@theguiido I don't know why you are asking me, I don't pvp, lol. Personally, I think they should normalize gear for PvP (make everyone wear exactly the same gear and enchants) and make it be more skill and build based than who has the bigger wallet. That's just my opinion though.
If there are PVP lobbies tiered and based on a scaling reward system then premades would be disinclined to go after weak pugs.
Say there are several post 70 queues,ranging from "pugs for fun" (0 to minimal Tenacity) to "so lets see how good you really are..." (no holds barred) where the rewards are incremental based on the quality of the opponent. The greater the group IL (IN PLAY )disparity, the less you win.
As to the scaling and people queuing in HAMSTER gear and switching up , having 4 tiers would offer a way to circumvent this...
Quite simply once you have won X number of games more than you've lost at a certain tier you are qualified at that tier. Playing at a lower tier would further reduce your rewards.
If you've been regularly winning at tier 4 and decide to go bully some plebs at tier 1 you get squat for your efforts. There should be no reward for doing something that presents no challenge.
It would require a special sort of person to deliberately burn themselves in higher tier games in order to show off at a lower one...
And for those who start to get overtaken at higher tiers, when their win\loss ratio drops, they become legitimately eligible for the lower tier again without a penalty...
ETA of course the ratio would not extend back too far, probably the last ten or so games. So you don't end up with someone trying really hard to break the next tier having to win 35 on the bounce to qualify. and the drop out would be one more than the same number the other way. Eg. if you win 6/10 most recent games you hit the tier. To lose the tier you would need to lose 7 out of your next 10.
The specific numbers would be judged and beta'd to see what works, but the principle works.
Obviously, not all top end PVPers are looking for a simple walk over so they can dance on the fallen bodies of their less empowered victims. But it certainly seems like there are enough who are.
And let's face it, if games were more balanced, those top enders who do crave parity as much as the weaker players, they'd have it.
"normalizing" gear in PVP is a terrible idea. As with any game that has character progression it just removes any incentive to improve your character so you can become more competitive. I started out pretty much like everyone else with low item level and earned my gear and rewards by playing the game. If you don't want the grind then this game is definitely not for you.
As for pug stomping that is more the matchmaking systems fault. Premade teams should never be matched against pugs as a first choice. There does need to be some tweaking done there. I play in 5 mans pretty frequently and there is nothing less fun than playing against a pug when your queueing up because the match is a forgone conclusion. I'm pretty sure most of the other teams feel the same way.
Bottom line is progression needs to exist in pvp in order to keep people playing towards a goal and PW making money. The changes you suggest do neither. A better suggestion would be to fix the current queue system and balance the classes better rather than trying to get some Neverwinter socialist pvp system going.
I think that they should make tenacity enchantments. That way people who wanna get into PvP could use current gear to get started. They don't have to give much. And dragonflight gear with tenacity gems would be good. Because lionsmane would still be better do to being able to use other enchantments.
Add a standard tenacity rating automatically to all players on entering any pvp environment.
This at the very least removes the need to grind through weeks of death just to become competitive. The auto-tenacity should account for the increased offence stats on pve gear - i.e. everyone gets around 4k tenacity - and make it apply to piercing damage!!!
Please Do Not Feed The Trolls
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
They had a combat league on pc. I don't think it went over as well as they thought. Everyone needs to just wear their big boy/girl pantys when Qing even the 4K gets the shty end of the q sometimes
Yeah... I tried that after the NCL. Went for 6 weeks without earning enuff points to qualify for rewards. No thanks. You can have it.
0
santralafaxMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 2,896Arc User
I believe blow outs will happen anyway because of premades. If a team has the optimal class diversity and all members are 100% PvP builds then the pug team is SoL for the most part.
I'm not as certain about that. If everyone is within a certain ilevel, there's going to be a lot less camping at the spawn.
0
santralafaxMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 2,896Arc User
I completely agree with you. Fighting people with no gear (pugs) is boring. 1000 to 0 games is no competition. For both the winning team and the losing team alike.
They also need to remove ambush rings from PvP. At not work mounted.
From Mod 10 patch notes---
Rings of Ambush, Sieging, and Charging Bull: The wording has been changed to state "When you have been running" instead of When you have been moving."This means that moving very slowly (such as when you are running into a wall) will cause the effects to stop, and the effects will no longer apply while you are mounted. Note that most Slow will not cause you to move slowly enough on their own to prevent these effects from firing.
@theguiido I don't know why you are asking me, I don't pvp, lol. Personally, I think they should normalize gear for PvP (make everyone wear exactly the same gear and enchants) and make it be more skill and build based than who has the bigger wallet. That's just my opinion though.
that would be great !!
0
deathklaat666Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 61Arc User
Agreed there should be a better way to match Teams... Unfortunately.. they tried this once in mod-5 and the queue waits were so long everyone cried and moaned so much they changed it back... there has to be a better way
"normalizing" gear in PVP is a terrible idea. As with any game that has character progression it just removes any incentive to improve your character so you can become more competitive. I started out pretty much like everyone else with low item level and earned my gear and rewards by playing the game. If you don't want the grind then this game is definitely not for you.
As for pug stomping that is more the matchmaking systems fault. Premade teams should never be matched against pugs as a first choice. There does need to be some tweaking done there. I play in 5 mans pretty frequently and there is nothing less fun than playing against a pug when your queueing up because the match is a forgone conclusion. I'm pretty sure most of the other teams feel the same way.
Bottom line is progression needs to exist in pvp in order to keep people playing towards a goal and PW making money. The changes you suggest do neither. A better suggestion would be to fix the current queue system and balance the classes better rather than trying to get some Neverwinter socialist pvp system going.
This is a goal that should be primarily reserved for PvE. The reason PvP is dead is because they've tried to force a PvE concept into a game mode that is inherently only fun when players are competitive with each other based on skill as opposed to gear. Literally every successful pure PvP game out there tries to limit the impact of progression because the focus of PvP games is supposed to be on improving your own performance and your team's/clan's/guild's performance through practice.
The motivation for progression really doesn't need to be getting your character to the point that it can solo five players that are 1000 ilvl under you. While they still need to make progression impactful enough to keep people playing there shouldn't really be a need to force players past 3k. The vast majority of the population plays PvE exclusively without the need to go past 2.5-3k and you'll still see people grinding endlessly to get to BiS anyways.
0
demonmongerMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,350Arc User
edited August 2016
In other games where you can pvp gear is not even. This is what makes the great players stand out and the not so great players better with survival tactics.
The point is you have something to strive for, goals to aim for to make your character the best of the best no matter how hard or long it takes.
We need total open world pvp let alliances merge into kingdoms. Then let kingdoms fight vs kingdoms in a large open icewindale type zone. No queque needed just enter the zone and let people go wild.
Allow horse type mounts to have jousting abilities to knock other playes off mounts.
Create multilayer mount's
Give up an open zone where all pve can be affected by pvp and the ability to right click players and choose 1vs1 pvp in any zone.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
I hate paying taxes! Why must I pay thousands of dollars in taxes when everything I buy is taxed anyways!
We need total open world pvp let alliances merge into kingdoms. Then let kingdoms fight vs kingdoms in a large open icewindale type zone. No queque needed just enter the zone and let people go wild.
Give up an open zone where all pve can be affected by pvp and the ability to right click players and choose 1vs1 pvp in any zone.
Borderlands!! And PvP can be awesome in this game, but it would require a bunch of stuff... First, we need a rework on the PvP campaigns or maybe a new one, they are so outdated that the rewards are STILL for lvl 60, almost 5 Mods ago...? Then we need leaderboards easier to comprehend and track, the ELO system is outdated too for most competitive PvP games, and right now I'm not even sure if its working as intended, I doubt it.
Then we need separate queues (1-2 players Solo queue and a Team queue 5v5), but besides that, it can be useful to have Player/Casual matches and Ranking matches, the player matches being to farm for gear, get some stuff, have fun, something less serious. The Ranking matches would be the opposite, and their purpose would be to make progress in a NEW PvP campaign and also reflects correctly in the leaderboard and your KDA ratio, while the Player Matches don't make progress in any of those, just some ideas.
In other games where you can pvp gear is not even. This is what makes the great players stand out and the not so great players better with survival tactics.
The point is you have something to strive for, goals to aim for to make your character the best of the best no matter how hard or long it takes.
We need total open world pvp let alliances merge into kingdoms. Then let kingdoms fight vs kingdoms in a large open icewindale type zone. No queque needed just enter the zone and let people go wild.
Allow horse type mounts to have jousting abilities to knock other playes off mounts.
Create multilayer mount's
Give up an open zone where all pve can be affected by pvp and the ability to right click players and choose 1vs1 pvp in any zone.
What are the survival tactics necessary against an opponent that can cap each node with a single player?
What survival tactics can you use when that single player can 5 vs. 1 your whole team, while losing less than 50% HP... often much less?
In that situation, the only way to win is not to play. This is the survival tactic that the majority of players have opted for. I can't say that that is the wrong choice to make. If we want PvP to grow & get better, changes need to be made. IL matching is not a perfect solution, but it is a nice place to start.
In other games where you can pvp gear is not even. This is what makes the great players stand out and the not so great players better with survival tactics.
The point is you have something to strive for, goals to aim for to make your character the best of the best no matter how hard or long it takes.
We need total open world pvp let alliances merge into kingdoms. Then let kingdoms fight vs kingdoms in a large open icewindale type zone. No queque needed just enter the zone and let people go wild.
Allow horse type mounts to have jousting abilities to knock other playes off mounts.
Create multilayer mount's
Give up an open zone where all pve can be affected by pvp and the ability to right click players and choose 1vs1 pvp in any zone.
What are the survival tactics necessary against an opponent that can cap each node with a single player?
What survival tactics can you use when that single player can 5 vs. 1 your whole team, while losing less than 50% HP... often much less?
In that situation, the only way to win is not to play. This is the survival tactic that the majority of players have opted for. I can't say that that is the wrong choice to make. If we want PvP to grow & get better, changes need to be made. IL matching is not a perfect solution, but it is a nice place to start.
Tbh, matching IL ain't gonna change anything for the PvP of this game, IL doesn't tell you anything, at least the old gear score would take into account your stats a little, but IL doesn't mean a thing. A 3k GWF with full elemental Lionsmane, a pair of Rosegold PvP rings, full purple insignia bonuses and belonging to a GH20 guild is gonna kill ANY other 3k GWF that doesn't have that.
Bringing IL into the queue system is just gonna make things more frustrating, you aren't gonna get enough ppl to play, and when you do, you'll most likely have someone smurfing to troll new people, also like many have said already, why go any further if I'm comfortable in my 2.5k bracket? An IL queue seems kinda pointless to me.
There needs to be balancing period, to op players are matched against casual pvpers and makes it really un fair to play surely it cant be that hard to do a gear rating system ?
0
someonediesMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 1,257Arc User
Due the low population in the queue (not pvp event time) You can see the same "premade vs PUG" situation over and over and over and over and over again.
#1 is too Equalise Gear in PVP, The issue with this is the massive throwback you'd get from all the "whale" Pvpers who spent a lot of money / time on their pvp gear, Since some of these players probably spend enough too pay half of Cryptics salaries, they probably wont do that. HOWEVER a "Ranked" PVP mode, with premade only teams and a lobby where the players choose their gear from equalised options (such as they can choose what PVP set / PVP rank 10's / PVP Trans enchants they want for the match from Special PVP vendors, these should all be BTC items that delete at the end of the match / ONLY have their stat bonuses work while in a PVP Match so that we dont get any bugs with people getting them out of the ranked match) Could be fun and then as everyone realistically can pick from the same options, be more balanced.
#2 Personally I'd rather they removed Tenacity, Increased stats on pvp gear too compensate (I feel PVP gear should Specialise in Arpen / Power for most offensive classes, and HP/Defence/Deflect for most defensive classes), And gave everyone a flat Tenacity bonus.
While this doesnt "fix" the ILVL discrepancies we see, It means that people who dont main PVP can use PVE gear too some effectiveness, while people who have farmed PvP gear have gear with "more relevant" stat lines for the content.
Adding onto this Idea:
They can even scale the Tenacity boost for people with significantly lower ILVL than their team average, giving them increased tenacity/damage too make them while not AS strong as the higher Ilvl people, at least stand a fighting chance, I've seen this done in other games and while not a perfect system its not a terrible one either.
Imagine as an example the average ilvl in a game is 3k. but someone in there only has 2k ilvl, as such they have about 20% higher tenacity / 10% more damage as a passive buff too help bring them closer too the other players in the match.
Obviously I just picked random numbers out there, but I'm sure a "fair" system could be coded in.
Even at 70 you still see people in full PVE gear getting instagibbed then raging about how Unbalanced it is, and if someone points out they have 0 tenacity the rage just intensifies.
Comments
Guardian Fighter
TLO
https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter/#/discussion/1221446/the-future-of-the-gf/p1 Existing Problems Still In The Guardian Fighter
https://www.arcgames.com/en/forums/neverwinter/#/discussion/comment/12984912m
Feat Changes I'd like to see in The Guardian Fighter
Say there are several post 70 queues,ranging from "pugs for fun" (0 to minimal Tenacity) to "so lets see how good you really are..." (no holds barred) where the rewards are incremental based on the quality of the opponent. The greater the group IL (IN PLAY )disparity, the less you win.
As to the scaling and people queuing in HAMSTER gear and switching up , having 4 tiers would offer a way to circumvent this...
Quite simply once you have won X number of games more than you've lost at a certain tier you are qualified at that tier.
Playing at a lower tier would further reduce your rewards.
If you've been regularly winning at tier 4 and decide to go bully some plebs at tier 1 you get squat for your efforts. There should be no reward for doing something that presents no challenge.
It would require a special sort of person to deliberately burn themselves in higher tier games in order to show off at a lower one...
And for those who start to get overtaken at higher tiers, when their win\loss ratio drops, they become legitimately eligible for the lower tier again without a penalty...
ETA of course the ratio would not extend back too far, probably the last ten or so games. So you don't end up with someone trying really hard to break the next tier having to win 35 on the bounce to qualify. and the drop out would be one more than the same number the other way.
Eg. if you win 6/10 most recent games you hit the tier. To lose the tier you would need to lose 7 out of your next 10.
The specific numbers would be judged and beta'd to see what works, but the principle works.
But it certainly seems like there are enough who are.
And let's face it, if games were more balanced, those top enders who do crave parity as much as the weaker players, they'd have it.
As for pug stomping that is more the matchmaking systems fault. Premade teams should never be matched against pugs as a first choice. There does need to be some tweaking done there. I play in 5 mans pretty frequently and there is nothing less fun than playing against a pug when your queueing up because the match is a forgone conclusion. I'm pretty sure most of the other teams feel the same way.
Bottom line is progression needs to exist in pvp in order to keep people playing towards a goal and PW making money. The changes you suggest do neither. A better suggestion would be to fix the current queue system and balance the classes better rather than trying to get some Neverwinter socialist pvp system going.
Add a standard tenacity rating automatically to all players on entering any pvp environment.
This at the very least removes the need to grind through weeks of death just to become competitive. The auto-tenacity should account for the increased offence stats on pve gear - i.e. everyone gets around 4k tenacity - and make it apply to piercing damage!!!
Xael De Armadeon: DC
Xane De Armadeon: CW
Zen De Armadeon: OP
Zohar De Armadeon: TR
Chrion De Armadeon: SW
Gosti Big Belly: GWF
Barney McRustbucket: GF
Lt. Thackeray: HR
Lucius De Armadeon: BD
Member of Casual Dailies - XBox
Amen Ring of Sieging
Dead🔪The motivation for progression really doesn't need to be getting your character to the point that it can solo five players that are 1000 ilvl under you. While they still need to make progression impactful enough to keep people playing there shouldn't really be a need to force players past 3k. The vast majority of the population plays PvE exclusively without the need to go past 2.5-3k and you'll still see people grinding endlessly to get to BiS anyways.
The point is you have something to strive for, goals to aim for to make your character the best of the best no matter how hard or long it takes.
We need total open world pvp let alliances merge into kingdoms. Then let kingdoms fight vs kingdoms in a large open icewindale type zone. No queque needed just enter the zone and let people go wild.
Allow horse type mounts to have jousting abilities to knock other playes off mounts.
Create multilayer mount's
Give up an open zone where all pve can be affected by pvp and the ability to right click players and choose 1vs1 pvp in any zone.
Then we need separate queues (1-2 players Solo queue and a Team queue 5v5), but besides that, it can be useful to have Player/Casual matches and Ranking matches, the player matches being to farm for gear, get some stuff, have fun, something less serious. The Ranking matches would be the opposite, and their purpose would be to make progress in a NEW PvP campaign and also reflects correctly in the leaderboard and your KDA ratio, while the Player Matches don't make progress in any of those, just some ideas.
What survival tactics can you use when that single player can 5 vs. 1 your whole team, while losing less than 50% HP... often much less?
In that situation, the only way to win is not to play. This is the survival tactic that the majority of players have opted for. I can't say that that is the wrong choice to make. If we want PvP to grow & get better, changes need to be made. IL matching is not a perfect solution, but it is a nice place to start.
Bringing IL into the queue system is just gonna make things more frustrating, you aren't gonna get enough ppl to play, and when you do, you'll most likely have someone smurfing to troll new people, also like many have said already, why go any further if I'm comfortable in my 2.5k bracket? An IL queue seems kinda pointless to me.
Dead🔪#1 is too Equalise Gear in PVP, The issue with this is the massive throwback you'd get from all the "whale" Pvpers who spent a lot of money / time on their pvp gear, Since some of these players probably spend enough too pay half of Cryptics salaries, they probably wont do that. HOWEVER a "Ranked" PVP mode, with premade only teams and a lobby where the players choose their gear from equalised options (such as they can choose what PVP set / PVP rank 10's / PVP Trans enchants they want for the match from Special PVP vendors, these should all be BTC items that delete at the end of the match / ONLY have their stat bonuses work while in a PVP Match so that we dont get any bugs with people getting them out of the ranked match) Could be fun and then as everyone realistically can pick from the same options, be more balanced.
#2 Personally I'd rather they removed Tenacity, Increased stats on pvp gear too compensate (I feel PVP gear should Specialise in Arpen / Power for most offensive classes, and HP/Defence/Deflect for most defensive classes), And gave everyone a flat Tenacity bonus.
While this doesnt "fix" the ILVL discrepancies we see, It means that people who dont main PVP can use PVE gear too some effectiveness, while people who have farmed PvP gear have gear with "more relevant" stat lines for the content.
Adding onto this Idea:
They can even scale the Tenacity boost for people with significantly lower ILVL than their team average, giving them increased tenacity/damage too make them while not AS strong as the higher Ilvl people, at least stand a fighting chance, I've seen this done in other games and while not a perfect system its not a terrible one either.
Imagine as an example the average ilvl in a game is 3k. but someone in there only has 2k ilvl, as such they have about 20% higher tenacity / 10% more damage as a passive buff too help bring them closer too the other players in the match.
Obviously I just picked random numbers out there, but I'm sure a "fair" system could be coded in.
Even at 70 you still see people in full PVE gear getting instagibbed then raging about how Unbalanced it is, and if someone points out they have 0 tenacity the rage just intensifies.
Drunken Goose of MidNight Express. - 3.3k Paladin , 3.6k GWF , 3.1k GF,