BG TERA - PVP or PVE? You decide!

[FriskUni]

Read my posting history? I'm all about World Spawns; I hate all of the new instanced and non competitive content. I dislike XI PvP because there is no point in it.

right, and FFXI never had that(PVP for world spawns), yet you still played it long enough to obtain a relic

[Cian]

Play on a pvp server if that's what you want. Just because we all use the same forum, doesn't mean our tastes in game content will be the same, and it certainly doesn't mean we need to play on the same server.

[Gredival]

right, and FFXI never had that(PVP for world spawns), yet you still played it long enough to obtain a relic

Yeah but top line gear came from competitive PvE which was vastly superior to all other games, which is why I stuck with it vs. switching. That and I loved that they were willing to defend their vision of a good game rather than caving into complaints (e.g. AV strats getting nerfed, Kings remaining the same, etc.)

I hate XI now because it moved away from what distinguished it in order to appease the masses. The reason I am interested in this game is that it boasts a PvE system that is potentially superior vs. the carebear style instances which are run of the norm everywhere else.

[Cian]

Yeah, too bad world boss gear is still inferior

[Elcura]

I don't think players deserve anything in virtue of merely playing. I hate handouts and coddling of the population. The best gear should go to the best players.

If that means we get cock blocked then we deserve to be cock blocked until we can beat the rival guild. Alternatively if we are in the top spot, that should be protected through any direct and indirect means of impeding our competitors.

Otherwise why play an MMO vs. a regular RPG if all we're doing is grinding vs the AI? I can do that on a console.

This is a game, not the wild wild west. I enjoy competition as much as the next person, but I don't enjoy competing at the expense of some other poor bastard. If I compete, it's still towards a team-oriented goal, like competing DPS against bosses and shit like that. That kind of competition drives people to get better, your kind drives people to assholery.

I believe the best should get the best, or rather those who are capable should be rewarded. But if that's the case, let the test be a hard monster to kill, not a group of douchebags who can't play nice.

[Gredival]

This is a game, not the wild wild west. I enjoy competition as much as the next person, but I don't enjoy competing at the expense of some other poor bastard. If I compete, it's still towards a team-oriented goal, like competing DPS against bosses and shit like that. That kind of competition drives people to get better, your kind drives people to assholery.

I believe the best should get the best, or rather those who are capable should be rewarded. But if that's the case, let the test be a hard monster to kill, not a group of douchebags who can't play nice.

If I wanted to do that, I could play co-op in other games or play a console RPG. Noncompetitive PvE is like a group project in school. You're just adding tedium to a task by working with others.

Some people here absolutely don't want to play in a PvP server, well I'm on the opposite side saying that I absolutely won't play in a PvE. And I'm pointing out that for a group that generally considers itself relatively good at gaming, PvP offers better opportunities to excel.

"Best" is a relative term. Taking competition out of it removes that relativity.

[Falisa]

Just because some of us don't enjoy open world PvP in MMOs doesn't mean that we aren't better at games. >.> I really do enjoy PvP in non MMO settings, like fps and dota style of games. But when I go to sit down and play an MMO, I don't want to deal with PvP. Does that make me worse at the game than you? No, I think not.

Noncompetitive PvE is like a group project in school. You're just adding tedium to a task by working with others.

If you don't like working with others, then why are you playing an MMO?

[Elcura]

If I wanted to do that, I could play co-op in other games or play a console RPG. Noncompetitive PvE is like a group project in school. You're just adding tedium to a task by working with others.

Wait, how is working with others adding to tedium? That doesn't even make sense, NOT working with others adds tedium, the whole point of cooperation is to make the task easier - less tedious. You've got this shit ass backwards. And so basically, you wouldn't play an MMO (that mostly focuses on social interactions and group dynamics) cooperatively? But you might play other games cooperatively? I don't understand why you would have this mentality in a genre that's designed around social interactions first and foremost.

[Rulke]

Just because some of us don't enjoy open world PvP in MMOs doesn't mean that we aren't better at games. >.> I really do enjoy PvP in non MMO settings, like fps and dota style of games. But when I go to sit down and play an MMO, I don't want to deal with PvP. Does that make me worse at the game than you? No, I think not.?

These are my sentiments exactly. There are game styles I play and enjoy for the PvP. MMORPGs just dont happen to be one. I like the fact that seperate server types are being offered so people can choose the kind that fits them.

[Rehn]

He can always roll with the other 26 who chose PvP

[Gredival]

Just because some of us don't enjoy open world PvP in MMOs doesn't mean that we aren't better at games. >.> I really do enjoy PvP in non MMO settings, like fps and dota style of games. But when I go to sit down and play an MMO, I don't want to deal with PvP. Does that make me worse at the game than you? No, I think not.

In a PvE server the challenges poses by your rivals are limited. In a PvP server you must not only beat the mob, but also competing (possibly all allied against you).

Given that, do you not think that in the PvP servers more work, and more talent, is required to succeed? By definition you must do more for the same reward. That gear represents a far greater accomplishment.

That doesn't mean you are worse at the game; we wouldn't know that unless you came to compete directly. You might or might not beat me. But the fact you don't come to play against me means your accomplishments mean far less and you chose the easy road comparatively.

By the same token I have always thought Abjurations earned in Einherjar were worth far less and devalued HNM gear in FFXI.

If you don't like working with others, then why are you playing an MMO?

Wait, how is working with others adding to tedium? That doesn't even make sense, NOT working with others adds tedium, the whole point of cooperation is to make the task easier - less tedious. You've got this shit ass backwards. And so basically, you wouldn't play an MMO (that mostly focuses on social interactions and group dynamics) cooperatively? But you might play other games cooperatively? I don't understand why you would have this mentality in a genre that's designed around social interactions first and foremost.

I like playing 1v1 games like SC2. But there is a different element of competition in group v. group which I also enjoy. It is not simply Dirk v. LeBron, it is the Mavericks vs. the Heat. It isn't just MVP v. Boxer, it's IM vs. Slayers.

You mention DotA, so let's take that as an example. 1v1 DotA is a different game than 5v5 DotA. 1v1 isn't "worthless" (as people will proclaim when they dodge a 1v1 challenge) but success relies upon a different skillset than standard 5v5 play. Primarily 1v1 emphasizes stellar laning mechanics and pressure. Deny well enough that you don't let your opponent farm, and keep him from running to other lanes and the jungle, and you have the game locked.

But there are more/different skills you must have to succeed in team play: map awareness, knowing when to leave your group and when to stay with it, timing your skills with the flow of battle... This all manifests as your skill with a specific hero in fulfilling a certain role. How well you initiate as Puk or Enigma, how good you extract as Pudge or Vengeful Spirit, etc. You have to adapt your play with your hero to the situation, anticipating and reacting on a whole other level comparative to 1v1. Laning mechanics are still very important, but you can win your lane and still lose the game. On the flip side, deficiencies in your laning mechanics can be masked in 5v5 by playing a support hero that should be deferring farm anyway. (Alternatively when you are so dominant that you win a game solo 5v1, it's pretty amusing.)

Ultimately working as a group against another group is dynamic and reactive, and that is universal amongst MMOs, RTS, FPS. I enjoy that dynamic. Comparatively working as a group against a static AI is just about finding a strat and grinding. The second is unrewarding to me and I'd rather just grind solo on a console RPG. The pixels are valuable because of the accomplishment attached to them. If all they represent is beating an AI, I don't see the point in co-op.

[Kachiko]

I never understood the attitude that PvP players > PvE players. They are two completely different worlds and have little to no relavence compared to each other. I don't care how good at PvP you are, it's not going to help you take down a games hardest boss, and no matter how good you are at executing the hardest boss encounter, it's not going to help you win a PvP battleground. Maybe you're great at executing a set of procedures, but can't react to the chaos of pvp battle and vice versa; those are two separate skill sets for two separate situations.

I also don't buy the idea that you're more skilled if you level on a PvP server, which somewhat mixes that content. If you're being honest, on a PvP server, most likely, you're picking your battles and going in when you Think you have the most favorable odds, such as numbers, or the guys at lower health from grinding NPCs. That just shows you know when/where to do something, not that you're 'better', or took more 'skill' to do then the guy you're doing it to. There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone with numbers. There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone who's lower level. There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone that you have much better gear than. There is no 'skill' in rocking the scissor class you just fought. There's no 'skill' in killing someone one, with low health, when you have full health. There is no 'skill' in killing off a team that is also fighting an HNM at the same time. The only 'skill' in a PvP server is if you're the person getting ganked and win, which we all know is the small minority of encounters. It's great that you enjoy eating oranges, but that doesn't mean you are better, at eating fruit, then people that eat apples. There's a reason why most games have content for both tastes.

So far, TERA has moved in the direction of discouraging PvP, so that's just not going to bode well for those that are looking for the PvP experience in the game. Dungeon's drop the best loot period and unless they implement a PvP gear system to match it, it's the only way you'll have the good gear to smash whatever content they implement with the Server invasion stuff later this year.

[Gredival]

I never understood the attitude that PvP players > PvE players. They are two completely different worlds and have little to no relavence compared to each other. I don't care how good at PvP you are, it's not going to help you take down a games hardest boss, and no matter how good you are at executing the hardest boss encounter, it's not going to help you win a PvP battleground. Maybe you're great at executing a set of procedures, but can't react to the chaos of pvp battle and vice versa; those are two separate skill sets for two separate situations.

Normally I would agree, they test different skill sets. But in the context of this game specifically we're talking about merging it. You have to handle a mob while fighting off your competitors who are trying to kill you and take the mob. In a PvP server, you must have both skillsets to excel. In a PvE server you need only one. By definition doesn't that mean the PvP experience is harder?

If you're being honest, on a PvP server, most likely, you're picking your battles and going in when you Think you have the most favorable odds, such as numbers, or the guys at lower health from grinding NPCs. That just shows you know when/where to do something, not that you're 'better', or took more 'skill' to do then the guy you're doing it to... There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone who's lower level. There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone that you have much better gear than. There is no 'skill' in rocking the scissor class you just fought. There's no 'skill' in killing someone one, with low health, when you have full health.

True, but I only suggested griefing as a demotivational counter-guild tactic not as evidence of skill.

There is no 'skill' required to steamroll someone with numbers... There is no 'skill' in killing off a team that is also fighting an HNM at the same time.

If there is one guild large enough to steamroll any rival individual guild, the likely result is that they team up to make a counter superpower. Then every world spawn is not just fighting a mob, but fighting your rival. You don't have to be good enough to beat the mob, you have to be good enough to beat the mob and your rival at the same time. It's like the MPK days of HNMs. It wasn't about beating Fafnir, it was about beating everyone else trying to MPK you while you beat Fafnir.

That to me is enticing. It escalates the challenge, makes the encounter dynamic, and it makes the gear worth more.

Dungeon's drop the best loot period and unless they implement a PvP gear system to match it, it's the only way you'll have the good gear to smash whatever content they implement with the Server invasion stuff later this year.

I was under the impression there was a significant amount of open world content in which you could PK during PvE.

[Elcura]

I was under the impression there was a significant amount of open world content in which you could PK during PvE.

As much as you preach about competition and survival of the strong (which I can understand), it's lines like this that tell me you're just in it to grief people during PvE.

Also, I never mentioned DotA once, I have no idea where you pulled that thread from. I know there are different skill sets depending on what you do, but for the most part it isn't skill. It's SURPRISE MOTHERFUCKER and your group is dead, your chances of killing this NM vanish and these group of assholes have taken your mob. How many times does this have to happen before someone gets fed up? What if the people griefing you are beyond reproach? I know you think of yourself as one of the big dogs, you want to be alpha, who doesn't? But are you seriously expecting things to roll so well for you?

I'd like to avoid the assholery, because that's what it is. You can call it competition, you can call it drive, you can call it challenge, you can call it whatever you want. But in this setting, in this scenario, it's assholery. I get salty enough when I lose claim on something, I'd be fucking furious if I got claim then lost the fight because of some asshole.

[Gredival]

As much as you preach about competition and survival of the strong (which I can understand), it's lines like this that tell me you're just in it to grief people during PvE.

How is this line distinguishable in any way? I'm saying that having PvP possibilities during open world PvE changes the dynamics of the PvE positively by increasing competition between and against groups, and promoting gear rarity/concentration amongst the top. That happens basically BECAUSE OF griefing other groups, making them beat YOU not just the mob. I don't shy away from that at all.

Also, I never mentioned DotA once, I have no idea where you pulled that thread from.

I grouped your and Fallisa's points because they were similar, which is why there is a double quote block. Even though you didn't mention it, the example of DotA still serves my point that gaming isn't just solo vs. group, it's a) 1v1, b) co-op only groups, and c) competitive groups and the dynamics are different in each. To me working with others against AI is tedium, I don't see a point in it comparative to playing a console game. But working with others against other groups is an entirely different dynamic that pushes you in different ways. Therefore I enjoy A and C, I hate B

I know there are different skill sets depending on what you do, but for the most part it isn't skill. It's SURPRISE MOTHERFUCKER and your group is dead, your chances of killing this NM vanish and these group of assholes have taken your mob.

I'm really not envisioning this as "SUPRISE MOTHER FUCKER" moreso than run of the mill. It's not about opportunistic poaching, it's outright war. I think that everyone should expect that every NM fight is a fight against your competition first, and a fight against the mob second.

How many times does this have to happen before someone gets fed up? What if the people griefing you are beyond reproach? I know you think of yourself as one of the big dogs, you want to be alpha, who doesn't? But are you seriously expecting things to roll so well for you?

Too bad so sad. I'm out there to be the best and to dominate, but if I can't then I'm just like everyone else who has to accept limitations. I vehemently supported the Kings/World Spawn system even when it meant that I had no chance of getting items even if I spent a year straight in Dragon's Aery. I play Starcraft actively and earnestly try to become better, but I realize very well that I don't have the natural talent (or the time/resources) to practice enough such that I could move into Grandmaster league, much less pro e-Gaming. That doesn't mean I begrudge those on top for my failure. They are just better, plain and simple. And I think when we talk top level gear, it should be exclusive in that sort of fashion.

I'd like to avoid the assholery, because that's what it is. You can call it competition, you can call it drive, you can call it challenge, you can call it whatever you want. But in this setting, in this scenario, it's assholery. I get salty enough when I lose claim on something, I'd be fucking furious if I got claim then lost the fight because of some asshole.

But in this scenario the better guild always wins, regardless of who claims. If you are stronger you can kill them and take it. If you are stronger you can fight them off while you kill the mob.

There is no arbitrariness, no luck, no bots -- the better group gets the spoils at the end of the day. If you are tired of losing claims, all you have to do is get better/stronger. Yes it's top heavy, top exclusive even, but at least there is rationale behind who wins and loses. And there is always opportunity to usurp the crown. You can always get even, kill them and take the mob back.

That's not assholery, that's just a winner take all competition. And the only reason to be afraid is if you care more about purely obtaining the pixels than what they represent.

[Elcura]

There is no arbitrariness, no luck, no bots

Except for the part where you're playing with other people.

But in general, I get your view and understand it. I just hugely disagree with it, we can go back and forth further, but it'll only waste space.

[Gredival]

Except for the part where you're playing with other people.

But in general, I get your view and understand it. I just hugely disagree with it, we can go back and forth further, but it'll only waste space.

I said better group not better player. Not only is a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, but a team should be greater than the sum of its individual parts put together. That's part of group play, it's not arbitrary.

[FriskUni]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but if you plan on playing TERA for PvP, you're in for a shock

also as it's been stated before, currently the HNM gear is utter trash compared to dungeon gear, you know what that means? that's right, HNM are pretty much up all the time unclaimed, so you're not going to have any competition

[Kachiko]

Normally I would agree, they test different skill sets. But in the context of this game specifically we're talking about merging it. You have to handle a mob while fighting off your competitors who are trying to kill you and take the mob. In a PvP server, you must have both skillsets to excel. In a PvE server you need only one. By definition doesn't that mean the PvP experience is harder?



True, but I only suggested griefing as a demotivational counter-guild tactic not as evidence of skill.



If there is one guild large enough to steamroll any rival individual guild, the likely result is that they team up to make a counter superpower. Then every world spawn is not just fighting a mob, but fighting your rival. You don't have to be good enough to beat the mob, you have to be good enough to beat the mob and your rival at the same time. It's like the MPK days of HNMs. It wasn't about beating Fafnir, it was about beating everyone else trying to MPK you while you beat Fafnir.

That to me is enticing. It escalates the challenge, makes the encounter dynamic, and it makes the gear worth more.



I was under the impression there was a significant amount of open world content in which you could PK during PvE.

Right now, there's nothing worth doing open PK over. The bling is all in the dungeons, and while I won't speak to the rule-set that the NA one may run under, as there are no released details, I highly doubt they'll be changing the current loot system, so even if you can go around PK'ing, none of that content is worth PKing over in the context that you'll get something good out of it, loot wise.

As to the rest of the discussion, everything you've said is an argument that power makes you the better player, which I maintain is not a definition of 'skill' pertaining to one play type vs another play type. Sure, there's a different dynamic at play, then a very hard, scripted, boss fight, but that's not an argument that the PvP style of game play requires more 'skill' at the game then the PvE content requires when you consider the real PvE content of end game hard modes and rated battlegrounds. Can a PvP/PvE encounter take more skill then just a PvE encounter? Sure. Can a PvE encounter that take more skill than PvP/PvE encounter? Sure.

Yes, maybe in an idealized PvP game, it would take more skill to be on the PvP server than the PvE one, but I've yet to see an open world PvP experience where it didn't all boiled down to how much power one side had vs another. If you can add unlimited people, then it's no longer skill and all about the power one side has, and that's just not something PvP players seem to realize or acknowledge. At the end of each of the two spectrums, they require their own skill set that do not translate well into their opposite side, and as it stands, that's also not where TERA has headed, but we'll see what comes later this year.

[Arelian]

I said better group not better player. Not only is a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link, but a team should be greater than the sum of its individual parts put together. That's part of group play, it's not arbitrary.

The better group will just have more people. In an action MMO like Tera, if the tank isn't focusing 100% on the mob, they have a chance at getting 1-shotted. It comes down to a very basic numbers game. If the ganking group has more people than the group fighting the monster, the ganking group will almost always win simply because they have more resources to pool from and they can focus 100% on the other players.

"Skill" has very little to do with it, really.