Hello guys, i have been playing mmos and pvp for over 15 years now, and i have never...ever seen a matchmaking as bad as this one...ever.
I am a new neverwinter player, got my warlock to lvl 70 and 1945 item power, i thought in my ignorance that i would be matched by players around the 2000 item power level....oh the surprise hahaha, i got oneshoted by everything that moved.
I was like, no, they are not matching me with high end geared players, its not possible....guess what, they were, everyone was 4k+ except for 1 that was 3600.
One guy literally walked up to me, swung his sword once at me, and walked away, that hit got me a nice dot, i died from that dot alone in less than 2 seconds....i have 85k health, a swing and a single dot killed me in 2 seconds....what the hell, the guy was a GF or a paladin, i cant be certain, the guy had a shield ^^
How is a new player supposed to help the team? i felt completely useless, and for the first time in 15 years i don't feel like pvping anymore, i felt i was a burden to my team and that they would be better off if i didn't queued for the match at all.
I like pvping how am i, as a new player, supposed to get thousands of glory to equip myself if i get oneshoted by everything and cant help my team at all?
Sorry for the bad English, im not from a English speaking country. Stay well.
This is also why a Solo Q system wont work either - because it doesnt prevent this from happening...
EDIT: @ambisinisterr just saw your post but couldnt read it - about to walk into a meeting
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
All very valid and thought out points. I agree with the bandaid comment completely.
As a person I don't like seeing answer without first considering both why certain problems exist to begin with or how solutions will fix the why. I don't know what the developers will decide but they definitely do keep an eye out of threads like this and others.
Obviously something will be done but suggestions really should be thought out. I.E. I agree the leaver penalty isn't working but my opinion on what should be done with it is based on why it doesn't work and how changing it will actually play out. As a strategist as a person, a gamer and a professional worker I am always looking for patterns and expected results.
That said, my personal favorite suggestion although I don't think the developers will ever do it: removing progression items from PvP.
When the game first launched PvPing from level 1-59 was amazing fun. Then levewl 60 people started getting gear sets, enchantments and boons and the power fluctuations made PvP matches a game of Russian Roulette.
I knew people who would level from 1-59 just to do the PvP then delete the character to play more level 1-59 PvP. Kind of sad considering that level 60 should have been an improvement.
Then we got lockboxes with scaling gear and enchantment slots for level 4 characters. Level 1-59 PvP balance died along with level 1-59 PvP.
I think the best thing the devs could ever do is remove the gear from PvP. We could definitely have minor variances through PvP rewards (sort of like the LoL rune system) but remove the vast gap that occurs between a fresh level 60 and a level 60 with BiS. Balanced PvP is fun for all. Unbalanced PvP is only fun for the winning side.
All very valid and thought out points. I agree with the bandaid comment completely.
As a person I don't like seeing answer without first considering both why certain problems exist to begin with or how solutions will fix the why. I don't know what the developers will decide but they definitely do keep an eye out of threads like this and others.
Obviously something will be done but suggestions really should be thought out. I.E. I agree the leaver penalty isn't working but my opinion on what should be done with it is based on why it doesn't work and how changing it will actually play out. As a strategist as a person, a gamer and a professional worker I am always looking for patterns and expected results.
That said, my personal favorite suggestion although I don't think the developers will ever do it: removing progression items from PvP.
When the game first launched PvPing from level 1-59 was amazing fun. Then levewl 60 people started getting gear sets, enchantments and boons and the power fluctuations made PvP matches a game of Russian Roulette.
I knew people who would level from 1-59 just to do the PvP then delete the character to play more level 1-59 PvP. Kind of sad considering that level 60 should have been an improvement.
Then we got lockboxes with scaling gear and enchantment slots for level 4 characters. Level 1-59 PvP balance died along with level 1-59 PvP.
I think the best thing the devs could ever do is remove the gear from PvP. We could definitely have minor variances through PvP rewards (sort of like the LoL rune system) but remove the vast gap that occurs between a fresh level 60 and a level 60 with BiS. Balanced PvP is fun for all. Unbalanced PvP is only fun for the winning side.
It won't happen. But I wish for it.
@ambisinisterr Reading this, I feel we are cut from the same cloth and its refreshing to speak with another player who has been in this game since beta. I understand and agree with EVERYTHING you just said.
I remember when I first started the game in beta... and how much fun PVP was. It was so dynamic and exciting and I agree lvl 1-59 where phenomenal! Even at 60 for a LONG time people were still gearing, not many players had what would be considered BIS enchants. Heck, I used to run around in just rank 8s which at the time were pretty darn good! But even the "average" player had 6s and 7s.
The gear gap wasnt huge at all, which made PVP much more fun.
Then, as you said, lockboxes, new sets, gear, bonuses, items, etc. You name it. Each and every module basically brought some new OP "must have" items.
Module 1 -New Weapon set Module 2 - Emblem Module 3 - tenacity/BlackIceGear/weapons Module 4- Artifact Weapons Module 5 - More artifact gear Module 6 - "reset" and now lvl 70 versions of everything etc etc.
I agree with you, that in a "perfect" world, gear would be very basic. 3 "tiers" and you would be given gear depending on the "tier" of item you have on your "PVE self" I dont know if this makes sense but basically all gear would be the same.
I think the DEVs TRIED to do this with tenacity and for a little while it worked! Only 3 "tiers" of gear, and tenacity was basically required to do PVP. But they also HALVED all healing which is why it worked. No player could sustain indefinitely as DPS > HPS(HOT). Now a days Heals > DPS and gear gap is the worst its ever been.
I think you are right in the sense that they will NEVER "removing progression items from PvP" however THAT said I think this is where the removal of boons as well as mount bonuses "meets in the middle". Players still get to keep all their personal hard earned gear from PVE but DONT get to bring over their immense PVE campaign boon stat bonuses. So its a middle ground of sorts. I think this is the most realistic but fair way of doing this.
Also, about your leaver penalty in PVP, I dont have a good solution. I just know its NEEDED - otherwise people leave at any time. I would just hope that my PVP Level solution would help solve this by putting people in matches that are more fair and enable them to feel they stand a chance so they DONT have to leave in the first place.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited October 2016
Just going to say, again, that I don't think that any leaver penalty will stop all leavers from leaving. I never claimed that it did.
I said three main points: -Leaver penalties reduce the amount of leavers -Leaver penalties will at least make leavers who don't leave the match suffer and wait at the campfire with everybody else -There is no instance in which having no leaver penalty is better than having a leaver penalty (except when others have already left)
Improving PvP so that less people want to leave is a must. No arguements there.
However no matter how great the PvP is there is no reason to ever remove the leaver penalty. MOBA's which spend their entire budget on PvP improvements all have leaver penalties for a reason. Bad matches happen. You should either be a good sport or suffer with your team. You should never be rewarded by leaving and having the option to play the game on a different character or on the same character playing PvE.
My only argument is that there is no logical reason to ever not have a leaver penalty. Even this junk system is better than no system.
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited October 2016
After re-reading your last post a while back I noticed I had definitely misunderstood it. That one was on me Clonkyo.
I think Ayroux, you and I are all on the same page.
PvP in NW is Russian Roulette unless you are in a premade top tier party. Your chances of winning are more dependent on the luck of what team you end up on than your gear, your skill or your team's gear/skill.
Removing boons is an interesting point. The problem I see with that is that some boons are blatantly only good in PvP. This definitely expands the gap between PvE and PvP builds, as aryoux has stated over the years, but I don't think the devs would want to remove boons from PvP and have dead boons or have to adjust them.
Additionally a big issue is simply with the stance the developers have taken and will likely always take: they want people who PvP to want to PvE. A stance I am normally fine with but not in regards to boons and gear progression. If they remove boons from PvP then players who PvP will be less likely to do new campaigns as it won't help them compete in PvP. This shouldn't matter IMO but to the bean counters it does.
Ultimately I have to go back to a quote that I used to say in the pre-alpha days. i don't remember the source. It might even be a hoshposh of quotes I combined into my own, let me know if anybody knows the original source: "If you make < a game > for everybody then you make < a game > for nobody."
It goes along with lincoln's statement that you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.
I don't believe there is a way to make a game balanced for both PvE and PvP. PvP games are best balanced by removing variables. PvE games are fun when there are a lot of variables to play with. No amount of tinkering with numbers will balance PvE and PvP without separating them as each system requires a fundamental difference in design philosophy. Even if by some miracle they manage to make them somewhere in the same continent of balanced then that will all go out the window with the inclusion of a new module let alone a new class. The devs will have to make a change in design philosophy to balance PvP otherwise they will be chasing the sun.
Run, rabbit run. Dig that hole. Forget the sun. When at last the work is done, don't sit down it's time to dig another one.
Just going to say, again, that I don't think that any leaver penalty will stop all leavers from leaving. I never claimed that it did.
My only argument is that there is no logical reason to ever not have a leaver penalty.
100% agree. Leaver penalty must stay, otherwise any bad match and players will leave causing more bad matches.
It is already is already worse than that. People will ,now, under the current rules, sit by the campfire & beg for kick rather than take the 30 min. slap on the wrist for QQ. 30 minutes is nothing. 2 skirmishes. One dungeoun, but rather than take it & catch up on the dailies, " We don't have a chance. Kick me plz!"
A Removing boons is an interesting point. The problem I see with that is that some boons are blatantly only good in PvP. This definitely expands the gap between PvE and PvP builds, as aryoux has stated over the years, but I don't think the devs would want to remove boons from PvP and have dead boons or have to adjust them.
Right, and for a while this worked (having PVP specific boons) but now its gotten out of hand and ruining PVP with all the gear gap issues. This is exactly what is causing the problems, and yeah, they would have to make some adjustments MAYBE... I look at it the same way I look at items. When your playing a game, you HAVE to have bad items drop, so that you appreciate the good ones. In the same way, I dont think it a farcry to keep the bad PVE boons in, as it merely provides choice for players. Not just that, off the top of my head I cant think of any completely worthless PVE boons anyways... So I dont think it requires any work on that front.
Additionally a big issue is simply with the stance the developers have taken and will likely always take: they want people who PvP to want to PvE. A stance I am normally fine with but not in regards to boons and gear progression. If they remove boons from PvP then players who PvP will be less likely to do new campaigns as it won't help them compete in PvP. This shouldn't matter IMO but to the bean counters it does.
This is another reason why my solution, taken as a whole, solves this problem.
Do you know why PVPers dont PVE? Because all their gear come from PVP and you cant make money off PVE anymore. This is exactly the problem tenacity on GEAR brings. Why would a PVPer do PVE? He cant get any gear from PVE, he cant get any artifact equipment that he cant more easily just BUY... Weapons dont come from it. etc etc.
If the DEVs want PVPers to PVE they have made some horrible choices in this game, because they have completely divided the game up into PVP and PVE where there is such a big gap between the two. "ideal stats" are WAY different, gear is different, there is currently NO reason for a PVPer to do PVE. Even with the campaign boons its not like it requires organized PVE to run. You run around for a month doing dailies and bam, you have your boons, then you wont do PVE anymore.
If you remove tenacity from gear, remove crit suppression as well, it more alligns the stats between the player bases as well as allows PVPers to use the BIS PVE gear if they want in PVP and ALSO allows them to use their boons to spec towards PVE damage making PVE MUCH more appealing to us PVPers. One reason I always was reluctant to PVE with any seriousness is it would require me to respec all my boons so I was more efficient. I would then choose to NOT PVP for a period of time as I was in full PVE gear.
My suggestion removes all this. I can use ANY gear I want in PVP, I could spec my boons for full PVE and I would have more REASON to PVE... Especially if all the best gear came from PVE... EVERYONE would do it.
Ultimately I have to go back to a quote that I used to say in the pre-alpha days. i don't remember the source. It might even be a hoshposh of quotes I combined into my own, let me know if anybody knows the original source: "If you make < a game > for everybody then you make < a game > for nobody."
It goes along with lincoln's statement that you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.
I agree with this too. I dont think NW is doing a great job. Its segregating (as I said above) the population when it doesnt need to.
Think back to pre-module days. This held true back then. PVP was NOT for everyone. Right now, it seems to me, PVP is essentially for NOONE except a small handful of BIS players who dominate the PVP scene... This is what needs to be fixed. Not making it 100% inclusive... Removing boons/mount bonuses and tenacity on gear (by adding it to the base character sheet) still provides a far gap between all the gear/artifacts/etc that players can have. It STILL wouldnt be "for everyone" but it would be far more friendly for all players.
I don't believe there is a way to make a game balanced for both PvE and PvP. PvP games are best balanced by removing variables. PvE games are fun when there are a lot of variables to play with. No amount of tinkering with numbers will balance PvE and PvP without separating them as each system requires a fundamental difference in design philosophy. Even if by some miracle they manage to make them somewhere in the same continent of balanced then that will all go out the window with the inclusion of a new module let alone a new class. The devs will have to make a change in design philosophy to balance PvP otherwise they will be chasing the sun.
"PvP games are best balanced by removing variables." - couldnt say it better myself. This is why the removal of variables (boons/mount bonuses/tenacity on GEAR) removes those variables.
PVE SHOULD be allowed to have massive variables. Let people play the way they want to! You see this to the extreme in Path of Exile. PVE is amazing there and people have loads of fun.
PVP on the other hand, needs to be stripped down. Looking at Destiny, they actually do a great job of this. Guns have PVE variables that are removed in PVP so a lvl 1 gun CAN be used and effective in PVP. Sure its not AS good as some of the BIS weapons, but it CAN kill a player. You would never use that lvl 1 gun in PVE tho as it would be horrendous.
There isnt a direct way to translate over to Neverwinter without massive massive design overhauls. But I do think the closest we will ever see is what I have proposed. Remove all boons, remove mount bonuses, remove tenacity on gear and provide that as a base to all players and in the process, removing crit suppression.
I don't understand why people are against bracketing.
It would encourage a lot of people, including myself, to PvP with alts and even develop them. Right now it's hard enough to keep up. Heck I'm taking my time ranking up my utility Dark enchantments past 9
I could do it right now but it isn't a priority with black Friday coming and I need another purple mount.
I am not against it, and I dont think anyone actually is. The question is "how do you bracket" thats the problem. There are too many issues with using Itemlevel.
1) It isnt really reflective of true strength. An unguilded 4k player will lose to a guilded one who has SH boons. Same item level. Massive difference. 2) A player using rank 10s and no utilities, might show as < 3.8k where as a rank 12 player with rank 12 utilities will show as over 4.3k and if both in the same guild, that 500+ points of Ilevel difference REALLY isnt that much of a difference.
3) People can gear swap to get under "thresholds" to get easier Ques 4) Cant gear lock players while in Que because then it forces people to sit around doing nothing waiting for it. At low population times, or for higher ILevel players, a bracket will increase que times forcing players to sit around and wait for long periods of time doing nothing.
This is why I think the BEST proposal is to create a NEW "score" to base brackets off of. I called it a "PVP Level" in which you gain EXP/Levels for winning matches and LOSE Exp/Levels for losing matches - to a "floor".
So currentlt we have ranks like Dominator, Tyrant, Overlord, etc. I propose using these ranks as the "brackets" and using the PVP levels as a way to move inside the brackets such as (based on a 1-150 PVP Level): - Unranked (1-7) - Dominator (8-14) - Tyrant (15-21) - Supreme Tyrant (22-28) - Ultimate Tyrant 29-35) - Overlord, (36-42) - Invincible Overlord (43+)
So you can only DE-Level to the bottom of your highest achieved "bracket" so if you are level 14 and win a match, you are now PVP Level 15. If you win a few more, you might be PVP Level 18. If you lost 3 matches, you would fall back to PVP Level 15, however if you lost ANOTHER one, you would NOT fall below 15 as that is the floor of your current bracket.
As you win, you gain levels, and thus move up into higher and higher tiers of PVP play.
This separates out the player base based on TIME in PVP as well as GEAR and SKILL.
Its no secret that Gear > Skill in PVP. So you get a die-hard PVP player who has BIS gear, its going to be very easy for them to get into the 30+ range. You have a casual player, he may PVP a few times a week, its going to take him a while to level up, and a NEW player will only be matched against very low PVP Level players - NEVER encountering a High Level Player.
Alts would be very friendly in this model as you would not play BIS players.
Also one VERY important factor in all this - to avoid "boosting" is that any "group" of players is going to be treated as the HIGHEST PVP Level person in the party. So even if you had a premade of all Overlords, one Invincible Overlord and tried to "boost" using a Dominator on your team, for the sake of matchmaking, it will treat the ENTIRE group as ALL "Invincible Overlords" since that is the highest person on the team.
What this does, is puts the "gear edge" in favor of the PUG group. Since any PUG group WOULD be 100% made up of Invincible Overlords. Thus gives a premade a DISADVANTAGE compared to everyone else. So premade at your own risk as you might get harder games.
Or say you had a team of 4 Tyrants and 1 Overlord. It treats that premade as 100% Overlords. Likely to get matched against a full BIS team... So now premades have more risk in Queing as one as you will get the hardest opponents available.
THIS is a much better matchmaking/bracket system that AT FIRST will feel like no matchmaking, but within just a few weeks players will start to settle out where they should be. This also gives MEANING behind each PVP game, meaning players are less likely to AFK or Quit since they LOSE levels for a loss. They shouldnt feel they have no chance since it will be a pretty "fair" matchmaking system.
I don't understand why people are against bracketing.
I don't think anybody is against bracketing or anything which makes more balanced matches. Realists like myself are simply saying that is a great solution to a problem which doesn't exist in NW.
There is matchmaking systems currently in place but in order for it to match people in a reasonable amount of time it needed to have the restrictions reduced and the system had to match greater differences in power ratings. The problem in NW is a small pool of PvP players at any given time.
Let's imagine every data point of the following graph are actually players in the PvP queue and the y coordinate is their gear/skill rating. Sorry I am being lazy and don't want to draw a graph.
There are only 11 players queued in that graph. You can't bracket or segment the player pool to improve the match. You need 10 players to fill a match and you only have 11 players to choose from. All but the highest or lowest skill person is going to be put into the same match. That is a huge skill/gear disparity because there was a small pool of data points to pull from.
Now I guarentee NW doesn't just have 11 players playing PvP at any given time but with the large gap created by player skill, builds and player gear combinations the system needs a lot of players to properly work. Let's use some simple numbers so it's a clear example of what happens in NW queueing...
Let's say we have 100 players to choose from in order to create a match.
We'll give the system three different scenarios: one where the maximum power rating is 5, one where the maximum power rating is 10 and one where the maximum power rating is 15.
We'll make a perfect spread of ratings in the first two scenarios so: in the first there will be 20 people at each power rating and in the second scenario there will be 10 people at each power rating. With 20 people at each power rating we have the ability to make 4 perfect matches per power rating. With 10 people at each power rating and 10 possible ratings we can only make 2 perfect matches per rating. A bit more complex a perfect spread in the third scenario will only result in 6.6 people and 1.3 perfect matches per rating. The more power tiers the less common it is to find equivalencies in the same population of players so the system ends up with the option of long wait times and strict rules or mixing high and low ratings.
For fun, if there was no power spread (impossible due to player skill) there would be 50 perfect matches per rating.
Conclusion: the bigger the gap in power rating (player skill, build and gear score) the larger the player pool is needed to support ideal matchmaking. If the population can't support the gap the matchmaking system has to either choose not to make matches or decide to mix tiers however it has to in order to get people into a match.
So, the TL/DR of that math mumbo jumo is that games either need a small gap in power or a large pool of players to create the most balanced PvP matches.
Therefore there are two valid options: increase the player pool or reduce the power gap. The third option of bracketing and matchmaking won't solve the problem if there are not enough players to populate balanced matches at any given time.
Since increasing the player pool is not a variable Cryptic can control the only viable solution to the problem of the matchmaking Russian Roulette is to reduce the gap in power between the players they already have.
"If you make < a game > for everybody then you make < a game > for nobody."
Nintendo for their GB "Pokémon" franchise (if i remember correctly) . But i always thought about that as a mistake for a simple reason which we all can see on, in example, LoL or even other MMOs:
You misunderstand the quote.
The point is to pick your audience and give YOUR AUDIENCE the best possible experience/service. If you try to please everybody then nobody will be pleased.
This TED talk describes the flash of genius a statistician had after trying to discover the perfect Pepsi. The answer is that the perfect Pepsi doesn't exist but the perfect Pepsis do. Malcom Gladwell does a much better job explaning it than I ever could so I encourage people to watch it.
As the talk describes, a large portion of the american populace likes chunky spaghetti sauce. You can't make a non-chunky chunky spaghetti sauce. It's either chunky or it's not chunky. Physics at work.
Unfortunately in video games, movies and other entertainment media this is not the case. Companies will try to make the perfect spaghetti sauce that is both chunky and not chunky and both the people who like chunky sauce and dislike chunky sauce end up not enjoying what they ate. When you try to make the perfect game you end up making a mess. Make the perfect ___ game. Don't make the perfect game.
LoL is actually a great example of a company that DOESN'T make a game for everybody. It makes a game for people who enjoy MOBA games. They don't make players run around killing monsters outside the MOBA in order to progress within the actual MOBA. They don't have characters unlocked through story/quest progression. They don't try to please anybody but the MOBA audience.
When games like NW try to be the perfect PvP game and the perfect PvE game you have the balancing mess that NW is... The PvE community complains over and over again that what they enjoy about the game is being removed in order too try to make PvP better and PvP is never balanced and as I argued before can't be balanced without separating it completely from PvE. You can't make non-chunky chunky tomato sauce! -.-
Conclusion: the bigger the gap in power rating (player skill, build and gear score) the large the player pool is needed to support a matchmaking system.
Therefore there are two valid options: increase the player pool or reduce the power gap. The third option of bracketing and matchmaking won't solve the problem if there are not enough players to populate balanced matches at any given time.
Since increasing the player pool is not a variable Cryptic can control the only viable solution to the problem of the matchmaking Russian Roulette is to reduce the gap in power between the players they already have.
BOOM! Truth bomb just hit and was delivered by @ambisinisterr this is exactly what @clonkyo1 and I have been preaching for months now...
This is why dividing up the Ques and creating different Ques ISNT the solution. It only further divides the population creating LESS balanced matchmaking and still solves nothing when the game is largely about items > Skill. In a game where SKill > Items you can expact a learning curve where players CAN experience harsh matches which will only make them better. In NW however, no amount of getting 2 shot with at wills, will make a player "get better" at PVP. This is a fundamental problem with NW and its matchmaking. It puts too much weight, or tries to, on SKILL when GEAR should be the focus.
Anyways I agree 100% with this. Cryptic has TWO choices to fix PVP: 1) Grow population to sustain gear gap 2) Shrink Gear gap based on population.
This is why My proposal is a TWO pronged approach. Step 1) Fix power gap - by removing all boons/mount bonuses from PVP. Step 2) Create the PVP Level "bracket" system that will properly divide up the players.
and when you reach the end thing you are done forever cause the queue would never pop.
There will be nothing done to matchmaking beside duo/solo queue option available cause there is not enough interest in PvP which will not prevent criers from crying that they got a premade anyway cause two good duos on one team is sometimes an impossible to win for the other consisting of total pugs. The unpopularity in PvP isn't actually really anything impressive as there are no rewards for progression of any sort at all beside the uber rewarding artifact of power that can be used as a feeder. In guild wars 2 in pvp you get achievements all the time in pvp then you switch the grinding ladder for different rewards and complete these sort of rewards and then you can switch again to something else. In GW2 you get something all the time for participation and it has no entry requirements into PvP but is gated in PvE.
This is false. This is why everything is "ranges" and also why PVP matchmaking would be ONLY based on PVP Level and have no respect for guilds/alliances/friends - which is another flaw in the current MM system.
The beauty behind BOTH of these suggestions (as I posted above) is it creates smaller gear gap and the PVP Level idea segments the current player base. So the "BIS" players wont SIGNIFICANTLY outgear the average players which means that a skilled "average gear" player could potentially make it into higher brackets.
If you had 100 players in the current MM system, it will struggle to find a match as @ambisinisterr detailed in his post. Part of this is because of friends list, and inaccurate measure of "skill" (ELO). So you end up with bad matches, even if you removes the friendslist and guild qualifiers, ELO is still a horrible metric to use in a game like NW where Gear > Skill.
But say you had 100 players, the PVP Level system segments everyone for you. So the top 10-20 players will be the highest PVP Levels with enough time and then get matched against eachother.
This is why you need BOTH to reduce gear gap as well as implement this system.
The counter proposal is the Solo Q option which only divides the community up more, creates multiple Ques, and pits BIS players against average GS or casual players who end up dying in 2 hits to at wills... We dont need to go down that road as THAT will be the end of PVP certainly.
Also, As you can read by yourself, we are not avocating to remove "boons" from the game, but just from Domination and GG, the main "sources" of PvP... so, i dont get why you brought up the "PvE Balance" at all when what players like myself or @ayroux are stating that "changes on PvP should only affect on PvP, not PvE at all". So, on this sense, i think, devs would please both PvE players by not touching their "game" while pleasing us, PvP players, by removing the "uselessness" on chars/playersbrought by the"power creep".
Oh wow, was someone thinking we meant to remove boons from the game?! Oh no... That would be silly... That is NOT what we meant at all... but merely to remove boons from PVP only.
I had always envisioned a "PVP Tab" in which it would allow you to "loadout" a version of your character, so you can pick all your gear here and it would also show on THIS tab, your character without any boon/mount/companion bonuses. So it would accurately show you what your character will look like in a PVP match.
Then when you Que for PVP, you dont need to worry about if you have PVE gear on or not, or if you have your right loadout - as it would ALL be based on that "PVP tab".
Also in my perfect world, this PVP tab would ALSO include your "PVP Level" that would show for you to know where you stand.
This would make NW appeal to both PVP and PVE crowds and wouldnt impact PVE at all, but would fix PVP.
0
ambisinisterrMember, Neverwinter ModeratorPosts: 10,462Community Moderator
edited October 2016
Dunno what it is but you're having a hard time understanding me Clonkyo.
I never believed you supported removing boons from the game. I am pointing out that the developers will not want to either leave the PvP boons as dead options in the existing roster nor do I expect they will be fond of completely changing them. I see major points of resistance from the developers even if it is a good suggestion in my opinion especially because they are very keen on having PvE and PvP all be under the same game mechanics as well as making sure PvPers have incentives to play new content.
Additionally your entire last post still seems to have missed that I said a game designed to try to make everybody happy will actually make everybody unhappy. I don't know what you're not getting because you are literally arguing for exactly what I said.
Again, League of Legends isn't trying to make everybody happy. They are make their one specific audience happy. Neverwinter is trying to make 5 or more audiences happy and at any given time at least one of them is likely very unhappy.
They juggle between balancing for PvP, creating new PvE content, supporting UGC, making the D&D fans happy and making the MMO players happy. You can make a comedy drama film. You can make a comedy action film. You can even make a comedy drama romance film. But a comedy drama romance action fantasy film should sound preposterous for a reason. Pick an audience and make it great. Don't try to make everybody happy.
Neverwinter needs to stop trying to fit everything under one roof and pick some audiences to focus on. Theyy can pick PvP and PvE but they have to stop trying to make them equal and start making them separate but equal...wow I never thought that term could ever be justified...don't respond to that...
You're not saying anything I am not. You're just thinking I am saying something I am not.
Dunno what it is but you're having a hard time understanding me Clonkyo.
I never believed you supported removing boons from the game. I am pointing out that the developers will not want to either leave the PvP boons as dead options in the existing roster nor do I expect they will be fond of completely changing them. I see major points of resistance from the developers even if it is a good suggestion in my opinion especially because they are very keen on having PvE and PvP all be under the same game mechanics as well as making sure PvPers have incentives to play new content.
Additionally your entire last post still seems to have missed that I said a game designed to try to make everybody happy will actually make everybody unhappy. I don't know what you're not getting because you are literally arguing for exactly what I said.
Again, League of Legends isn't trying to make everybody happy. They are make their one specific audience happy. Neverwinter is trying to make 5 or more audiences happy and at any given time at least one of them is likely very unhappy.
They juggle between balancing for PvP, creating new PvE content, supporting UGC, making the D&D fans happy and making the MMO players happy. You can make a comedy drama film. You can make a comedy action film. You can even make a comedy drama romance film. But a comedy drama romance action fantasy film should sound preposterous for a reason. Pick an audience and make it great. Don't try to make everybody happy.
Neverwinter needs to stop trying to fit everything under one roof and pick some audiences to focus on. Theyy can pick PvP and PvE but they have to stop trying to make them equal and start making them separate but equal...wow I never thought that term could ever be justified...don't respond to that...
You're not saying anything I am not. You're just thinking I am saying something I am not.
@ambisinisterr when we are saying removal of boons, this would also NOT include PVP specific boons - from the PVP campaign, merely all the MODULE specific boons (i.e. Sharandar module 1 boons, Dread mod 2 boons etc.)
So there wouldnt be any useless boons in the system... Just the PVE-module boons and the SH boons.
Also you mention this: "they are very keen on having PvE and PvP all be under the same game mechanics as well as making sure PvPers have incentives to play new content."
I dont see why this would change? Without detailing out my suggestion (so new readers will have to go find it) when I proposed removing tenacity on gear, this opens up a whole new world to PVP gear options. So PVP players will be HIGHLY incentivised to do PVE (unlike now) because the new GEAR can actually be used by PVPERs
Take yourself back in time to pre-tenacity days. What did every GF run in PVP? Stalwart set, until it was nerfed, then either 2pc/2pc for ARP stacking OR the Timeless set (tier 2). What did every GWF run? 2pc titan and 2 piece scrappers... PVE sets...
What did every PVPer use for weapons? Ancient Weapons from CN... PVE weapons!
Tenacity on gear made it so people DONT need to do PVE. remove this barrier and now PVE is relevant again to get NEW gear released for PVP.
Campaign boons will STILL be done by PVPers to make their stats better FOR running PVE to get gear to be better in PVP. Its all tied together.
So I still think that even with boon removal from PVP there will be PLENTY of options for PVP players in doing the new PVE content and they will WANT to do it.
"They juggle between balancing for PvP, creating new PvE content, supporting UGC, making the D&D fans happy and making the MMO players happy."
We agreed back a few posts ago. PVP is best done when its simplified. They didnt have a problem doing ALL this back in the day... Only after some poor decisions and countless modules and more and more boons did it become a bigger issue. So Strip out that power creep and now you CAN do everything.
Also, I think the analogy breaks down just a little bit. Most MMOs support both PVE and PVP and do it pretty well. Sure there are ALWAYS balance issues, but its not like supporting both types of play is a different genre... Its very common to do.
"Neverwinter needs to stop trying to fit everything under one roof and pick some audiences to focus on." I agree. And Neverwinter should focus on the Action Combat MMO users. This entails BOTH PVP and PVE players. This can be EASILY done with what we have suggested, which I cant see ANY negative drawbacks from.
Nothing there I disagree with. Purely clonkyo misreading what I have said.
Clonkyo,
Seriously. You are arguing against what I haven't said or argued against. Let's stop this.
My only correction to what you have said is, again, LoL is successful and has players that enjoy the game (are happy) because they focus on making a game for a specific audience. They design their game to make MOBA players happy. They don't try to make PvE players happy. They don't try to make story driven players happy. They ONLY try to make MOBA players happy. If you are not a person that likes MOBA's then you WILL NOT enjoy LoL. It's not a game for everybody and they don't do anything to try to make any audience other than the MOBA audience happy.
On the other hand Neverwinter tries to be a game for everybody and that is not possible. Instead of making a couple of audiences happy they have consistently had at least one audience unhappy at any given time.
I, not you, are saying its bad to try to make everybody happy and I am correcting your claim that LoL makes everybody happy. They might make everybody in their audience happy but they are ONLY working to make one specific audience happy instead of trying to make every audience they possibly could try to shove under their umbrella happy.
That's all I have said. I don't know where you keep coming up with all these other arguments.
If you get it now, great! If not...let's stop. It's very circular and has taken up enough of the thread as it is.
Nothing there I disagree with. Purely clonkyo misreading what I have said.
Clonkyo,
Seriously. You are arguing against what I haven't said or argued against. Let's stop this.
My only correction to what you have said is, again, LoL is successful and has players that enjoy the game (are happy) because they focus on making a game for a specific audience. They design their game to make MOBA players happy. They don't try to make PvE players happy. They don't try to make story driven players happy. They ONLY try to make MOBA players happy. If you are not a person that likes MOBA's then you WILL NOT enjoy LoL. It's not a game for everybody and they don't do anything to try to be that way.
On the other hand Neverwinter tries to be a game for everybody and that is not possible. That's allI have said. I don't know where you keep coming up with all these other arguments.
If you get it now, great. If not...let's stop. It's very circular and has taken up enough of the thread as it is.
WEll, i think that you're still confusing things but well, let's quit that debate and focus on our main point.
Main Point = We are all very passionate about the game and its clear in this thread just how much we DO care. So the question is, how do we make sure the DEVs atleast SEE this idea and see the rationale behind it?
I would absolutely LOVE for them to try "vanilla" PVP is what I will call it, as a weekend or WEEKLONG event. What is the harm in trying it?
I agree with @clonkyo1 - copy/paste the code that disables pets in domination ONTO the boon system, mount bonuses, insignias etc. Heck I dont even care if they provided this on Owlbear to make it easier for them if they needed. Just provide it in SOME avenue and let the PVPers test it! Let us TRY IT and see if it will work or not...
I have a suspicion though that even if they do all this, some unknowing PVE player will come in and write about how they "lost a bunch of stats" and they will blame THAT on why they lost, not realizing the PVP player gave up literally tens(plural) of thousands of stats MORE than that PVE player.
So just you have to realize that regardless of how good something is, there will ALWAYS ALWAYS be a few nah sayers who frankly just have zero idea what they are talking about...
I mean a case and point is people saying to keep companions in for SH Siege PVP... I still just facepalm everytime I think about that. The entire PVP population said NO, the PVE-ers said "yes"... They literally didnt even understand what they were saying yes to and only saw the benefit to their own character, not the PAINFUL loss it would cause them when some guy started to actually abuse all the companions that are abusable in PVP.... Anyways enough said on that.
Point being. We all agree. Vanilla PVP is what this game VERY badly needs.
Comments
EDIT: @ambisinisterr just saw your post but couldnt read it - about to walk into a meeting
All very valid and thought out points. I agree with the bandaid comment completely.
As a person I don't like seeing answer without first considering both why certain problems exist to begin with or how solutions will fix the why. I don't know what the developers will decide but they definitely do keep an eye out of threads like this and others.
Obviously something will be done but suggestions really should be thought out. I.E. I agree the leaver penalty isn't working but my opinion on what should be done with it is based on why it doesn't work and how changing it will actually play out. As a strategist as a person, a gamer and a professional worker I am always looking for patterns and expected results.
That said, my personal favorite suggestion although I don't think the developers will ever do it: removing progression items from PvP.
When the game first launched PvPing from level 1-59 was amazing fun. Then levewl 60 people started getting gear sets, enchantments and boons and the power fluctuations made PvP matches a game of Russian Roulette.
I knew people who would level from 1-59 just to do the PvP then delete the character to play more level 1-59 PvP. Kind of sad considering that level 60 should have been an improvement.
Then we got lockboxes with scaling gear and enchantment slots for level 4 characters. Level 1-59 PvP balance died along with level 1-59 PvP.
I think the best thing the devs could ever do is remove the gear from PvP. We could definitely have minor variances through PvP rewards (sort of like the LoL rune system) but remove the vast gap that occurs between a fresh level 60 and a level 60 with BiS. Balanced PvP is fun for all. Unbalanced PvP is only fun for the winning side.
It won't happen. But I wish for it.
I remember when I first started the game in beta... and how much fun PVP was. It was so dynamic and exciting and I agree lvl 1-59 where phenomenal! Even at 60 for a LONG time people were still gearing, not many players had what would be considered BIS enchants. Heck, I used to run around in just rank 8s which at the time were pretty darn good! But even the "average" player had 6s and 7s.
The gear gap wasnt huge at all, which made PVP much more fun.
Then, as you said, lockboxes, new sets, gear, bonuses, items, etc. You name it. Each and every module basically brought some new OP "must have" items.
Module 1 -New Weapon set
Module 2 - Emblem
Module 3 - tenacity/BlackIceGear/weapons
Module 4- Artifact Weapons
Module 5 - More artifact gear
Module 6 - "reset" and now lvl 70 versions of everything
etc etc.
I agree with you, that in a "perfect" world, gear would be very basic. 3 "tiers" and you would be given gear depending on the "tier" of item you have on your "PVE self" I dont know if this makes sense but basically all gear would be the same.
I think the DEVs TRIED to do this with tenacity and for a little while it worked! Only 3 "tiers" of gear, and tenacity was basically required to do PVP. But they also HALVED all healing which is why it worked. No player could sustain indefinitely as DPS > HPS(HOT). Now a days Heals > DPS and gear gap is the worst its ever been.
I think you are right in the sense that they will NEVER "removing progression items from PvP" however THAT said I think this is where the removal of boons as well as mount bonuses "meets in the middle". Players still get to keep all their personal hard earned gear from PVE but DONT get to bring over their immense PVE campaign boon stat bonuses. So its a middle ground of sorts. I think this is the most realistic but fair way of doing this.
Also, about your leaver penalty in PVP, I dont have a good solution. I just know its NEEDED - otherwise people leave at any time. I would just hope that my PVP Level solution would help solve this by putting people in matches that are more fair and enable them to feel they stand a chance so they DONT have to leave in the first place.
I said three main points:
-Leaver penalties reduce the amount of leavers
-Leaver penalties will at least make leavers who don't leave the match suffer and wait at the campfire with everybody else
-There is no instance in which having no leaver penalty is better than having a leaver penalty (except when others have already left)
Improving PvP so that less people want to leave is a must. No arguements there.
However no matter how great the PvP is there is no reason to ever remove the leaver penalty. MOBA's which spend their entire budget on PvP improvements all have leaver penalties for a reason. Bad matches happen. You should either be a good sport or suffer with your team. You should never be rewarded by leaving and having the option to play the game on a different character or on the same character playing PvE.
My only argument is that there is no logical reason to ever not have a leaver penalty. Even this junk system is better than no system.
I think Ayroux, you and I are all on the same page.
PvP in NW is Russian Roulette unless you are in a premade top tier party. Your chances of winning are more dependent on the luck of what team you end up on than your gear, your skill or your team's gear/skill.
Removing boons is an interesting point. The problem I see with that is that some boons are blatantly only good in PvP. This definitely expands the gap between PvE and PvP builds, as aryoux has stated over the years, but I don't think the devs would want to remove boons from PvP and have dead boons or have to adjust them.
Additionally a big issue is simply with the stance the developers have taken and will likely always take: they want people who PvP to want to PvE. A stance I am normally fine with but not in regards to boons and gear progression. If they remove boons from PvP then players who PvP will be less likely to do new campaigns as it won't help them compete in PvP. This shouldn't matter IMO but to the bean counters it does.
Ultimately I have to go back to a quote that I used to say in the pre-alpha days. i don't remember the source. It might even be a hoshposh of quotes I combined into my own, let me know if anybody knows the original source:
"If you make < a game > for everybody then you make < a game > for nobody."
It goes along with lincoln's statement that you can please some of the people some of the time but you can't please all of the people all of the time.
I don't believe there is a way to make a game balanced for both PvE and PvP. PvP games are best balanced by removing variables. PvE games are fun when there are a lot of variables to play with. No amount of tinkering with numbers will balance PvE and PvP without separating them as each system requires a fundamental difference in design philosophy. Even if by some miracle they manage to make them somewhere in the same continent of balanced then that will all go out the window with the inclusion of a new module let alone a new class. The devs will have to make a change in design philosophy to balance PvP otherwise they will be chasing the sun.
Run, rabbit run. Dig that hole. Forget the sun. When at last the work is done, don't sit down it's time to dig another one.
Do you know why PVPers dont PVE? Because all their gear come from PVP and you cant make money off PVE anymore. This is exactly the problem tenacity on GEAR brings. Why would a PVPer do PVE? He cant get any gear from PVE, he cant get any artifact equipment that he cant more easily just BUY... Weapons dont come from it. etc etc.
If the DEVs want PVPers to PVE they have made some horrible choices in this game, because they have completely divided the game up into PVP and PVE where there is such a big gap between the two. "ideal stats" are WAY different, gear is different, there is currently NO reason for a PVPer to do PVE. Even with the campaign boons its not like it requires organized PVE to run. You run around for a month doing dailies and bam, you have your boons, then you wont do PVE anymore.
If you remove tenacity from gear, remove crit suppression as well, it more alligns the stats between the player bases as well as allows PVPers to use the BIS PVE gear if they want in PVP and ALSO allows them to use their boons to spec towards PVE damage making PVE MUCH more appealing to us PVPers. One reason I always was reluctant to PVE with any seriousness is it would require me to respec all my boons so I was more efficient. I would then choose to NOT PVP for a period of time as I was in full PVE gear.
My suggestion removes all this. I can use ANY gear I want in PVP, I could spec my boons for full PVE and I would have more REASON to PVE... Especially if all the best gear came from PVE... EVERYONE would do it.
I agree with this too. I dont think NW is doing a great job. Its segregating (as I said above) the population when it doesnt need to.
Think back to pre-module days. This held true back then. PVP was NOT for everyone. Right now, it seems to me, PVP is essentially for NOONE except a small handful of BIS players who dominate the PVP scene... This is what needs to be fixed. Not making it 100% inclusive... Removing boons/mount bonuses and tenacity on gear (by adding it to the base character sheet) still provides a far gap between all the gear/artifacts/etc that players can have. It STILL wouldnt be "for everyone" but it would be far more friendly for all players.
"PvP games are best balanced by removing variables." - couldnt say it better myself. This is why the removal of variables (boons/mount bonuses/tenacity on GEAR) removes those variables.
PVE SHOULD be allowed to have massive variables. Let people play the way they want to! You see this to the extreme in Path of Exile. PVE is amazing there and people have loads of fun.
PVP on the other hand, needs to be stripped down. Looking at Destiny, they actually do a great job of this. Guns have PVE variables that are removed in PVP so a lvl 1 gun CAN be used and effective in PVP. Sure its not AS good as some of the BIS weapons, but it CAN kill a player. You would never use that lvl 1 gun in PVE tho as it would be horrendous.
There isnt a direct way to translate over to Neverwinter without massive massive design overhauls. But I do think the closest we will ever see is what I have proposed. Remove all boons, remove mount bonuses, remove tenacity on gear and provide that as a base to all players and in the process, removing crit suppression.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, Life is but a dream.
1) It isnt really reflective of true strength. An unguilded 4k player will lose to a guilded one who has SH boons. Same item level. Massive difference.
2) A player using rank 10s and no utilities, might show as < 3.8k where as a rank 12 player with rank 12 utilities will show as over 4.3k and if both in the same guild, that 500+ points of Ilevel difference REALLY isnt that much of a difference.
3) People can gear swap to get under "thresholds" to get easier Ques
4) Cant gear lock players while in Que because then it forces people to sit around doing nothing waiting for it. At low population times, or for higher ILevel players, a bracket will increase que times forcing players to sit around and wait for long periods of time doing nothing.
This is why I think the BEST proposal is to create a NEW "score" to base brackets off of. I called it a "PVP Level" in which you gain EXP/Levels for winning matches and LOSE Exp/Levels for losing matches - to a "floor".
So currentlt we have ranks like Dominator, Tyrant, Overlord, etc. I propose using these ranks as the "brackets" and using the PVP levels as a way to move inside the brackets such as (based on a 1-150 PVP Level):
- Unranked (1-7)
- Dominator (8-14)
- Tyrant (15-21)
- Supreme Tyrant (22-28)
- Ultimate Tyrant 29-35)
- Overlord, (36-42)
- Invincible Overlord (43+)
So you can only DE-Level to the bottom of your highest achieved "bracket" so if you are level 14 and win a match, you are now PVP Level 15. If you win a few more, you might be PVP Level 18. If you lost 3 matches, you would fall back to PVP Level 15, however if you lost ANOTHER one, you would NOT fall below 15 as that is the floor of your current bracket.
As you win, you gain levels, and thus move up into higher and higher tiers of PVP play.
This separates out the player base based on TIME in PVP as well as GEAR and SKILL.
Its no secret that Gear > Skill in PVP. So you get a die-hard PVP player who has BIS gear, its going to be very easy for them to get into the 30+ range. You have a casual player, he may PVP a few times a week, its going to take him a while to level up, and a NEW player will only be matched against very low PVP Level players - NEVER encountering a High Level Player.
Alts would be very friendly in this model as you would not play BIS players.
Also one VERY important factor in all this - to avoid "boosting" is that any "group" of players is going to be treated as the HIGHEST PVP Level person in the party. So even if you had a premade of all Overlords, one Invincible Overlord and tried to "boost" using a Dominator on your team, for the sake of matchmaking, it will treat the ENTIRE group as ALL "Invincible Overlords" since that is the highest person on the team.
What this does, is puts the "gear edge" in favor of the PUG group. Since any PUG group WOULD be 100% made up of Invincible Overlords. Thus gives a premade a DISADVANTAGE compared to everyone else. So premade at your own risk as you might get harder games.
Or say you had a team of 4 Tyrants and 1 Overlord. It treats that premade as 100% Overlords. Likely to get matched against a full BIS team... So now premades have more risk in Queing as one as you will get the hardest opponents available.
THIS is a much better matchmaking/bracket system that AT FIRST will feel like no matchmaking, but within just a few weeks players will start to settle out where they should be. This also gives MEANING behind each PVP game, meaning players are less likely to AFK or Quit since they LOSE levels for a loss. They shouldnt feel they have no chance since it will be a pretty "fair" matchmaking system.
There is matchmaking systems currently in place but in order for it to match people in a reasonable amount of time it needed to have the restrictions reduced and the system had to match greater differences in power ratings.
The problem in NW is a small pool of PvP players at any given time.
Let's imagine every data point of the following graph are actually players in the PvP queue and the y coordinate is their gear/skill rating. Sorry I am being lazy and don't want to draw a graph.
There are only 11 players queued in that graph. You can't bracket or segment the player pool to improve the match. You need 10 players to fill a match and you only have 11 players to choose from.
All but the highest or lowest skill person is going to be put into the same match. That is a huge skill/gear disparity because there was a small pool of data points to pull from.
Now I guarentee NW doesn't just have 11 players playing PvP at any given time but with the large gap created by player skill, builds and player gear combinations the system needs a lot of players to properly work. Let's use some simple numbers so it's a clear example of what happens in NW queueing...
Let's say we have 100 players to choose from in order to create a match.
We'll give the system three different scenarios: one where the maximum power rating is 5, one where the maximum power rating is 10 and one where the maximum power rating is 15.
We'll make a perfect spread of ratings in the first two scenarios so: in the first there will be 20 people at each power rating and in the second scenario there will be 10 people at each power rating.
With 20 people at each power rating we have the ability to make 4 perfect matches per power rating.
With 10 people at each power rating and 10 possible ratings we can only make 2 perfect matches per rating.
A bit more complex a perfect spread in the third scenario will only result in 6.6 people and 1.3 perfect matches per rating.
The more power tiers the less common it is to find equivalencies in the same population of players so the system ends up with the option of long wait times and strict rules or mixing high and low ratings.
For fun, if there was no power spread (impossible due to player skill) there would be 50 perfect matches per rating.
Conclusion: the bigger the gap in power rating (player skill, build and gear score) the larger the player pool is needed to support ideal matchmaking. If the population can't support the gap the matchmaking system has to either choose not to make matches or decide to mix tiers however it has to in order to get people into a match.
So, the TL/DR of that math mumbo jumo is that games either need a small gap in power or a large pool of players to create the most balanced PvP matches.
Therefore there are two valid options: increase the player pool or reduce the power gap. The third option of bracketing and matchmaking won't solve the problem if there are not enough players to populate balanced matches at any given time.
Since increasing the player pool is not a variable Cryptic can control the only viable solution to the problem of the matchmaking Russian Roulette is to reduce the gap in power between the players they already have.
The point is to pick your audience and give YOUR AUDIENCE the best possible experience/service. If you try to please everybody then nobody will be pleased.
This TED talk describes the flash of genius a statistician had after trying to discover the perfect Pepsi. The answer is that the perfect Pepsi doesn't exist but the perfect Pepsis do. Malcom Gladwell does a much better job explaning it than I ever could so I encourage people to watch it.
As the talk describes, a large portion of the american populace likes chunky spaghetti sauce. You can't make a non-chunky chunky spaghetti sauce. It's either chunky or it's not chunky. Physics at work.
Unfortunately in video games, movies and other entertainment media this is not the case. Companies will try to make the perfect spaghetti sauce that is both chunky and not chunky and both the people who like chunky sauce and dislike chunky sauce end up not enjoying what they ate.
When you try to make the perfect game you end up making a mess. Make the perfect ___ game. Don't make the perfect game.
LoL is actually a great example of a company that DOESN'T make a game for everybody. It makes a game for people who enjoy MOBA games. They don't make players run around killing monsters outside the MOBA in order to progress within the actual MOBA. They don't have characters unlocked through story/quest progression. They don't try to please anybody but the MOBA audience.
When games like NW try to be the perfect PvP game and the perfect PvE game you have the balancing mess that NW is...
The PvE community complains over and over again that what they enjoy about the game is being removed in order too try to make PvP better and PvP is never balanced and as I argued before can't be balanced without separating it completely from PvE. You can't make non-chunky chunky tomato sauce! -.-
This is why dividing up the Ques and creating different Ques ISNT the solution. It only further divides the population creating LESS balanced matchmaking and still solves nothing when the game is largely about items > Skill. In a game where SKill > Items you can expact a learning curve where players CAN experience harsh matches which will only make them better. In NW however, no amount of getting 2 shot with at wills, will make a player "get better" at PVP. This is a fundamental problem with NW and its matchmaking. It puts too much weight, or tries to, on SKILL when GEAR should be the focus.
Anyways I agree 100% with this. Cryptic has TWO choices to fix PVP:
1) Grow population to sustain gear gap
2) Shrink Gear gap based on population.
This is why My proposal is a TWO pronged approach.
Step 1) Fix power gap - by removing all boons/mount bonuses from PVP.
Step 2) Create the PVP Level "bracket" system that will properly divide up the players. This is false. This is why everything is "ranges" and also why PVP matchmaking would be ONLY based on PVP Level and have no respect for guilds/alliances/friends - which is another flaw in the current MM system.
The beauty behind BOTH of these suggestions (as I posted above) is it creates smaller gear gap and the PVP Level idea segments the current player base. So the "BIS" players wont SIGNIFICANTLY outgear the average players which means that a skilled "average gear" player could potentially make it into higher brackets.
If you had 100 players in the current MM system, it will struggle to find a match as @ambisinisterr detailed in his post. Part of this is because of friends list, and inaccurate measure of "skill" (ELO). So you end up with bad matches, even if you removes the friendslist and guild qualifiers, ELO is still a horrible metric to use in a game like NW where Gear > Skill.
But say you had 100 players, the PVP Level system segments everyone for you. So the top 10-20 players will be the highest PVP Levels with enough time and then get matched against eachother.
This is why you need BOTH to reduce gear gap as well as implement this system.
The counter proposal is the Solo Q option which only divides the community up more, creates multiple Ques, and pits BIS players against average GS or casual players who end up dying in 2 hits to at wills... We dont need to go down that road as THAT will be the end of PVP certainly.
I had always envisioned a "PVP Tab" in which it would allow you to "loadout" a version of your character, so you can pick all your gear here and it would also show on THIS tab, your character without any boon/mount/companion bonuses. So it would accurately show you what your character will look like in a PVP match.
Then when you Que for PVP, you dont need to worry about if you have PVE gear on or not, or if you have your right loadout - as it would ALL be based on that "PVP tab".
Also in my perfect world, this PVP tab would ALSO include your "PVP Level" that would show for you to know where you stand.
This would make NW appeal to both PVP and PVE crowds and wouldnt impact PVE at all, but would fix PVP.
I never believed you supported removing boons from the game. I am pointing out that the developers will not want to either leave the PvP boons as dead options in the existing roster nor do I expect they will be fond of completely changing them. I see major points of resistance from the developers even if it is a good suggestion in my opinion especially because they are very keen on having PvE and PvP all be under the same game mechanics as well as making sure PvPers have incentives to play new content.
Additionally your entire last post still seems to have missed that I said a game designed to try to make everybody happy will actually make everybody unhappy. I don't know what you're not getting because you are literally arguing for exactly what I said.
Again, League of Legends isn't trying to make everybody happy. They are make their one specific audience happy. Neverwinter is trying to make 5 or more audiences happy and at any given time at least one of them is likely very unhappy.
They juggle between balancing for PvP, creating new PvE content, supporting UGC, making the D&D fans happy and making the MMO players happy. You can make a comedy drama film. You can make a comedy action film. You can even make a comedy drama romance film. But a comedy drama romance action fantasy film should sound preposterous for a reason. Pick an audience and make it great. Don't try to make everybody happy.
Neverwinter needs to stop trying to fit everything under one roof and pick some audiences to focus on. Theyy can pick PvP and PvE but they have to stop trying to make them equal and start making them separate but equal...wow I never thought that term could ever be justified...don't respond to that...
You're not saying anything I am not. You're just thinking I am saying something I am not.
So there wouldnt be any useless boons in the system... Just the PVE-module boons and the SH boons.
Also you mention this:
"they are very keen on having PvE and PvP all be under the same game mechanics as well as making sure PvPers have incentives to play new content."
I dont see why this would change? Without detailing out my suggestion (so new readers will have to go find it) when I proposed removing tenacity on gear, this opens up a whole new world to PVP gear options. So PVP players will be HIGHLY incentivised to do PVE (unlike now) because the new GEAR can actually be used by PVPERs
Take yourself back in time to pre-tenacity days. What did every GF run in PVP? Stalwart set, until it was nerfed, then either 2pc/2pc for ARP stacking OR the Timeless set (tier 2). What did every GWF run? 2pc titan and 2 piece scrappers... PVE sets...
What did every PVPer use for weapons? Ancient Weapons from CN... PVE weapons!
Tenacity on gear made it so people DONT need to do PVE. remove this barrier and now PVE is relevant again to get NEW gear released for PVP.
Campaign boons will STILL be done by PVPers to make their stats better FOR running PVE to get gear to be better in PVP. Its all tied together.
So I still think that even with boon removal from PVP there will be PLENTY of options for PVP players in doing the new PVE content and they will WANT to do it.
"They juggle between balancing for PvP, creating new PvE content, supporting UGC, making the D&D fans happy and making the MMO players happy."
We agreed back a few posts ago. PVP is best done when its simplified. They didnt have a problem doing ALL this back in the day... Only after some poor decisions and countless modules and more and more boons did it become a bigger issue. So Strip out that power creep and now you CAN do everything.
Also, I think the analogy breaks down just a little bit. Most MMOs support both PVE and PVP and do it pretty well. Sure there are ALWAYS balance issues, but its not like supporting both types of play is a different genre... Its very common to do.
"Neverwinter needs to stop trying to fit everything under one roof and pick some audiences to focus on."
I agree. And Neverwinter should focus on the Action Combat MMO users. This entails BOTH PVP and PVE players. This can be EASILY done with what we have suggested, which I cant see ANY negative drawbacks from.
Purely clonkyo misreading what I have said.
Clonkyo,
Seriously. You are arguing against what I haven't said or argued against. Let's stop this.
My only correction to what you have said is, again, LoL is successful and has players that enjoy the game (are happy) because they focus on making a game for a specific audience. They design their game to make MOBA players happy. They don't try to make PvE players happy. They don't try to make story driven players happy. They ONLY try to make MOBA players happy.
If you are not a person that likes MOBA's then you WILL NOT enjoy LoL. It's not a game for everybody and they don't do anything to try to make any audience other than the MOBA audience happy.
On the other hand Neverwinter tries to be a game for everybody and that is not possible. Instead of making a couple of audiences happy they have consistently had at least one audience unhappy at any given time.
I, not you, are saying its bad to try to make everybody happy and I am correcting your claim that LoL makes everybody happy. They might make everybody in their audience happy but they are ONLY working to make one specific audience happy instead of trying to make every audience they possibly could try to shove under their umbrella happy.
That's all I have said. I don't know where you keep coming up with all these other arguments.
If you get it now, great! If not...let's stop. It's very circular and has taken up enough of the thread as it is.
I would absolutely LOVE for them to try "vanilla" PVP is what I will call it, as a weekend or WEEKLONG event. What is the harm in trying it?
I agree with @clonkyo1 - copy/paste the code that disables pets in domination ONTO the boon system, mount bonuses, insignias etc. Heck I dont even care if they provided this on Owlbear to make it easier for them if they needed. Just provide it in SOME avenue and let the PVPers test it! Let us TRY IT and see if it will work or not...
I have a suspicion though that even if they do all this, some unknowing PVE player will come in and write about how they "lost a bunch of stats" and they will blame THAT on why they lost, not realizing the PVP player gave up literally tens(plural) of thousands of stats MORE than that PVE player.
So just you have to realize that regardless of how good something is, there will ALWAYS ALWAYS be a few nah sayers who frankly just have zero idea what they are talking about...
I mean a case and point is people saying to keep companions in for SH Siege PVP... I still just facepalm everytime I think about that. The entire PVP population said NO, the PVE-ers said "yes"... They literally didnt even understand what they were saying yes to and only saw the benefit to their own character, not the PAINFUL loss it would cause them when some guy started to actually abuse all the companions that are abusable in PVP.... Anyways enough said on that.
Point being. We all agree. Vanilla PVP is what this game VERY badly needs.