Castle & Keep [PvP Game Mode]
|
Basically an open world attack / defend PVP style - two teams, a castle to defend and attackers attempt to over take the castle.
Not sure if already suggested, but would REALLY improve the game a ton. 25 on 25 or 50 on 50 would work best. Need free guild/clan hosting? Check us out at http://Es-Gamers.com Last edited by MassAsster#1950 on Apr 19, 2014, 4:43:50 PM
|
|
|
good luck getting 25-50 people to pvp
Animalistic in nature, somebody help me
|
|
|
If it was an actual game mode, why not?
I mean think about it, you entered into a separate game mode designed for Attack/Defend , why not ? After the grind through the group play, you want to see your character in action. The NPC's are great and all, and core of the game, but why not expand to large scale player vs player battles? It worked amazingly well for Dark Age of Camelot Need free guild/clan hosting?
Check us out at http://Es-Gamers.com |
|
|
nice idea man. I like the objective based pvp modes that gives builds without dps a chance, then its not always about who is the richest player. But pianoking is right, so hard to get people to pvp since theres no incentive atm. They need to add pvp titles, ranks, or rewards and pvp would boom.
I Stream PvP Twitch.tv/GrindcoreTHRALL
THE STORY OF MY Descent into the Abysmal Afterlife( HC to SC, too Stronk!) http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/346754 PK massacre, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ldz09uBZ-ug |
|
" +1 Never understood why any game would totally ignore adding the basic infrastructure needed for PvP. It simultaneously attracts a large, new playerbase and solves some of the boredom/endgame problem. But to be honest, how do you expect to balance PvP when such a small percentage of the players actually engage in it? Like balancing any other aspect of the game, the more testers you have the better/easier the balancing will be. Of course, this presupposes GGG actually listen to their players regarding PvP... Regardless, infrastructure for PvP should come before attempts at balancing. One requires relatively little time while the other will take years to get right (probably never since the game is constantly evolving each patch). The only response I've seen is that it's abusable by RMTers, but so is every other aspect of the game. Things like large GvG fights would solve back some of this problem by emphasizing teamplay over individual gear. IGN: BaiBhai | BhaiBhai | Bhailo Last edited by Bhai#0148 on Apr 19, 2014, 10:08:14 PM
| |
" Some interaction from GGG with their players would be a huge step forward, it just seems to me that they don't care at all when it comes to pvp... The fact that they stay silent on every post on the pvp feedback forum makes me feel this way. IGN: DullahanTheHeadless Last edited by Dullahan987#4829 on Apr 19, 2014, 10:08:55 PM
|
|
" +1 IGN: KiPad
Mirror Services (/view-thread/778747): #1 Crit Rings for *ALL* builds (Low-life, CI, and Life), #1 1H Axe, #1 Ar Boots, #1 Life Rustic |
|
|
I feel this generation of players prefers mmo like arena and mass guild vs guild team battles. Thats what they've grown up with. That type of thing isn't very fitting for a game like this. They suffer from severe balance issues and desynch wouldn't help things either. Its no different then playing a FPS/Chivalry or anything similar. Its taking the concept of strategic team based "duels" (2v2,3v3 at the most) and making it just one big cluster fuck of randomness. You kill a guy, maybe 2...next thing you know you're killed from behind. Its a mundane cycle of killing then dying to something random. Sarn arena may have no objective but in the end you have alot more control over what happens to you and when. Compared to some mass mmo like guild vs guild, capture the flag, protect the castle arena.
Seen as how everything now adays requires an incentive or no one does it. I guess you'd have to reward people in some form or else they wouldn't even bother. Titles,orbs,gambling or something. Its not like it used to be, where people just pvped to dominate entire games of players and talk shit. MMO's have created a new generation of pvpers that seek rewards, which is fine. GGG, the ADA of gaming....huuuur i gotz mai skilz.
IGN: MullaXul |
|
" I have to disagree - Take a look at something like team fortress 2 (dust bowl or any push map). Mundane as you may think, it's popularity is unrivaled for a game of it's age in the FTP market. It's essentially nothing more than attack to win the area, repeat until all areas are taken, then swap. It's built on teamwork and cooperation between the players. It's only as dysfunctional as your team is. With the right map, narrowing the playing field where needed, this could really be interesting. Hell, you could even allow the party system to follow and group up within your team side. Need free guild/clan hosting? Check us out at http://Es-Gamers.com Last edited by MassAsster#1950 on Apr 20, 2014, 10:45:02 AM
|
|
" This is true if you have a competent team and enjoy team based games. Its still exactly what I was saying about the MMO generation of pvpers seeking team based,big area battles often with incentives. People don't want to 1 vs 1 or 1 vs x amount of players anymore. Its all team team team, which is just how people that grew up with that form of pvp like it. Whatever it takes to get people pvping around here I support either way. I personally hate teams and prefer to pvp solo vs as many people as I can at once. My opinions have 0 bearing on what we'll get or what the majority wants though. So I'll just go with the flow as long as its positive for this scene. GGG, the ADA of gaming....huuuur i gotz mai skilz. IGN: MullaXul Last edited by MullaXul#2277 on Apr 20, 2014, 12:12:10 PM
|
|
