ever be any consensus on such an idea.

    I know Rare is coming out with custom servers but still not sure what its all about. I guess they will be rentable? Im not 100 percent sure on that its just what I heard. I dont mind renting servers but as a PC'er im use to renting servers for serious mod usage not so much to play vanilla but I would give it a try.

    I mean, most likely situation right now is, we'll all see. I still think there's an interesting conversation to be had though.

  • 1

    @iridedeathwish We understand that. PvP is not for anyone. If you like sailing there are custom servers coming (without gold/rep ofc) :)

  • 0

    in the whole thread it shows that the thinking about PvE versus PvP is the problem.
    And this occured mainly when they made Arena and introduced an PvP only Mode and playstyle, even if this mode had some PvE elements in it with having to dig some chests, now only one chest afaik nobody cares for because it's not what wins you the match and anyway people are searching for TDM Lobbys.
    And this split and oppsosition was made popular by summit and pace and some other elitist streamers who made tuccing and DG popular, no matter with or without explit, they showed a playstyle about stomping noobs and play tricks on others, regular or irregular, exploit or not, it is the mindest that makes up and hardens the front about PvP versus PvE.

    and the game was meant to be inclusive!
    the game was meant to be a pirate adventure where pvp and pve are both important to get that hang of a pirate adventure.

    But to deliver to toxic bullies, give them even a training ground and telling everybody every playstyle is viable, when the worst you can do is splitting playstyles and not hearing the adventerous pirates and make the cutlass mandatory, fix glitches and make these pure PvX playstyle unattractive or impossible, they didn't.

    15M players and Falcore telling us the game is growing and lots to come.
    but sweeping major problems under the carpet!

    The games community has just evolved into something i dont like that much, its not the game - the game is fine and you cannot do any gamemechanics to control this, its the players and the less and less adventurers branching out into both aspects of the game in a balanced way, but extremes and pure PvX playstyle exploiting and circumventing intended mechanics.
    some players even state that serverhopping is a feature and a tool of the "tools not rules" formula.
    ridiculous!!!
    Maybe we get a hop server item in the tavern and on the ferry lol
    Oh wait i'll do a request for that.
    I bet all will say no , that not #bemorepirate this and that...
    ridiculous it is!!!

    Rare your community building is good for cash and thats all!
    Its worst bs regarding a healthy, friendly and inclusive community and you can see it in this thread where people feel they belong to this or that side, when there should be only one side who combines and unites these both extremes who doe not contradict or are mutually exclusive, but belong together.

    Arena and supporting and partnering several streamers makes you look like beeing greedy for money only but dont care for a healthy community with a common mindest about pvepvirates.

    No it's pve versus pvp - and you this thread is even poking it!!!

  • 3

    @cotu42 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    You can switch and choose, if you have a PVE world and a PVP world... the PvEvP world is no more. You lose the balance of the world, you make the shared world into two separate ones out of which you choose at the menu screen.

    Again, only if there are only PvPers and PvEers who are being forced together by the game. If the majority of players are actually PvEvPers, then that's what they'll choose. Because PvEvP is different from both PvE and PvP and most players are PvEvPers. And again, if the majority of players are actually PvEers and PvPers who are being jammed into a pot by a game that they like a lot of the bits of but generally wish were different, that feels like another issue worth answering.

    The chests are empty... the chests add nothing other than gold value to your purse, you are the one that makes the argument it is only about the fun, not the treasure and yet you and many others have been moaning about the loss of that treasure.

    Yes, because currently the end of a particular run is turning in treasure. The number of pennies that then jingle up onto my penny count is largely irrespective to me, I'm only a hundred or so hours into the game and I've already bought everything I actually want to buy, I only pick things up now to pop commendations or get missions. If those two things weren't there I wouldn't care if every chest was empty, but I'd still get annoyed if I didn't get to turn them in. Because turning in the treasure is the culmination of the story of the session, its the medal ceremony at the end of Star Wars. You can't say for sure that people only care about the money that results because they get annoyed when they don't reach that culmination, its like someone ripping out the last page of the book you're reading to not get to turn in your treasure chest. I spend just as long picking up castaway chests as captain's.

    You state it is a counter argument? The whole premise of the discussion is not whether a PvE mode would work, but also which conditions need to apply to it. I state clear restrictions for it to function without causing issues with the current mode, you are the one fighting me on those conditions.

    No, I said that it was a counter-factual, not a counter argument. Which is to say, a statement about a possible situation that I don't think is real, likely or preferable. Like saying "If Paul Hollywood ruled the world we'd all have buns for tea, and that wouldn't be a bad thing".

    If It is a bad idea or a terrible idea... why are you arguing in favor of it? Shouldn't the developers add good ideas or great ideas and not implement bad ones that hurt their brand?

    Again, you're not following. I'm not arguing in favour of it, I'm saying its a bad idea, you're saying that its a terrible idea. I don't think its a terrible idea, I only think its a bad one. If you're looking to say that is a terrible idea I'm going to say that I think its just a bad one. That's not the same as arguing for it, its not the same as saying its a good idea. I think its a bad idea, I always thought it was a bad idea, I don't think that its a terrible idea, and if you say that it is, I'll disagree, but yes, I think its a pointless disagreement. Which is why, a few pages back, I stopped responding. I don't think its a good idea, I just don't think its as bad an idea as you do.

    If the odds of encountering these people is so low, what is the big deal?

    Because the psychological impact on new players is totally disproportionate to their in-game effect, which is negatively effecting player behaviour and could (and for all we know is) negatively effecting the game. Its for this reason that some of the tweaks that I'd be in favour of would actually have nothing to do with in game changes but rather ways of helping new players to frame and understand what actually just happened to them.

    If they are offering loot, it is their loot and how they acquired it is really not much of an issue.

    If one person sails out and digs up loot and sails back to an Outpost, taking half an hour or so, and then someone else kills them while having nothing aboard, five minutes out from the Outpost and turns it in, it just isn't accurate to say that those players are both offering the same possibility of loss to encounter ratio.

    Nobody likes to lose, so should everyone become a god and be handed the rewards for free? It is a game, losing isn't fun but it is part of a game. Should people be able to opt out of losing, no... they shouldn't. Play the game, be a good sport in victory and loss.

    But people aren't getting rewards for free, they're putting in work. Any given reward in Sea of Thieves comes from a combination of Work+Risk=Value. It is possible that that equation could become unbalanced, and it is possible that helping people to re-balance it is a good thing. Everyone has turned in loot without ever coming within ten miles of another ship all session, that loot wasn't turned in for free, helping newer players to see the reality of the risk balance rather than the unhelpful perception of it seems like a good thing.

    People are never without risk, engaging in PvP can end up in a loss or win scenario for either end. Regardless of whether you bring treasure or not, you are risking your time, effort and fun. Once again you are purely reflecting upon the hardcore PVE and hardcore PVP people, while the major concern is the PvEvP majority people, which engage in both aspects of the game.

    But if you enjoy PvP, and you enjoy a hard fought battle even if you lose, you're not even risking your fun. Meanwhile, if you hate PvP you don't even have a chance of fun. The risk balance just isn't even there. The thing is that I'm not even bothered by that fact particularly, but you said that people shouldn't get rewards without risks, the thing is, currently PvP players are, while PvE player's aren't. I think its fine for players to get rewards without risks, but if you're going to hold the opposite against PvE servers you should at least be consistent about it being a problem with PvPers.

    They risk their treasure and do PVE as well as PVP. They will not always have loot on board and they won't always be without it. Catch them at the right time and you profit, else you end up with empty hands... if you win the battle. The question is at what time do you find them, when they are out being a PVE crew or when they are out being a PVP one?

    I would suggest that the question is how do people try to find them and how do they deal with them when they've found them. One thing that bugs me personally is the idea that someone who spots me sailing out from an Outpost and chases to attack me is good at the game just because they're capable of catching and attacking me. If you sink a lot of people who have no loot aboard, you're not very good at the game, when people are carrying loot or not is not a co-incidence, its not just chance. One of the issues is that there is far less pressure to make players learn that aspect of the game, so for example if cannonballs were simply far rarer, if ships came with enough to defend against a reasonable run of Krakens and such, but that if you go after every ship you see just because you'd quickly run out that would force players to actually learn to read patterns of behaviour, the position of vault islands around the map and stop them sinking ships that are empty just because. Its not about cutting out PvP, its about making it less of a cheap option.

    You keep coming back to but PVP people and but PVE people... which in turn establishes my argument even more. You keep coming back to these terms, because even the PvEvP people that you encounter you are placing in one of the boxes based on their current activity. Are they out doing PVE enjoyment or PVP enjoyment. The balance in risk is the fact that PvEvP people are both, it just matters which session and at what time you come across them.

    The point is that everyone has a balance within them of PvP and PvE, and is simply quicker to say PvP and PvE, but read it as "People who are, by overall inclination or current mood, at that moment more inclined to PvP". The point is that if the balance in the game slides too far out of whack with the balance within the majority of players that is an issue.

    Provide these people a choice at the menu and that is exactly what they will be making. The choice that they usually make out on the seas, they will now make in the menu screen.

    Yes, and if that choice is a slider rather than a simple yes or no, why would that be an issue?

    You are a PvEvP player according to yourself, you yourself have indicated that based on the activity you want to do you would turn off PVP.

    Yes, when I'm doing an activity that isn't enhanced by PvP. I'd turn off the annoyance switch, not the fun switch.

    They are NOT deserting the PVEVP mode completely, they are deciding to do PVE activity in the dedicated mode for it, they have no reason to do that in the PVEVP mode and so will only enter that for their PVP needs...

    What about their PvEvP needs?

    They will still play on the PvEvP mode, but they will not do so when they are out and about providing the spoils, the loot, the joy of thievery. Instead of them risking that like the people they want risking their things when they are out hunting...

    Then they're not really PvEvP players. They're either PvE or PvP players. I think sometimes people are PvEvP players, who want to dig up a chest, then see a sail on the horizon and be allowed to attack it on the way back to the Outpost for extra fun and loot. I think that there are players who want to be both in one session. I think those players will still choose PvEvP. Why don't you think they exist? Do you not think its more fun to dig up a chest while at risk of attack and run it back to the Outpost while scanning the horizon and maybe looking for a victim, or a danger? I think that's more fun.

    I am one of the people that says that PVP adds spice to the game, it makes the game better! Yet a meal needs balance! If you just throw in more spice but remove the rest... it is going to burn.

    Yes, but if you have a side salad it doesn't mean that all of the food runs off your plate to hide in the salad bowl. Nor do you only eat the salad in fear of the spice. You enjoy them both, side by side, the contrast only increasing the enjoyment.

    Once again, people won't make a binary choice, they would make a menu choice... how many times do I have to specify this. You act like it is ONE or the OTHER... THEY WILL PLAY BOTH, PVE on the PVE server PVP on the PvEvP one... because there is no reason to PVE on the PvEvP one! There is motivation to do PVP there, because there is no PVP in the PVE one.

    Actually, you're the one acting like there's a binary choice. They will do PvE on the PvE server, PvP on the PvP server and PvEvP in the PvEvP server. PvEvP is more than the sum of its parts, people can feel PvEvP, I often feel PvEvP during a session, in fact, all the sessions that I play SoT I feel that way, because when I don't, I don't play it. I wouldn't be losing me from the PvEvP server, it would just be gaining me on the PvE one.

    What fun and excitement? The PVE fun and excitement comes from the PVE... so that means they will go do the PVP in the PVP enabled world for that excitement, why would they do the PVE there? It isn't like they cannot swap back and forth.

    The excitement of being chased into the Outpost while carrying a chest, the fun of getting it in under the nose of a superior ship. I'm not talking about PvE fun, or PvP fun, I'm taking about PvEvP fun. PvE in a PvEvP world is sometimes more fun, that's the whole premise of a PvEvP world.

    You are making the argument why a PVE server is not needed. You bought a PvEvP game... not a PVE game, if you want that play a different game. No game can be everything... that is how games fail.

    It can't be everything, but it can be more than it is. If you don't think the game can or should be improved then this discussion is sort of pointless.

    Name me one example of a game that allows you to swap between both worlds and succeeds. Where the PvEvP element is still alive and kicking in those worlds?

    Sea of Thieves. It lets you swap between PvP Arena and PvEvP Adventure mode.

    Are you sure? Because frankly you sound like you want bad things to be implemented into the game to split up the servers into a PVE or PVP one.

    Pretty sure, yeah. I don't, but I don't think you're following what I'm saying, so there is that.

    Yet don't you see that for many people that is exactly what it will do? Split up their time on the seas? Not everyone had 12 hours of play time, they spend their play time on the seas giving them the options means they will divide the time they would otherwise spend on the shared seas in the PvE world.

    I don't see that. I wouldn't split my time, and I see no reason to imagine a group of people that would. Would you split your time? I bought a PvEvP game because most of the time I enjoy PvEvP, so I'd mostly still play in PvEvP. If you'd rather split your time, why did you by a PvEvP game?

    Yes, most people don't have 12 hours of play time, so the won't split between servers, they'll take the option that lets them pack in as much fun as possible in the period available, the option that has both PvP fun and PvE fun, the PvEvP option.

    You cannot opt out of PVE, I explained this before. The PVE doesn't give a damn about whether you are a PVP crew or not, it will engage with you. A kraken will attack you, a megalodon will appear, a skeleton ship will arise from the depths.

    But you can opt out from digging up chests, or hunting skeleton captains. How about, you can opt out of all non-combat parts of the game if you choose to but never the combat. And you can certainly opt out of the non-combat PvE parts of the game, but you can never opt out of the combat PvP parts. Is that acceptably accurate? The point still remains.

    A player can also opt not to engage in the PVP battle, you can flee, you can hide, you can scuttle...

    All of which are engaging with the event. That the event has multiple solutions when engaging with it doesn't change that they are engagements.

    Also the PvE mode will not and shall never be used purely by some of the PVE inclined people, there is a huge group of people that will avoid loss at any cost. Those that will opt out because it is simply the easy thing to do. There is no motivation to do the PVE in the PVP enabled world, nada. You say fun and excitement... in other words: Internal motivation of the player. The one motivational aspect that has no merit.

    The one motivational aspect in a game that has all the merit. I'm only playing this game for fun due to internal motivation. Why, are you getting paid to do it? Are you achieving something worthwhile in your life by playing it? There is no other reason to play the game than fun. The achievements aren't real you know, no-one cares how much money you've got in Sea of Thieves apart from you, its only for fun. If you're not playing Sea of Thieves for fun, why on earth are you playing it?

    People take the most direct, easiest route to victory if you hand it to them. If there is no reason not to take that route, the majority of people won't do it. The people will still play on the shared world, for their PVP needs not their PVE ones. There is no reason to... a balanced world is fun and is what makes the PVP the spice and not the entire meal.

    People take the most direct and easiest route to achieve their goals. There is no "Victory" in Sea of Thieves, you can't "Win" the game, its a sandbox. You can only have the most possible fun in the least possible amount of time. When that's achieved with PvEvP they will take that route, when its achieved with PvE they will take that route.

  • 3

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

    Also as far as the pursuer having no risk that isnt all true, they lose supplies and really what I find to be the worse "risk" of all is the risk of losing. I was just PvP'ing on a game other night the guy yelled out "I never lost to a girl before!". They didn't get one kill on me in our match up and the fact they lost was satisfying enough to me and emotionally turmoiling enough for them.

    On regarding the balance of pvp and pve.
    It's true that majority of players are PvPvE'rs, but they are hardly that at the same time.
    It would be insane when you're in pvp mode to first stack your ship with pve loot and then go and try to sink a sloop with one chest on them or maybe nothing or maybe full fort loot. Cause you have something to loose yourself. NO ONE does this, outside of maybe some pro streamers for entertainment and viewership. No sane person would go pvp like this, where they stack their ship full and then go hunt. Maybe you carry some random items, but i guarantee it will always be less worth than what the supposed enemy is carrying. It's the same thing that has been said multiple times here, people take the path of least resistance, this applies to pvp'rs and pvpve'rs too. They want your loot, they don't want to loose theirs. And how does one do this? With an empty ship, you spawn and sail and see a ship and go try your luck if you can sink them and they have loot on. You don't hoard your ship full first. Aka you have nothing to loose. When you enter the game with pvp in mind you maybe get some supplies, maybe not and go hunt other ships. The loot you'll be carrying is from the ships you've sunk. You don't go full run of FoTD and then grade 5 athena and then go fight after the grade 5 reaper galleon, as a fully stacked loot pinata and try your luck if the reapers is better than you at pvp or not, or if you do, please let me know, cause you're the first one on the entire planet.. Unless you're Pace or Summit who does this for living, has a crew of top 1 rank organized people who are "professionals" and there's around probably about 30 people out of 5 billion of them who can actually do this without dying on this entire planet and of course do this only to maximize viewer numbers, from them i can believe this, but not a normal SoT player sitting alone in their house. But Pace and Summit are the exception not the rule, so what do the other pvp maniacs and copycats bring in to the fight as their risk? Nothing. You can try to imitate them, but odds are you've lost your loot before you reached the ship you're planning to attack or tuck in. Watching someone stream for 30 minutes doesn't mean you yourself can 1v4, it doesn't mean you'll learn to do that even with 2 years of practice. So people, straight out of bat, stop acting like it.
    I see this way too much, people come in huffing and puffing. On enemy crews, in my crews, open crews.. Everywhere. Everyone thinks they are the tough nails and can do what they want. They swing in like i'm going on board and solo this ship, just keep sinking it and they get on board then boom they dead. And they go again like hey bad luck, i go again and boom they dead again.

    The whole problem lies that the aggressor almost never has any risk.. There's no balance in the fight for the guy who just wants to pve. There is nothing to gain if you're attacked like this for sinking the aggressor, except you get to keep your loot, that you dug up, what kind of reward is that? You're granted that reward when you dig it up. It's yours, you don't need to dig it up again or steal it from someone's ship, it's already your reward. Period. It's not like on top of that the aggressor doubled you loot magically coming at you with nothing but cannonballs on their ship, they have NOTHING to loose. Unlike claimed. They come at you with their ship empty.

    That's most of my pvp encounters i've defended against. It's like hey i have nothing on my ship and you come barging in.. Oh look i've managed to board yours and you've got nothing also on yours, what a surprise since you were expecting i carry something.. WHAT THE HECK are we both doing here? Why are we both wasting our time?

    And the supposed problem pve servers would bring that adventure only has empty ships roaming. WE HAVE that NOW. I almost never carry anything on the boat, cause nothing is worth loosing it for. And by the looks of others, they seem to be doing the same. I alliance server my athenas and fotd, always, cause ef spending hours on doing grinding to loose the loot and most of all, my time. Minor hauls and forts i do solo i rowboat, cause they are almost untrackable, if i solo sloop i rowboat my loot. It takes hours but hey at least i don't sink. I can send my sloop on a wild goose chase for the whole server to catch and red zone them, whilst i haul my rowboat across the map. So that leaves me in adventure on my boat to do commendations and events. Which sometimes grant loot, but unless it's mandatory to turn in, i shovel reveal it and leave it be. It's not like gold is hard to come by and used for anything. You break the ground and accept that it's less painful to leave it there than to loose it to another crew by a chance of bad luck running in to one. So in the end what are we doing here? Sailing empty ships on the sea, killing in sight for no reason. It's not like double gunning or instagibbing some solo sloop will teach you how to pvp, specially if they don't fight back, cause it's not worth their time. They have a faster change of getting back in to game as you swing your sword at them whilst they menu scuttle their own ship on the spot. How is that going to make you better at pvp? How is that going to make the pvp better in the game. It doesn't. And until somethings done to improve the pvp and rewards of defending your ship from attackers, it keeps going down this road, until it matters zero if they implement pve servers or not, cause the game is already one. Have some manners, even pirates have them. Stop KoS. Negotiate, parley. Alliance ships and then betray them, stab them in the back when it matters the most, attack ships and check if they have loot or at least if they fight you. If they don't do either, kill them once and leave them be, no need to sink'em for no reason than to feel superior that you bested someone with no effort, maybe next time they might have something on their boat if they see you and trust you a bit, instead of insta scuttling on sight. People wiping empty ships gains nothing, except hatred towards you as a human being. Stop being a waste of human skin.

    "They have supplies to loose" and "They have their ship to loose" and "Their ego will be bruised if the loose". Give me a break. 3 things of absolute zero value. Your ship spawns with supplies, they have zero value. Your ship respawns it has zero value, maybe maybe a reaper emissary flag now days. That's the only thing worth something, but compared to the party with full fort loot on their ship, you the attacker are trying to get, it's nothing. So what are you the aggressor bringing in to the fight? Risk and sense of accomplishment for the other party? I'm sorry but i don't need those to enjoy the game. So nothing.

    I don't need the fear of getting my effort and time vanished to enjoy playing the game, it's not what i play for. Unlike some people here claim, "The constant risk of loosing everything makes the game great". Maybe for you, but you're not me, you don't know me.. I'm the guy who plays any game on the beginner difficulty, who doesn't touch games with challenge like Dark Souls cause they offer me nothing but misery. I'm the guy who always takes the path of least resistance in life and zero challenges and it works, for me. You don't know me, don't tell me what i'm supposed to enjoy. BUT that aside in Sot as it is right now, give me a reason to stick around and defend my ship, give me a reason to not just throw my loot over the board while running away and then scuttle so you won't even know my name tag when you'd catch my ship, so neither party will get anything. Cause at least i will personally go through immense effort to make sure if i can't keep the loot i dug up, no one will get it, i will not grant you the satisfaction of winning, if it's imminent that i can't win, my play style and motives change to this, petty, but hey that's what i can enjoy. Revenge is best served cold blooded, i like it more than winning.

    As Falcore jokes about reapers always running away from him in his videos. A lot of pvp orientated players also frown upon despawning loot etc, even in other games with open loot. I've got news for you! It wasn't your loot in the first place. If i can do something about loot i've digged up and found, i decide whether you get to keep it or not. Not you the aggressor. It's not being graceful in loss at the moment you know you've lost the battle. Ef that. If i loose i'm taking everyone down to Davey Jones locker with me i can. I don't bag you on victory, but i sure as heck won't bow down to you at loss. We all sink together.

    Just like your average pvpve'r and pvp player enjoy sinking the other players ship, possibly ruining their day and then gloating over their corpse. I enjoy ruining yours the attackers day in the most pettiest ways i can find in those situations. I've been attacked multiple times by galleons and brigs as a solo sloop. Now i've been around for a long time and sometimes i sunk and sometimes i sink them. Latest was a grade 4 reapers brig coming after me whilst doing this current event, i had zero loot on board, was just lighting the beacons. They wanted a skirmish and attacked anyway. I told them i have nothing and just doing the event. They sunk my ship before i got back to it. I got on theirs to parley, they didn't want to and attacked. I killed all 3 of them in their reapers outfits (granted this was a an easy fight since they were on console and i had the benefit of mouse and keyboard, otherwise i'd probably lost), i've played a long time and hundreds of hours, but i'm not that good, cause i don't pvp often and i never in 2 years have attacked anyone in adventure, defended yes and arena, but that's how i've learned my pvp. Still, I killed them again and again and again. I wiped them 6 times on their ship and then ran their brig in to the island and let it sank. They had a rowboat with like 3 chests on their ship. Not worth my time. I took the rowboat and their grade 4 emissary and spent a good 10+ minutes rowing it in to the red zone out of the map and threw their 3 chests and flag in to the ocean and logged off. Revenge. This i was so proud of, it felt damn good. It was never about winning them, i could have gone about my day and logged on to new server straight after they sunk my ship, i had nothing to loose. It was about sending a message and teaching a lesson. You get what you deserve, hint for next time, learn to pick your battles, scout your enemies and their ship. Don't just attack and kill on sight for no reason.

    It doesn't matter what happened 10 minutes ago if the aggressor as a PvPvE'r had their ship full of their voyage loot and they could have been the victim then. The whole point is that the pvp encounter almost exclusively is always one sided in the risk. This is the whole heart of the problem that needs fixing. Not who's turn it is now..

    Bring something worthy to the encounter, because your supplies or your bruised ego "of the biggest risk of them all, the risk of you the attacker loosing" aren't worth anything to me, to us. What even is that latter? Are the PvPvE'rs so insecure that if they loose a swordfight they'll loose all selfrespect. Give me a break.

    Even this playing field, to fix the game.
    Make the ship worth something or killing pirates.
    Use the emissaries or reputation system for this.
    If you sink a ship you'll gain instant level 5 emissary. Or killing pirates increases the emissary by 1 with every death.
    This way the defender has a reason to defend instead of running away. Or won't feel like someone with nothing to loose is just bullying them. There's a reason to defend your ship and your loot.
    If you win the battle your loot is worth more, even though you might be at disadvantage in crew numbers. You might still loose because you're overpowered, but at least you won't feel like the other side just came after you with nothing to loose and everything to gain, when you take all the risk and have everything all the loot to loose and nothing to gain from engaging the enemy. You have the loot, the aggressor comes in to steal it and you sink and kill them, you gain instant emissary 5 for defending, hence the attacker brought something of value to the fight, instead of just trying their luck.

    Or on top of this make a bounty system. Where if you're responsible, via your hand, cannons or explosives you've held, if you're the reason of sinking a player ship. You and your crew gain a reputation, not the in-game reputation system. A bounty reputation. No matter if you wield reapers or emissary or nothing. The more you pvp the more notorious your crew becomes on the server and you'll gain visibility on the map, like reapers currently, but you can't remove this by changing flag or emissary. And it doesn't reset just by relogging server. The Bounty will slowly, very slowly degrade over time, like a week, but it carries with you server hopping. You'll become a notorious pirate and will be treated as such. The bounty on your ship much like the emissary grades will grow the more you pvp. You'll be visible on the map to everyone. If you only kill pirates you'll gain a fraction of this bounty system, but sinking a ship will grant a full level. So essentially if you've sunk like 5 player ships, you have a grade 5 emissary bounty on you.. Worth like a 100k or something worthy, even though you have no loot on your ship. It's not your loot, it's your name and head the other pirates are now after. And you have no way to remove yourself from the map, or maybe an npc faction you have to pay up to remove the bounty. Like you need to pay 50% of the gold your bounty is worth to npc in-game to remove the bounty. If your bounty is 500k you'll have to pay 250k. Now there's a risk of pvping and you won't just be sinking empty sloops for no reason, other than just stroke your "ego" to feel like you matter on the this planet, you need to make sure the effort is worth it. THIS is the fix i want, to end the pointless pvp, where people just attack out of spite, toxicity and bullying. You can try to defend all you want that it's a pvp game and nobody has ill in tensions here when they attack, but the truth is. Most of people do this just for the sake of making others feel bad. They do this only to cause misery in others, no other reason. That's a truth if you deny, you're the one that's blind or lying. You can write all you want here that making others feel sad and miserable doesn't make you feel good, it still doesn't make it true, we are humans, that's how the human nature works, no one who just wants to kill other people or their avatars offline or online is genuinely nice. Fix this! And to do that there needs to be a risk and punishment for both sides. PVE loot guys have their risk of loosing their loot, now do something to the PVP side. There could be an extension of the leaderboard system for this too. Where you can unlock items if you manage keep up level 5 bounty a week and not sink. The catch is sinking doesn't remove the bounty either or dying, you can't just cheese out of it, going to skelly ships. You need to be sunk and killed by a player for someone to claim the bounty off you, and then maybe there's a token or skull the players with the bounty drops when they die and their ship drops like a an emissary flag that the bounty hunters needs to cash in to said npc for the bounty to be lifted off. And.. And.. You can't reclaim the bounty yourself. You can't just go back trying to get the bounty off the ones who defeated you and turn it in yourself or by your crew. It has to be a player outside of said crew. Like it encourages pvp, but it provides the pvp side a risk of loosing something. You have to wager, if you want to sink 5 empty sloops fast just to get the bounty and if you're worthy to carry it the whole week. Or should you pvp and chase actual enemy loot and slowly gain your bounty on your head while actually making gold, instead of cheap grief sinks of nobody that matters to you.

  • 3

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

    Pirates steal and kill just like the playstyle is in the game right now.

    Just to say, I don't find this much of an argument. Pirates had to face bounties, an active Navy and only ever got caught once for their crimes. Its not some sort of Piracy simulator and it doesn't force you to act in one way or another. If you hack someone up for their money, that was on you.

    The salty PvE players that get their ship sunken or their loot stolen needs to stop whining about it on the forums. Because as I said earlier they should always known that there is that small risk of getting your ship sunken or your loot stolen. If you can't live with that risk then dont take the risk. Easy as that.

    Again, its not about getting salty when you have your loot stolen, its about getting sad when the game shows you how rubbish people can be. If I'm carrying loot, I'll stack it with an emissary flag and you can come at me, its all good, that's not what makes me sad. What makes me sad is when I'm sitting fishing on a pond and I can see my ship in the bay, and then I see someone sail up to it and go on board, I know there's no loot on my ship, then I see my ship go on fire, because they decided to firebomb it anyway, and I see them pogoing up the hill towards me and I know they're coming to kill me, just because, and there's really no reason to bother fighting back. That's what I have an issue with. Its not the rage of defeat, that's its own kind of fun, its the ennui of remembering that some people are just flat out unpleasant. I'm down with the game letting you be a Pirate, its when it lets you be a psychopathic serial killer that I find it irritating.

  • 4

    @gtothefo

    What are PvEvP needs according to you? Because in my view it is those that it are people that will engage in PvE and in PvP activities. This doesn't mean that they are reckless and just charge in with their whole session of loot worth on board. You realize that many of the PvP crews that are empty when they engage are manned by PvEvP people, that also do voyages, tall tales, fish, etc. They still choose not to risk their own treasure troves when they PvE and avoid PvP in those cases.

    Because frankly you are not making any sense. You think it is a bad idea and argue it should be added to the game which makes zero sense, whether it is terrible or bad it shouldn't be something one would then want in the game at all. Bad, terrible... why fight me on the topic of how horrible it is if it is. Why would you want a bad idea to be added to the game?

    You argue that people will do PvE in a PvP mode, because some unknown reason that you cannot even explain other than they are PvEvP players. Because people state they enjoy the PvP element in the game, but does that mean they want it to increase? That they would still place their own accumulated treasure at risk? Because most people sell before they attack, if that choice is at the menu screen... why wouldn't they make the same choice as they do on the seas? People enjoy the balance of the current world, the people you take as your defense are mainly people that are against the implementation... you are not representing them properly, you are morphing their opinions to suit your argument without any explanation or reasoning.

    You are stating that they don't risk anything in a single fight, while risk reward is not going to be equal in every situation. The majority of people will not charge in with their Athena chest... they sell it first. They will bring nothing while they were risking their own acquired treasure 10 mins prior if you had caught them out. You cannot expect the risk/reward balance to be equal in each situation in a sandbox game.

    If there is no victory, there is no loss... so your complaint about treasure and not able to cash it in is void. You are not making logical sense. If you can lose, you can win... just because it is a sandbox game does not mean there is no victory or loss. It just means you decide what that is. If selling the loot is your idea of reward and victory to acknowledge the time and fun at sea, then you will feel loss when that is taken from you. It is a common belief, which is why many people won't risk it if they had the choice.

    You have not given a single motivation for why people that enjoy both doing PvE and PvP would not choose at the menu screen based on their current goal. They already do that on the seas, sometimes with success and sometimes with failures. Why shift that choice from the world into the menu?

    If you are unable to acquire loot and sell it without losing it, you didn't deserve selling it. The fact that you believe it is impossible to PvE in peace just shows me you are not actually good at PvE because avoiding PvP conflicts is part of that skillset.

    A PvE mode is not a good idea if it offers the same as Adventure mode. Therefore it should not be added. A PvE mode that offers something else, is maybe viable if it is worth the investment from Rare.

  • 4

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

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

    Pirates steal and kill just like the playstyle is in the game right now.

    Just to say, I don't find this much of an argument. Pirates had to face bounties, an active Navy and only ever got caught once for their crimes. Its not some sort of Piracy simulator and it doesn't force you to act in one way or another. If you hack someone up for their money, that was on you.

    The salty PvE players that get their ship sunken or their loot stolen needs to stop whining about it on the forums. Because as I said earlier they should always known that there is that small risk of getting your ship sunken or your loot stolen. If you can't live with that risk then dont take the risk. Easy as that.

    Again, its not about getting salty when you have your loot stolen, its about getting sad when the game shows you how rubbish people can be. If I'm carrying loot, I'll stack it with an emissary flag and you can come at me, its all good, that's not what makes me sad. What makes me sad is when I'm sitting fishing on a pond and I can see my ship in the bay, and then I see someone sail up to it and go on board, I know there's no loot on my ship, then I see my ship go on fire, because they decided to firebomb it anyway, and I see them pogoing up the hill towards me and I know they're coming to kill me, just because, and there's really no reason to bother fighting back. That's what I have an issue with. Its not the rage of defeat, that's its own kind of fun, its the ennui of remembering that some people are just flat out unpleasant. I'm down with the game letting you be a Pirate, its when it lets you be a psychopathic serial killer that I find it irritating.

    Yet if you are fishing and skellie captains spawn acting like psychopathic serial killers that is acceptable (ever tried talking one down?), and if you get attacked by skellie ships, meg or kraken and sunk on your way to the seapost to sell your fish that's okay too. It's just some players who behave in the same manner who are wrong and a problem? Even though you signed up for that by clicking 'Set sail'.. Maybe the PvE needs a good ol' buff to even things out..

    Anybody who is at risk of being 'psychologically damaged' by PvP encounters in a video game was mightily unwise to buy a game advertised as containing it really in the first place.. People somehow equate temporarily losing loot, (there's plenty more, it's everywhere) in a computer game, with being mugged physically on the way to the shop..

    They whine "why should I have to scan the horizon" in the same way some people object to wearing a seat-belt or crash helmet. They refuse to listen to advice on how to avoid threats and just want the game adapted to them, at the expense of and to the detriment of the current playerbase.

    Yes this game consists of mainly PvEvP players with the opposing binaries at each end being the much smaller minorities of PvE and PvP players. But these two groups are by far the most vocal and the din they make is in no way a reliable indicator of current opinion no matter how much people think it is.

    The 'community' does not live on this forum either, is is a miniscule fraction of the community, most players will have never even visited these forums. You go to a hardware forum for a product and you could be forgiven for thinking the product is totally faulty, it must be because everyone posting is having problems with it, thing is you never hear from the several million happy customers who are having no problems..

    The game is what it is at the end of the day and if the devs want to change it they will, it's up to them, 30 people moaning on the forums won't change anything.. Remember the devs are all keen players too, you can watch their weekly stream if you like. They are on the ball and the game will evolve as and when they see fit.

  • 2

    @gtothefo This may sound stupid but, why not combine an expanded tutorial with a short party game style pve mode.
    A mode you load into with your crew, or even randos.
    A race to the top of Sea Dogs parkour thingy to ring the bell, winner gets x gold, and there can be smaller gold prizes for the others.
    Then off to a shooting range for round 2, we all blast away at moving targets, again competing for points, more gold rewards.
    Now on to the cannon range, same thing again.
    Would be a silly yet chill place for someone who just doesn't feel up to a the full adventure experience, or maybe just something different, but also a good learning experience for new players.
    Throw in some silly hats and new cosmetics for rewards and you have an experience that complements adventure but doesn't replace it.

  • 2

    @captainskandalf

    If you want that PvP is always rewarding regardless of whether you have treasure or not? A bounty system that if you defend well, entices others to hunt you down even more? Do you truly believe this will not make the seas even more kill on sight, as now everyone is worth it at all times? Wouldn't this increase the hostility upon the waves and be an even bigger outcry of those that complain about being sunk, while they carried no treasure? Keep in mind many complaints are of people that also have nothing to risk other than their supplies.

    The emissary system has tried to create these type of situations where both sides always bring something of value. By having people opt into a situation where you indicate I am always worth coin and open for battle. Empty or not, most likely people will try and sink you. You want to forcefully have people take part in it?

    You state a majority of PvEvP players don't do both at once, which I agree with, they unload their ships before heading into battle. However to state it doesn't matter that 10 mins prior they had tons of loot on board, that this is irrelevant to the discussion is false. People want to create the picture that those that attack others never are at risk, while the reality is they take those same risks. They might manage their risks better, know how to avoid PvP better, sell more frequently and engage in PvP only on their terms. There is no real way to ensure in a sandbox game that both sides bring equal amounts of rewards for the others.

    Those that do both PvE and PvP in the world have been on both sides of the coin. They should understand that at times they hold the treasure and other times it will be the other way around. There is no perfect system that won't promote the KoS mentality and award those for taking out empty low risk ships.

    If we create a world where people do the PvE without the PvP, it becomes an easy menu choice. As you state PvEvP people don't engage in both at the same time for the majority, so they would choose at the menu screen.

    It is a balancing act, where everyone at some point has risks they take and when they don't. This is done by having everyone engage in the activities in a shared PvEvP world. It is what makes the game a PvEvP one, it isn't suited for everyone. Yet it is what also many actually enjoy and why they play specifically this game for.

  • 0

    @cotu42

    Well, one of the problems is that (in my experience an opinion as a newbie) will never be able to even learn to play the game as your ship gets sunk even before you're able to reach it..

  • 1

    I am a newbie and i have tried to play the game, i have. And i honestly love it soo much. The issue is that someone always think it's really fun to sink my ship even before i manage to get to it as i start the game. And this has happened so many times i've lost count and lost the want to even play the game. How is one supposed to even learn the game if you're never even able to play it? In /my/ opinion i wish there was a specific gamemode that you could play single player if one would want that. In that way, you won't disturb those who want to play multiplayer, but those who want to play alone are allowed to? Is that really such a bad thing? I mean, none of the players will be disturbed and get what they want..

  • 1

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

    I am a newbie and i have tried to play the game, i have. And i honestly love it soo much. The issue is that someone always think it's really fun to sink my ship even before i manage to get to it as i start the game. And this has happened so many times i've lost count and lost the want to even play the game.

    It happens so many time you lost count? How many hours do you spend at the outpost before getting to your boat exactly?

    How is one supposed to even learn the game if you're never even able to play it? In /my/ opinion i wish there was a specific gamemode that you could play single player if one would want that. In that way, you won't disturb those who want to play multiplayer, but those who want to play alone are allowed to? Is that really such a bad thing? I mean, none of the players will be disturbed and get what they want..

    There is one coming, private custom servers will be there to allow new players to learn the ropes in peace, alone or with friends, without worry of being bothered.

    Seriously, if there is something that keeps coming up from this thread (and what the devs should take from it) is how new players appears to need to be taken by the hand for a longer period of time nowadays, and an extended tutorial is really what is needed here.

    A lot of emphasis was put on the community events side and content creation aspects of custom servers when they got announced, but the devs should really push and advertise more for this also as a training and learning tool for players finding their sea legs. Might as well take down two parrots with one stone with this mode, instead of butchering up the game's thriving community and balance with a new peaceful Adventure mode.

  • 1

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

    I am a newbie and i have tried to play the game, i have. And i honestly love it soo much. The issue is that someone always think it's really fun to sink my ship even before i manage to get to it as i start the game. And this has happened so many times i've lost count and lost the want to even play the game. How is one supposed to even learn the game if you're never even able to play it? In /my/ opinion i wish there was a specific gamemode that you could play single player if one would want that. In that way, you won't disturb those who want to play multiplayer, but those who want to play alone are allowed to? Is that really such a bad thing? I mean, none of the players will be disturbed and get what they want..

    According to your stats you took part in the sinking of another crews ship on the 25th September so you are a 'storyteller', exaggerator and a hypocrite.

  • 3

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

    @xultanis-dragon Again, I'm not saying to plan around people who complain about something, my issue there isn't about the disagreement, its about the response. The point is that saying "You're not forced to solo sloop" doesn't really fly, sure, you're not shackled to doing solo sloop, but picking a crew blind does put you in the position of doing what they want to do not what you want to do. Wanting to do a Tall Tale and not a Ghost Fleet, or visa versa really isn't that unreasonable an ask, and saying that you're only forced to solo sloop if you want a modicum of control over that choice is kind of like saying you're forced to solo sloop, at least sometimes. I'm still not clear on why there couldn't be an option on the crew seeker screen to set filters on what you're up for doing when seeking a crew to help with that. Even with children we don't force them to spend their free time performing an activity picked from a sack. If you could have some small control over what you're doing with a blind picked crew I think that would really help with the solo slooper issue, and I'm not clear on what the counter argument would be.

    You aren't picking a crew blind. If you are joining an LFG, chances are the LFG has written what they are planning to do. You can create an LFG as well and post in that you want to do a specific Tall Tale, you aslo have Discord as an option.

    You have options. You are not forced into any unwanted decision. You look for the crew or the LFG that fits what you are planning to do and you play.

    You want a slider but why add a slider when there are already options to find crews that are doing what you are doing??

    "LFG - We are farming FoTD, turn in at end" - Obviously not want you want.

    "LFG - We are fishing and going for battlegills" - You want to fish but maybe not for battlegills, there you go not what you want.

    "LFG - Doing Tall Tales, I don't care which one I need all of them" - There you go, there is your tall tale quest.

    You have options. You aren't choosing blindly from the sack. You have choices, you get to pick from the sack but you get to look at them and decide yes or no and you keep going till you find something you like.

    The thing is, its all well and good to say that the game wasn't balanced for solo play and that Rare stipulated that, but frankly, its not stipulated on the Steam page that the game isn't balanced for Solo play. If its true, it shouldn't be a huge surprise when people react to that.

    Actually, I'm pretty sure by omitting that the game is not single player they have stipulated that its not for solo play. They labeled the game as online co-op and online PvP. Not to mention the game had been out for almost 3 years before the steam release. Could have done your research on it. I did before buying the game.

    How is this Rare's fault?? I find it a huge surprise people are reacting at all. It not stipulated on the page that its single player or that its solo play. I would gather that the game is not suitable for solo play, same thing with other games that are multiplayer but aren't created around playing solo. Like Planetside 2. You can play solo but the game is created around playing as squads or more.

    Sorry broski, you don't get to use the Karen defense. Like ordering a pizza saying you want everything on it and then being surprised by the toppings. "They should have told me what everything was!!" -

    Again, I feel like you're missing the point that I'm making about the High Risk/High Reward debate. I'm not saying that there's a problem with the game there, I'm really not, I'm saying that there's a problem with the answer to people who don't like the game that its High Risk/High Reward. The point is that its not, its a sliding scale where ability reduces risk and increases reward. Which is fine, I'm fine with that, I'm honestly not making a point about the game here, I'm making a point about a response to people who complain about it that happens to be fallacious.

    The problem with that is that its subjective as well as like a lot of this game. I'm really good at this game. However, I've run into crews and other players that are significantly better than I am. The game is risk/reward. High risk, low risk, high reward, low reward.

    I know what you are saying that players with more skill have a potential of low risk, high reward when they play but again all of that is subjective.

    Just because the game is experienced based doesn't make new players any more disadvantage then older players. The learning curve to this game is learned by playing and by wanted to learn. Why should the game be geared around players who don't want to learn??

    I've played with PvE players that don't want to have look outs on the ship, or they want to horde loot on their boat because they want to feel like a BA pirate. They refuse to attack anyone because they don't like to PvP and because of that never learn how to actually use their cannons.

    Its all upto the player how much they want to learn and how much they want to get better at the game. Aka - Git gud.

    My point here is that saying "Its High Risk/High Reward, so that's okay" happens to be false. That's not any kind of suggestion that the game needs to be changed, the point there is that that particular defense of the game happens not to follow. The point about high skilled and low skilled players being in the same bucket that I'm making isn't that its a problem, or even that its actually unfair, the point I'm making is that it happens to make the exchange something other than High Risk/High Reward, that's all.

    Well lets look at it from a server hoppers point of view. We start with 16 banana's, 40 or so cannon balls, some alternate ammo and 15 planks.

    We have no loot so technically there is not risk to us right?? False - Just because we don't have loot doesn't mean we don't have risk. Time is a risk factor, how much we spend and whether or not we succeed. Hiding on a FoTD can take over an hour sometimes even more depending on the crew doing it. Also its never a guarantee if the crew is smart and knows how to protect.

    However, what if we have a ton of loot on board?? Well the risk factor has gone up even if we are skilled. Just because we are skilled and experienced doesn't mean something can't happen beyond our plans. Skelly ship with anchor ball can show up and disable us while chasing or running away. Kraken, meg. The ship we are fighting could get a lucky shot or a cursed cannon ball can put us to sleep.

    I know you want to say that players with more experience have less risk but that is false, because players with no experience could have low risk as well. It all depends on how much risk you are willing to take am I right??

    New players that horde loot onto their boat they are increasing their risk but increasing their reward right?? They could take care of that by turning in frequently.

    You only risk as much as you are willing to lose.

    High risk, high reward means that you get to choose what you risk.

    Aren't good at the game because you refuse to learn how to play?? Then turn in.

    30-45 minutes is plenty of time to pick up a couple of fish and run them out to the Hunter's Call, its plenty of time to go and read a couple of journals towards a commendation. In relation to why 1 bad session should be given more weighting than 3 good ones, because that's how people's memories work sometimes. Its the same as the endowment fallacy that people suffer from, its a matter of perception, and its about how those shorter sessions get wasted and the nature of the progress that early players experience because of them that matters because it drives new players away from the game.

    Sorry but I'm gonna stop you right there. If you are telling me that you get attacked when you play the game for 30 to 45 mins frequently enough to make you frustrated I want to see it. I just can't believe you because I can play solo all the time and no one bothers me. Same thing with other players on the forum. I want to believe players I do but I just can't because from personal experience of YEARS of playing have stipulated that this kind of story is false.

    I played the game for years and I'm sorry but I never get attacked playing solo if ever. For years I've played and its never happened so the fact that you are saying that you can't do a short session in peace I just will not believe you.

    The thing about the changes in the game's difficulty is, on release day there were no more experienced players, and now there are, which means that new players have a new and far more deadly threat to face than anyone who started the game on day one. No in game threat is close to that offered by a human player that's been learning the game for a couple of years. I suspect that the reason Rare have modulated some of those PvE threats down is because the overall death rate of new players has probably stayed pretty stable despite those changes. People here talk about how a PvE server would kill the game, I'd suggest that a perception of a game that is impossible to get going in because its full of unbeatably experienced players could kill it just as hard. I agree that this is a perception rather than a reality, but its perception that will drive people away, and its new players that bring most of the revenue to the game, and its the revenue that is going to keep the game alive.

    Yeah see you might think this but again false. Just because players were inexperienced didn't make the game any less dangerous. You fail to realize that the game was incredibly more blood thirsty. You talk about not being able to do anything now?? When the game was released players got attacked ALL THE TIME. You see a ship on the horizon and they turn straight towards you.

    Experience didn't need to be an issue because EVERYONE sank. Everyone lost and the way respawns were set up, the ship always and I mean ALWAYS spawned at the nearest outpost. So you would fight over the same loot over and over.

    No the reason they modulated the threats is because players were a bunch of cry babies. Not because death rates are the same. Again players REFUSE to learn how to play. To this day there are players that have played this game for a year and don't know that the Kraken does a specific action before it wraps you, and that you can stop the wrap from happening 100% of the time. Yet the kraken was too hard.

    Again, I don't know why this is so hard for you to understand maybe because all you do is play solo for 30mins at a time but I have played with PvE players on a daily basis trying to help them learn and I can tell you for a fact that its not about capabilities, its purely about the will to learn. They just refuse. Players who have played for months still act like rookies because they REFUSE to learn.

    Perception won't drive players away. Look at EvE Online for a good long while Elite Dangerous before they ruined it and now its dead. Games like those don't have an immediate increase in player count. EvE online by your account should be a dead game or shouldn't have revenue but it does. The harshest game online and it still popular and strong. Granted players come and go but the game is catered to a certain demographic and those players play the game. They pay monthly subscriptions to play it.

    10 dollars a month is more money then most players pay for anything in micro-transactions.

    Perception of how harsh the game is won't kill the game. Telling players " oh yeah this game is a bloodthirsty game. You can do whatever you want, attack anywhere and anyone, no safe spaces, its horrible." you tell me something like that and my eyes light up like a kid in a candy store.

    Again, cater to your demographic.

    Marketing team of demon souls and Ninja Gaiden games said that the game would fail because its too hard and that its demographic is too small. The developers made the games anyways and released it. Immediately received a cult following and is now one of the most critically acclaimed franchises in the gaming community.

    Hard doesn't equate with failure. We don't have to cater to those that want things easy.

    You ask who the game should be balanced towards, the ones who have already bought all the upgrades they're interested in or the ones who haven't spent any of their money on it yet and I think I know which of those crowds need to be bought in if the game is going to carry on into the future.

    You actually don't know. You would have been one of the ones that said dark souls or ninja gaiden would fail because its too hard. Sorry to say every game out there that caters to a small demographic is popular and grows in popularity. You argument is just false pure and simple. I'm sorry but the evidence doesn't support your argument.

    Again, its not about a guarantee on progress, its about not wanting to waste time. If someone hunts out and reads a journal in no progress PvE mode, are they then forced to run around and read it in progress PvEvP mode to pop the commendation? The work's been done, having read it can't be stolen off them, does anyone doubt that they can get to the journal in the PvEvP server if they found it in the PvE one? Making them do it twice just seems petty at that point.

    Yes they are then forced to do it in the game. Sorry but progress is not mandatory is it? Its just a commendation or cosmetic. Nothing that adds to the game in itself correct?? So all those players that say they just want to play the game and enjoy it get that chance to play the game and enjoy it. Progress should not be gaurenteed. You want to progress then play in the PvPvE server. You want to just "play" the game and enjoy it in peace then you get no progress.

    But let me get this straight, they can find it in the PvE mode and you are saying that there should be no problem with them getting it in the PvPvE mode, but thats the whole argument isn't it?? They are saying they can't get it in the PvPvE mode. So again your argument is flawed. If they can get it in the PvPvE mode then why do we need the PvE mode??

    "Oh because they want to play in peace" - Then PvE mode with no progression. They get all the peace they need.

    You seem certain that having a PvE mode will kill the game, I'm not so sure. I'd suggest that if the game becomes too unwelcoming to new players that will kill it in a much more real sense. Why should your unwillingness to let people progress without the blood, sweat and tears that you put into it be allowed to kill it? Why would that be right?

    Yes it will. The game will still be around but not nearly as popular and other games that appear on the market like SoT will take over its popularity and the game will just die.

    Your statement that games that are too unwelcoming to new players fail is false. Again you can't use that argument when games that are incredibly unwelcoming to new players are the most critically acclaimed games. I'm sorry but you can say one thing and then evidence shows to the contrary.

    It would be right because we bought the game with certain expectations and we were told the game would be this. I purchased something as is and was happy with my purchases. Why should be okay with a group of players who cry and whine because they bought the game but now demand they change the core mechanics of the game entirely to murder it??

    How is that right?? How is it right for someone to come into a well established game and demand that they change everything about it because they are little children throwing a temper tantrum??

    I tell them to grow up.

    My point is that perceived risk is subjective. What I'm talking about is that finding ways to help new players deal with that perception is important. My point is that the number of actual encounters in the game is tiny, but the psychological impact on a new player is all out of whack with that. As I've said, if I get attacked and lose a Captain's chest its what, one of a hundred, easy come, easy go. But for a new player, that can be losing half of all the loot they've picked up in the entire game. What I'm saying is that to help the game keep rolling, picking up the new players that it needs to carry on that impact has to be dealt with in some way, and its not currently being done. I think having a separate PvE mode similar to Arena where players can pick up separate progressions in a mode where loss is less possible might be a good way to do that. If people can have a sideline progress that can't be lost in a separate mode they can, say, at first run all their sessions in that mode, then take one out of five sessions in the 'real world' then more, then more, until they're fully in the real world.

    Its a learning period. They can look at the forums ask for help, play with other crew mates. They have everything they need to succeed. I'm sorry but multiplayer games have been around for along time and if someone doesn't know how to play with other players or refuses to then that is a personal problem they need to learn how to get over.

    I was new and lost loot and I got over it and got better at the game. Why should we cater to those that don't know how to move on and just get better?? You want to protect players from losing, you want them to have a guaranteed win. Why?? Why can't they lose??

    Let me ask you something - If we protect the new players from losing and letting them have a guaranteed win in the early stages of the game, how in the hell are they going to be okay with losing in the later stages of the game?? You are basically spoiling the child and expecting them to be responsible when they grow up. This is not going to work. By protecting their loss they are going to get angry at ANY form of loss.

    "If the game is willing to give me the commendation then why can't I just not lose the loot?? That makes no sense!!!" - If you haven't realized it, its already happening. When they were releasing Arena we were against it. We even said that one of the reasons is that players will see Arena as the PvP server and demand a PvE server. Rare said "Arena is NOT the PvP server." and we told them that doesn't matter because some players will see it as the PvP server especially PvE players will see it as the PvP server and demand a PvE server.

    Here we are, again with players still calling it the PvP server and using it as an excuse for PvE servers.

    Arena is not the PvP mode. So if you want a mode separate from Adventure where a player can learn how to play the game in shorter amounts of time, then you have arena. No need for another PvE mode because Arena is not the PvP mode.

    I completely disagree with you broski because evidence proves otherwise.

    I'm not saying there is one answer, I don't think I've ever suggested that, and if there is, I don't by any means think that I've got it, I really don't think that suggesting that I'm looking at this with blinders is a fair comment based on the positions that I've shown here. I really don't think that active interesting PvP encounters is the problem in the game, and I don't think I've put forward a point of view that personally suggests that. I think that the real issue is a feeling of nastiness about certain sorts of PvP encounters, the Outpost campings, the empty ship Tall Tale sinkings. I don't think that's being done by PvPers hungry for interesting encounters, I think that's coming from a very different set of drives. I agree that interesting massed battles sound cool, and I'm sad to not have been playing in those games, when I was new to the game I spent a few sessions sailing to the Flameheart event thinking that I'd see players from all over the server swinging in so that we could fight shoulder to shoulder against this supposed great threat. It seems to me now that everyone just ignores the big red faced idiot and gets on with what they're already doing, which is a shame.

    Yes you are. By continuously defending your argument you are suggesting only one fix aren't you?? PvE mode, guaranteed progression, protecting newbie players. You have repeatedly suggested or implied that a new player is at a disadvantage because of PvP and that new players losing progress due to PvP.

    Your ideas revolve around PvE server or PvE safe space to a degree. You want to protect new players in a way from PvP or from the loss of PvP.

    I think that the real issue is a feeling of nastiness about certain sorts of PvP encounters, the Outpost campings, the empty ship Tall Tale sinkings.

    Outpost camping never happens, only rarely if ever. Tall Tales have check points now. I did a lot of my tall tales solo.

    I'd see players from all over the server swinging in so that we could fight shoulder to shoulder against this supposed great threat.

    This comment right here seems to be the mental problem for that side of the community. You see an opportunity for players to play together against a great threat. You see a potential for cooperation. You want that and that's fair. Its sometimes nice when players work together.

    However, I see a potential to attack an unsuspecting ship when they are loaded up and steal the loot.

    I never said I had the answers here, all I'm saying is that there seem to be a lot of people with issues, and I'm not sure that nothing should be done about that.

    Not saying you did. I'm just saying that players are still arguing as if the game is 2 different sides playing the same game.

    The game is not PvE or PvP. Its PvPvE, both at the same time and its at its greatest when both sides of the community are engaged.

    I want PvE players to PvE, but I want them to PvP. PvP players want to PvP but we have to PvE or deal with PvE constantly with skelly ships, megs, krakens, islands shooting at us.

    I want the whole server engaged at an event, everyone fighting over it.

    You know whats funny, I had more ships form alliances before alliances were a thing.

    When we used to fight over the forts, the ships that were clearly the PvE ships would form alliances to take out the ship that was destroying everyone. We had ships form alliances to try and take us out and sometimes they did, we came back and would fight more.

    If and when they won, they would split the fort loot accordingly and everyone would go about their day.

    Then they introduced alliances which killed players working together and instead made blind alliances where ships go into opposite sides of the map and just farm, they made the game focus on commendations and increased loot all over making it worthless.

    Rare did everything they could to FORCE players to play nice and it didn't work. They kept forcing the community apart. The game had more unity in the past where players actually worked together for a cause and players actually played "TOGETHER" before all of the stupid changes.

    I'm sorry man but the changes they made didn't promote sharing the world. Rare continued to divide the player base.

    You are looking at this as PvE or PvP. I've been trying to get the game to stay PvPvE.

  • 3

    @GtotheFo

    Out of interest a condensed sailing log from my 3 hour session this afternoon..

    Spawned at outpost, took 20 mins stocking up and generally messing around waiting for my son to join, spotted ship on far horizon coming in and set sail towards crooked masts for commendations, son joins en route.

    Pass near said ship, we ignore each other..

    Get to crooked masts, do commendations, no sign of anyone..

    Son goes for shower, I drop anchor in open sea, go into crows nest and wait for him, alternately checking horizon and the forum..

    Son comes back after ages.. Set off to FOTD to do more commendations..

    Pass another ship within cannon range, neither of us fire, but squeaky bottom time again..

    Son goes off to play fortnite with mates, I go to reapers to turn in loot accumulated..

    Get to reapers and turn in in a storm..

    I see a forum friend is on and message him as the storm recedes asking if he wants to play for a while, he can't. (Other side of the world)..

    I notice i'm getting attacked while afk chatting at reapers but have turned in so just fire all my cursed cannon balls at them and scuttle so they don't get my supplies.. if they had just said "hello" I would have given them everything, and there was a lot.

    This is a pretty typical session for me, unless we decide to fly reapers, when things go a little differently, but that is only maybe 25% of sessions. Point is how do you folks actually find all this grief?

  • 2

    @wagstr Yes, its different if a skellie acts that way to when a person acts that way. Because when inanimate objects do a thing its different from when a person does the same thing. I really don't think that's a controversial position.

  • 3

    @gtothefo

    Strongly disagree. It's a video game, you're not getting mugged..

  • 0

    @scarecrow1771 I don't think it sounds stupid at all. Honestly I think that would be an excellent idea, I really don't think the existing tutorial is up to the job which is where a lot of the annoyance comes from. It doesn't leave players confident with their ability to use cannons or actually run them through even the basics of combat, which I think is a mistake. I totally think that a version of the game that lets people see a more friendly side of the community and step into friendly competition would be a huge help.

    I think that a huge help would also be a chance to sort of de-brief after a session. If new players could be shown a track of player activity on their server on their session so that they can actually see if they were Outpost camped, or just unlucky, or cleverly tracked I think that would actually be a massive help for people to get a handle of the actual level of threat and problem on a server. If you can see that bad luck was just bad luck or that mistakes were legitimate mistakes I really think that would help a lot of people shrug off some nasty early experiences.

  • 1

    @thanotos-omega said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:

    @combatxkitty Because they only ever argue that PVE players need to be used as their victims, their only argument over and over is "if the people who prefer PVE leave we will have no one to bully and mooch off of," none of them seem to care about anything bur preserving the current PVP favoring status quo, and then show that it's all about bullying and stealing when they whine at the mere hint that they should be expected to play both halves of the game themselves, they don't care about figuring out how to balance things, they care about having someone whose new enough to be easy to beat and are scared of risking it themselves or worse losing the easy wins if they are stuck with only the other bullies to fight,

    You must have been on a different forum then because I been here for a long while and literally never saw that.

  • 0

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

    @scarecrow1771 I don't think it sounds stupid at all. Honestly I think that would be an excellent idea, I really don't think the existing tutorial is up to the job which is where a lot of the annoyance comes from. It doesn't leave players confident with their ability to use cannons or actually run them through even the basics of combat, which I think is a mistake. I totally think that a version of the game that lets people see a more friendly side of the community and step into friendly competition would be a huge help.

    Or they could create "tall tale ish" tutorial that you could play if you would like to. For example have character wake up at Sea dog tavern, be teached by Sea dog npc now to use cannons, different types of ammo against cardboard ships and fight against dummies.

    I think that a huge help would also be a chance to sort of de-brief after a session. If new players could be shown a track of player activity on their server on their session so that they can actually see if they were Outpost camped, or just unlucky, or cleverly tracked I think that would actually be a massive help for people to get a handle of the actual level of threat and problem on a server. If you can see that bad luck was just bad luck or that mistakes were legitimate mistakes I really think that would help a lot of people shrug off some nasty early experiences.

    For this i have no idea what to do because i my self have not encountered another crew when i spawn at outpost more than ONES for last year. So because of that i don't understand how new players get OP caped and can't come up with idea. unless they don't do anything for hour and that's why they get camped.