While some mmo's may have separate ruleset for pvp and pve others do not. I personally believe that if pvp is built from the ground up in an mmo there doesnt need to be separate rulesets just one ruleset.
Yep, the problem arises when you try to implement PvP as an afterthought. As much as I like Path of Exile this is the case with PvP and it's turned into an endless tinkering and readjusting existing mechanics in PvP scenarios to try to make it fit: it's not really up to par for a full fledged PvP experience, still needs a lot of work, and feels very out of place. Compare this to say, Rift or Guild Wars 1.
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
Yep, the problem arises when you try to implement PvP as an afterthought. As much as I like Path of Exile this is the case with PvP and it's turned into an endless tinkering and readjusting existing mechanics in PvP scenarios to try to make it fit: it's not really up to par for a full fledged PvP experience, still needs a lot of work, and feels very out of place. Compare this to say, Rift or Guild Wars 1.
Didn't even notice there was PvP there. Considering its setup I disagree as it's not designed for such things and more for skill and power customization (Not going into the gem thing in detail here but you level up items as much as your powers and the gems are attack, defense and support.)
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
edited December 2012
Wait, what do you disagree with?
There's no PvP at all in PoE until Act Two, and all it is is a 1v1 or 3v3 instanced match. It's pretty lame. It's like they totally forgot about PvP, or had no intention of making it, until some players harassed them to, then just threw it in there really quick. And like I said, now they are trying to tinker with the abilities so that certain specs aren't completely overpowered or completely useless in PvP, but it's very, very rough around the edges still.
But then again, it is closed beta.
But I don't think PvP in PoE will ever be a very rewarding experience.
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
There's no PvP at all in PoE until Act Two, and all it is is a 1v1 or 3v3 instanced match. It's pretty lame. It's like they totally forgot about PvP, or had no intention of making it, until some players harassed them to, then just threw it in there really quick. And like I said, now they are trying to tinker with the abilities so that certain specs aren't completely overpowered or completely useless in PvP, but it's very, very rough around the edges still.
But then again, it is closed beta.
But I don't think PvP in PoE will ever be a very rewarding experience.
My bad. I mean I disagree with putting PvP in the game the way they did. I agree with you it's a bad idea as an "after-though" appearance.
I can't imagine a scenario where they would not have duel wielding for fighters. Also since they already have a specified 2-Weapon fighter I feel like the only thing left is a specified dual wielder.
I'm really getting anxious since beta is still not announced
I will probably be a cleric and maybe a paladin or bard when they are announced. I want to be the most wanted and best functioning class for a party period. I don't give a hoot about soloing lol.
0
ranncoreMember, Moderators, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 2,508
I will probably be a cleric and maybe a paladin or bard when they are announced. I want to be the most wanted and best functioning class for a party period. I don't give a hoot about soloing lol.
I'm with you on that one, I have plenty of single player games - I always try to make characters that work well in groups. Usually divines. Don't care much for bards... :P
I like divines because they are most multidimensional characters to play. While they have their personal beliefs of right and wrong, at times they may feel that their deity is deceiving them - that is where role-play shines.
Or it can be the opposite. Sometimes you start to feel deity is too predictable and goody goody and turn on deity.
Same thing which happened to Asmodeus(non Realms) - he was serving He Who Was and felt that his deity was not evil when he should be in the war. When his deity gave him temporary punishment so that "his best angel sits back and reflects" Asmodeus went crazy and backstabbed and killed the deity. The deity was "wtf???!!!" and made Asmodeus into a devil.
It adds extra dimension to role-play: between deity-PC and PC-party and PC-game.
EDIT: Nothing against bards though - I like them
0
iamtruthseekerMember, Moonstars, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
I can't imagine a scenario where they would not have duel wielding for fighters. Also since they already have a specified 2-Weapon fighter I feel like the only thing left is a specified dual wielder.
I'm really getting anxious since beta is still not announced
I will probably be a cleric and maybe a paladin or bard when they are announced. I want to be the most wanted and best functioning class for a party period. I don't give a hoot about soloing lol.
Multiple attacks in dual wielding is not done the same way as in previous editions (2nd and third editions) since you don't get multiple attacks from holding two weapons, only if a class' assigned power grants you multiple attacks. So classes like fighters, rangersd and rogues have to choose that as one of their at will/encounter/daily powers from a limited selection, if it's available to them in the first place.
It's not simply buy a feat and get it with a -2 attack penalty anymore, including no more multiple attacks beyond two without said same power description permitting it in the upper (Paragon Levels 11-21, Elite Levels 21-30) tiers, often in a Paragon Path or Epic Destiny.
denkasaebaMember, Neverwinter Beta UsersPosts: 0Arc User
edited December 2012
I think that on release classes will have these roles:
Fighter (i guess there will be sword n'board, 2 h and dual wield): fighter natural role in 4e is the "brutal melee controller". So, a natural defender/striker, that can further push the striker role with 2h weapons or dual wielding. On the other hand, for a true defender, it's surely not the bulkiest class. While mobility is the big paladin issue, hp management is the big fighter issue... but many fighter powers deal so much damage, and the mark punishment is "baseline" so strong, that it is considered, by many players, the best class in d&d.
Cleric: leader (ok), focused on healing and buffing (which will be certainly more useful than on the board) and defending/controlling: the melee cleric is a natural defender, especially if they push the Warpriest paragon path to the level it was in the board game. The ranged cleric is a natural (but short range) off-controller, since it has lots of aoes and very strong dailies.
Wizard: controller or aoe striker. Roles are simple, here. I guess that they'll keep the balance between the three implements, to buff a little the wand... otherwise, if it's like in the board game, the jolly implement is the staff, with orb being a golden second choice... and wand is the stupid stepbrother.
Rogue: pure striker (Scoundrel) or striker/controller (Trickster), but always with an innate controller side (due to the mechanic of Sneak Attack). If Sneak Attack is reworked (but i don't think so, since in the video it always tries to attack from behind), maybe it could be pushed to be more strikery.
Ranger: the ranger is probably the purest striker in the game, focusing only on dealing lots of damage. I think we'll get the same here.
Dilige, et quod vis fac (Love, and do what you will)
Comments
Yep, the problem arises when you try to implement PvP as an afterthought. As much as I like Path of Exile this is the case with PvP and it's turned into an endless tinkering and readjusting existing mechanics in PvP scenarios to try to make it fit: it's not really up to par for a full fledged PvP experience, still needs a lot of work, and feels very out of place. Compare this to say, Rift or Guild Wars 1.
Didn't even notice there was PvP there. Considering its setup I disagree as it's not designed for such things and more for skill and power customization (Not going into the gem thing in detail here but you level up items as much as your powers and the gems are attack, defense and support.)
There's no PvP at all in PoE until Act Two, and all it is is a 1v1 or 3v3 instanced match. It's pretty lame. It's like they totally forgot about PvP, or had no intention of making it, until some players harassed them to, then just threw it in there really quick. And like I said, now they are trying to tinker with the abilities so that certain specs aren't completely overpowered or completely useless in PvP, but it's very, very rough around the edges still.
But then again, it is closed beta.
But I don't think PvP in PoE will ever be a very rewarding experience.
My bad. I mean I disagree with putting PvP in the game the way they did. I agree with you it's a bad idea as an "after-though" appearance.
That being said I have no idea what the situation is with Neverwinter.
I sure hope it has a "robust" PvP system
I think it was Cryptmapolis who stated that anyone who qualified for two weapon fighting feats could.
I've only heard of the Guardian Fighter and Great Weapon Fighter, and I think the Great Weapon Fighter is 2-handed fighting style.
I'm really getting anxious since beta is still not announced
I will probably be a cleric and maybe a paladin or bard when they are announced. I want to be the most wanted and best functioning class for a party period. I don't give a hoot about soloing lol.
I'm with you on that one, I have plenty of single player games - I always try to make characters that work well in groups. Usually divines. Don't care much for bards... :P
Or it can be the opposite. Sometimes you start to feel deity is too predictable and goody goody and turn on deity.
Same thing which happened to Asmodeus(non Realms) - he was serving He Who Was and felt that his deity was not evil when he should be in the war. When his deity gave him temporary punishment so that "his best angel sits back and reflects" Asmodeus went crazy and backstabbed and killed the deity. The deity was "wtf???!!!" and made Asmodeus into a devil.
It adds extra dimension to role-play: between deity-PC and PC-party and PC-game.
EDIT: Nothing against bards though - I like them
I brought this up on another thread, but I'll detail it here.
Multiple attacks in dual wielding is not done the same way as in previous editions (2nd and third editions) since you don't get multiple attacks from holding two weapons, only if a class' assigned power grants you multiple attacks. So classes like fighters, rangersd and rogues have to choose that as one of their at will/encounter/daily powers from a limited selection, if it's available to them in the first place.
It's not simply buy a feat and get it with a -2 attack penalty anymore, including no more multiple attacks beyond two without said same power description permitting it in the upper (Paragon Levels 11-21, Elite Levels 21-30) tiers, often in a Paragon Path or Epic Destiny.
Fighter (i guess there will be sword n'board, 2 h and dual wield): fighter natural role in 4e is the "brutal melee controller". So, a natural defender/striker, that can further push the striker role with 2h weapons or dual wielding. On the other hand, for a true defender, it's surely not the bulkiest class. While mobility is the big paladin issue, hp management is the big fighter issue... but many fighter powers deal so much damage, and the mark punishment is "baseline" so strong, that it is considered, by many players, the best class in d&d.
Cleric: leader (ok), focused on healing and buffing (which will be certainly more useful than on the board) and defending/controlling: the melee cleric is a natural defender, especially if they push the Warpriest paragon path to the level it was in the board game. The ranged cleric is a natural (but short range) off-controller, since it has lots of aoes and very strong dailies.
Wizard: controller or aoe striker. Roles are simple, here. I guess that they'll keep the balance between the three implements, to buff a little the wand... otherwise, if it's like in the board game, the jolly implement is the staff, with orb being a golden second choice... and wand is the stupid stepbrother.
Rogue: pure striker (Scoundrel) or striker/controller (Trickster), but always with an innate controller side (due to the mechanic of Sneak Attack). If Sneak Attack is reworked (but i don't think so, since in the video it always tries to attack from behind), maybe it could be pushed to be more strikery.
Ranger: the ranger is probably the purest striker in the game, focusing only on dealing lots of damage. I think we'll get the same here.
St. Augustinus