My reasons why this Game will never Succeed....

[Jean Ribault]

8 hours ago, Hethwill said:

??? Subject was more PvE activity... why is there PvP in the mix other than personal choice of playing in PvP server... *sigh* ?

 

I guess you didn't read my comment completely, or just didn't understand it.  I was talking about PVE.

I was clearly saying that PVE IS NEEDED, just comparing it to the flipside which will not produce the desired results, in the context of higher server numbers.

Or maybe I just don't understand your response because it makes no sens to me.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

No worries. I find it confusing myself. When bots are challenging - it is too hard! - if they are too easy - it is boring! - what kind of pve indeed.

And no, there's nothing beyond combat against bots and trading with "bot" markets. That's been established.

PvE server -and- PvP server ( with pve option but always open to pvp).

Make yer choice, sir.

[Jean Ribault]

35 minutes ago, Hethwill said:

...

PvE server -and- PvP server ( with pve option but always open to pvp).

Make yer choice, sir.

 

Not necessary to choose, I do both.

[Ruthless4u]

13 hours ago, Hethwill said:

I hope you are right ( for a pve server that is )...

... but hearing a ton of players saying that fighting 1 to 2 odds against NPC is too difficult ( final exam )  I come to wonder what type of pve do we want... always a boring steamroll the NPCs ?...

... and I still wonder why players chose PvP server...

... be honest.

 

PVE only guys want brain dead AI fleets to massacre and to sail back and forth between point A and B with 0 risk.

[Sunleader]

2 hours ago, Hethwill said:

No worries. I find it confusing myself. When bots are challenging - it is too hard! - if they are too easy - it is boring! - what kind of pve indeed.

And no, there's nothing beyond combat against bots and trading with "bot" markets. That's been established.

PvE server -and- PvP server ( with pve option but always open to pvp).

Make yer choice, sir.

Thats not really True.

I still remember when you Buffed the AI Fleets. And that was not Challenging.

It was simply a mess. The NPCs basicly ignored Wind and Waves and could Shoot Full Broadsides out of their Front or Rear because their Cannon Shooting Arcs where basicly 170 Degree instead of the like 90 Degree a Player gets. 

The NPCs were just as stupid and boring as before. Instead of having any improvement on constantly sailing straight into the Wind and getting stuck they simply Cheated and kept Broadsiding you out of their Arses....

And this is not Challenging. Because Skill doesnt help here. After all what good does it do to you when you can Maneuver as you want and still will be inside the Enemies Broadside Arc simply due to him having Arcs so wide that they can shoot Broadside out of their Rear lol

 

The Problem with NPCs is that they are Boring.

All of them Sail almost exactly the same. They are 100% Predictable and constantly get Stuck on Beaches or against the Wind unable to do anything to you because they need an hour to get around.

All of em can be Manipulated because if you Turn in on them they will turn around as well showing you their Rear and allowing you to just shoot into it.

What we wanted you to Fix was that the NPCs become somewhat Smarter and more Varied. So they Employ different Tactics and dont constantly get stuck.

Instead you simply went ahead giving them such wide firing Arcs that they could get Stuck but just Shoot you anyways.

 

Its the same as with Strategy Games. Turn Civilization on Godlike and the NPC will be just as stupid as before. The only difference is he gets like 100 times ressources and research thus having an Army 10 times as big and 2 ages ahead of you.

 

 

 

Challenging would be if after a Maneuver I would not know how the NPC Reacts.

Challenging would be if the NPC would not Shoot each Cannon as it goes into the Arc thus allowing me to just Deflect his First Salvo by Angling. And would instead wait for a Good Chance to Shoot.

Challenging would be if the NPC would be able to Sail Properly and would not constantly end up Stuck on Beaches or against the Wind and then needing long to get around again.

Challenging would be if the NPCs would have Different Classes and Tactics.

 

 

Each Rank of Captain should have a Set of at least 3-5 Tactical Behaviors for each Ship Class he is usually using.

So that an Admiral with a Ship of the Line will attempt to stay at Range and in its Fleet Formation. Instead of instantly closing in due to the "I have higher Crew so I try to Board" programming....

While a low level Commander with a Small Frigate might be more stupid and try to go for a Close Combat Fight Maneuver Fight.

 

The entire Programming based on Stats is Bullcrab anyways. In Reality you did not know the Enemy Crew Strength and while you could classify a Frigate from a Ship of the Line. Anything more Accurate like Class or Armament etc was something you would not know till your much closer. And you would never know how fast or agile that ship is and how much Firepower it has. Having the NPC Programmend to line out its entire behavior based on such Stats is not only unrealistic but also makes the Game super Boring because the NPC always does the same.

 

The NPC Should decide a Strategy based on Raw Size/Class and should have a Chance to Alter this Strategy during Battle.

For example if both the NPC and the Player have a Frigate. The NPC could decide to go for a Straight on Broadside Battle.

Then if he takes 2 Broadsides where he takes Significant Damage while not causing much Damage to the Enemy he could have a certain Chance to Disengage from Broadside Battle and Change to Maneuver Combat.

There should be Variations here as well. One NPC Should try to Match Speed in Broadside Combat trying to stay on Middle Range.

Another might try to be Faster while Closing in on Parallel.

A Third Strategy might always run faster or slower but staying distance to try and force the Enemy into Bad Wind.

 

 

 

If you want to make NPCs Challenging just Buffing their Stats and allowing them to Cheat is not going to make any Player have more Fun.

Do you know why Dark Souls was so Successful despite being super hard ???

Because it was FAIR. Enemies where not Dangerous due to being Cheating or Overpowered. But because they had Behavior Sets and Attacks which changed with each Enemy thus keeping the Game super Interesting as you constantly had to Update your Tactics but never had the Feeling that you only lost or died due to the Enemy Cheating you.

[Nelsons Barrel]

Dude, Hethwill is not a dev, just a player. 

[Sir Texas Sir]

On 7/16/2018 at 10:47 AM, Wraith said:

You can play the game you want to play but even a small clan with a functioning ship line is better than playing alone with regards to time/effort vs. getting to PvP/combat.  Maybe your experience as mule is predicated on the fact that you've mostly played with assholes instead of one focused on getting ships to everyone in your clan in the most expedient way possible?   

It still blows folks minds when I hand them a first rate like it’s candy.  We have at all times a dozen Oceans and Bellonas on stand by ready.  I even started to jot some of those with cannons to quickly hand out.  

I was once told when I joined BLACK back on global.  The clan is as weak as the weakest player that shows up to fight.  So if the guy next to me is in a crap store boaght ship it’s my fault for not getting him into something better.  I still think this way with how I have ran UISK in Russia and now CSA in US.  Part of what makes that happen is you have to as a clan pool all your resources together and work as a t am to make it happen.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

@Sunleader

You are correct regarding the AI. 100%

But you see, best AI behavior coding, and most "bang for the buck", is to replace the NPCs with Human Players. That way the NPCs become unpredictable, do have to work the wind, etc etc etc

Oh wait...

[John Jacob Astor]

On 7/16/2018 at 6:41 AM, Wraith said:

Clan turnover is a thing and something we all deal with. But you should probably look at the clans involved with the people who've been around the longest on the forum and that would be a good place to start. I don't know what nation you play in but just ask around, look at the clans of people whose name's you recognize and hit them up in game.  They should be able to integrate you into their ship line production and get you going in steady activities.  

US, but I would consider changing nations to join one where the play styles were friendly to merchant activity.  The first one was a bad fit in that regard.  The second one was better but it recently collapsed.  According to one of the remaining members, an officer looted the clan warehouse and skipped town to join a different nation.  The founder didn't appear to be very picky about who he gave officer status to.

I am hoping the planned clan leaderboard provides enough information.  This appears to have been a long-standing weakness in the integration of new players.  Very few of my fellow clan members in either of my first two appeared to have any awareness of these forums.  Which means new players are pretty much at the mercy of whoever happens to recruit them.

Not a good plan for player retention.

[Sir Texas Sir]

16 minutes ago, Marcus Corvus said:

US, but I would consider changing nations to join one where the play styles were friendly to merchant activity.  The first one was a bad fit in that regard.  The second one was better but it recently collapsed.  According to one of the remaining members, an officer looted the clan warehouse and skipped town to join a different nation.  The founder didn't appear to be very picky about who he gave officer status to.

I am hoping the planned clan leaderboard provides enough information.  This appears to have been a long-standing weakness in the integration of new players.  Very few of my fellow clan members in either of my first two appeared to have any awareness of these forums.  Which means new players are pretty much at the mercy of whoever happens to recruit them.

Not a good plan for player retention.

What nation are you in by chance?  

[John Jacob Astor]

1 minute ago, Sir Texas Sir said:

What nation are you in by chance?  

US nation.

[CptEdwardKenway]

On 7/7/2018 at 11:22 PM, HachiRoku said:

newly released on steam and games tend to loose 90% of playerbase after 2-3 weeks. Its rare for games not to. Devs dont market and that also is a BIG issue. Most entertainment products have 50% of the budget for marketing. 

Not really. There are a lot of people who are interested in it. I am a former player and quit because of the obvious reasons. When I started there was a playerbase of ~1500 for several months. The downward spiral began when certain clans thought it's a great idea to exploit, wipe out nations or gank the crap out of other players especially the new ones around the capitals.

 

I told this will happen 2 years ago but the gankers didn't stop. Btw where are they now? Especially that one "special" clan?

[Guest]

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 8:45 PM, Hethwill said:

You are correct regarding the AI. 100%

But you see, best AI behavior coding, and most "bang for the buck", is to replace the NPCs with Human Players. That way the NPCs become unpredictable, do have to work the wind, etc etc etc

Oh wait...

You seem to have it in for PvE!

I think the AI pretty good, in WOWS they steam straight at you and that’s it, here they sail to protect weakest side, sail to the wind advantage, reasonable RNG when landing shots too, not bad at all, best AI by far.

Not every player is an PvP unicum, most average, the rest below average and so populates PvE. Noobs just want to play too!

On ‎7‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 6:08 AM, Sunleader said:

The Last Point is the Critical thing.

There is no real Protection left. Thanks to the Update you can now even Gank Players in the Capital Reinforcement Zones.

So New Players come in. Get Raped and then leave saying yeah Screw you, I am out. Leaving a Negative Review making a Negative Review and if Possible Return the Game.

But a Fair Go is Impossible right now. The Entire Game System is laid out so that you are absolutely useless in a Fight unless you already got High Grade Ships to Farm for Equipment and Upgrades of PvP Ships.

New Players right now dont even get to the Point where they would actually have a Chance to Learn something from a Fight. Because they just get Bashed by Ships 3 times as Strong and 3 times as Fast with Armor that they cant even Hurt when Sterncamping....

But thats not all. The main Problem remains.

Because the PvPers HATE the Constant Grind for new Upgrades and Stuff.

And the PvEers dont want to be Constantly Fighting.

This Game cannot possibly get anywhere unless it decides on One Group and Adjusts the Gameplay Accordingly.

Also developers have gone down the road of the “Risk” theme, that is that the game will be more successful by making battles more riskier, by risking the lost of your ship. And almost every loser does.

“High Risk” value is not needed for this game, battle aesthetic are enough, for average players the challenge of winning battles without the loss of your ship is enough, even just participating in battles is enough.

Every game I've played that accommodates losers, lets them win too, is populated.

In this game it would be keeping their ship after a lost.

I really hope that developers don’t get hung-up on the value of risk, I hope they believe in there elegant battles and that it will be enough to be successful.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Guest

[Jean Ribault]

3 hours ago, BuckleUpBones said:

...

Every game I've played that accommodates losers, let them win too, is populated.

...

 

Couldn't agree more.  I said as much in another thread.  It's not hard to understand, simple concept - people want to win, even if they lose.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Jean Ribault

[z4ys]

7 minutes ago, Jean Ribault said:

 

Couldn't agree more.  I said as much in another thread.  It's not hard to understand, simple concept - people want to win, even if they lose.

patrol zone best place to be only dmg counts

[Jean Ribault]

3 hours ago, z4ys said:

patrol zone best place to be only dmg counts

I'm not asking to win every battle.  The better player(s) in any one battle should win, and should in turn be handsomely rewarded.  They won, after all, and it should have meaning.  However, the games that I see being very successful are games in which you get rewards just because you put up a fight.  CS-GO for example.  People have more fun when they win stuff.  Can't argue that.  In the context of this particular game, since there's really no working economy what can it hurt?  IMO it could only serve to retain players, instead of having them discouraged and then just quit.  We need to retain players, by all means available.

[Lonar]

Giving the looser also a reward can also work against ganking. You dont need to fight always against the easiest target, and also when you for example give the looser 1/4 of the pvp marks or something it makes less sense to gank someone with more ships since you can get around the same amount of marks when you loose as if they are split between a group (i have old infos here how it works).

[Sunleader]

On 7/18/2018 at 10:45 AM, Hethwill said:

@Sunleader

You are correct regarding the AI. 100%

But you see, best AI behavior coding, and most "bang for the buck", is to replace the NPCs with Human Players. That way the NPCs become unpredictable, do have to work the wind, etc etc etc

Oh wait...

 

Your Absolutely Correct there.

With which we are back to my Original Topic.

 

The Game needs to Decide if it wants to be PvP or PvE Oriented.

Because right now its trying to do both thus doing Both Super Badly.

 

1.

Players make super Fun and Challenging Enemies if you can actually make Players Fight each other on an halfwat equal Matchmaking where it doesnt result in one side just Roflstomping the other Player due to having Ship thats 3 times the Size 2 times the Speed and still so Thickly Armored that its basicly Immune to the other Players Cannons.

Needless to say that this is absolutely not the case right now. Thanks to which right now if your New to the Game you have absolutely no Choice but to do PvE because you will never learn anything or get anything by doing PvP.

 

2.

Players make super Fun and Challenging Enemies. But they hate Losing. And in PvP one Player MUST Lose.

Which is why usually PvP Games will make the Rewards for PvP so High that even the Losing Player will usually make Profit even if he was Utterly Defeated.

Now take a Guess how it works in this Game.

Yeah....

In this Game doing PvP is a Loss Business unless you Win and keep Winning.

Worse when you mix it with Point 1 above. You can basicly Guarantee that any New Player Trying to go for PvP in this Game is Effectively Punished over and over for even trying.

Making him feel like the Game tells him DO NOT PVP!!!

 

3.

And Finally. Its nice that PvP Enemies make for a Challenge thats Interesting.

But you see. PvPers hate boring NPCs like the Pest.

And guess what. PvP Players you kill dont tend to really Drop good Loot.

Especially not Money and Upgrades etc.

So these PvPers for each PvP Fight need to have 10 Boring Fights against NPCs.

 

 

 

This Game needs to Decide to either go PvP or PvE.

I dont care either ways. But they need to stop trying to be both.

Because with the current PvP Heavy World and the Removal of almost all PvP Restrictions thanks to which any New Player is just Bashed out of the Game anyways.

This Game is never going to be any Hit as PvE Game.

And with the Grind against Boring NPCs as well as the Grind in General where you cant really Earn your Pay with PvP Only.

Needless to say with absolutely no Incentives to Fight Players at your Level thanks to which the main PvP in this Game is Ganking and Sealclubbing.

This Game is never going to be a Hit as PvP Game either....

 

 

In the End we are back to my First Post.

Either they say. Ok we are PvP.

Then they need to Introduce Rewards for PvP Fights which are Profitable even when Losing.

They need to Implement a proper system of Incentive Matchmaking so that Killing Enemy 3 on 1 or Killing Enemys which got a much weaker Ship Pays nothing and only Costs you Repair and Risks your Ship while Fighting an Enemy at your level or Above gives you Proper Rewards that Outweigh your Cost even when you lose.

They need to get Rid of the Grinding of the Boring NPCs. Or make NPCs far more Interesting to Liken them to PvP Fights.

 

Or they say. OK we go PvE.

Then they need to Implement PvP Warzones where Factions Fight Actively thus the PvPers having an Concentrated Area where they find each other.

They need to make NPCs much more Interesting having them Employ Tactics etc.

And they need to Remove any Force towards PvP so that PvP is Optional for Fast Rewards like Free Ships etc. But is not Necessary as everything can be Earned by PvE.

 

 

Dont get me wrong.

I dont care either way.

But the current variant where they try to do both and do them Badly is just not worth the Time it costs to do anything.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Sunleader said:

Players make super Fun and Challenging Enemies if you can actually make Players Fight each other

Players can also be  griefers, gankers and just plain mean, these demeanours are a blight in PvP, as in all of society.

 

6 hours ago, Sunleader said:

This Game needs to Decide to either go PvP or PvE.

No it doesn’t, standard gaming model is both PvP and PvE, it would be a deathwish if developers did choose only one! 

 

6 hours ago, Sunleader said:

They need to get Rid of the Grinding of the Boring NPCs. Or make NPCs far more Interesting to Liken them to PvP Fights.

Grinding gives games volume/gameplay, this is a part of genre here, criticizing it won’t change the industry! AI is not easy to program within the limits FPS, PCs, let’s be reasonable here, at least be within the realms of reality!

Game is quite good, AI one of the best for sailing ships, developers should be proud of their AI.

Some tweaks to suit all grades of players for this genre would do wonders for the population though. 😉

Edited July 23, 2018 by Guest

[Sunleader]

On 7/23/2018 at 8:57 PM, BuckleUpBones said:

Players can also be  griefers, gankers and just plain mean, these demeanours are a blight in PvP, as in all of society.

 

No it doesn’t, standard gaming model is both PvP and PvE, it would be a deathwish if developers did choose only one! 

 

Grinding gives games volume/gameplay, this is a part of genre here, criticizing it won’t change the industry! AI is not easy to program within the limits FPS, PCs, let’s be reasonable here, at least be within the realms of reality!

Game is quite good, AI one of the best for sailing ships, developers should be proud of their AI.

Some tweaks to suit all grades of players for this genre would do wonders for the population though. 😉

 

1.

Pls do not Distort  other Peoples Statements by Changing and or leaving out Critical Parts of the Statement.

""

Players make super Fun and Challenging Enemies if you can actually make Players Fight each other on an halfwat equal Matchmaking where it doesnt result in one side just Roflstomping the other Player

""

You leaving out my comment on having halfwat Fair Fights and then denying my Statement and Demanding Fair Fights is a very Cheap Move and Adds nothing to the Discussion.

 

2.

Thats Factually Wrong.

There is not a Single Game out there that Successfully does PvP and PvE at the same Time.

All Games that do PvP and PvE work by either giving Massive Priority to one of both.

For example by adding Harsh Penalties and Restrictions to PvP or by simply having Seperated PvP and Warzones.

Or by Completely Focusing PvP and allowing to basicly do everything in PvP having PvE Mostly just to Spend Time when there is no PvP going on.

 

3.

Ok I call Double Bullcrab on this.

A.

No. Grinding Adds only Grind to the Game.

What does Add Volume and Gameplay to a Game is Content.

Grinding is Defined by Repeating the same Actions over and over and over and over.

Playing through Content which goes through changes here and there is not Grind. Its Gameplay.

But this Game has no Content. This Game has Grind. Where you Repeat the same Actions over and over and over.

Where you kill the same few Ships 200 times to get to the next few Ships you have to Kill 200 times.

And when you reached the last of the 6 Steps of new Ships to Kill 200 times you have to kill the same Ships 2000 times to Build up Money and Equipment to actually be allowed to Fight Enemies.

 

B.

NOOOO. Sorry but Seriously No.

This Game has one of the most Horrible Sailing AIs in the Gaming Industry.

Which is not Surprising because this Game is the only one which Expects the AI to actually Sail the Ship with Controls given to the Players instead of just Limiting the AI to the Maneuvers a Player can do while allowing the AI to just move the Ship.

Now this is a Grandiose Undertaking. But its worthless if it doesnt work.

And right now it does not work...

The NPCs get Stuck on Beaches or against the Wind. They are almost 100% Predicable and they have the always same Tactical Patterns with no Variation Whatsoever.

Thanks to that almost EVERY SINGLE FIGHT GOES EXACTLY THE SAME WAY.

 

C.

AI is not Easy to Program.

Very True.

But this current System is not an Actual AI to begin with.

Currently its actually not an AI at all to be Honest.

Because right now what your Fighting has no Intelligence. What your Fighting is an Preset Program which takes action based on Triggers.

If Enemy has "X" Number less Crew than Yourself you Try to Close in and Board.

If Enemy Passes Firing Arc Fire at Enemy.

etc etc etc.

Right now there is no Decision making on the AIs part. The AI is basicly just Executing a Row of Triggers.

Hell. Currently There dont even seem to be any actual Random Factors that would Change the Actions of these Triggers in a certain Percentage of cases to keep it Challenging.

Instead the Action is a 100% Guaranteed Reaction to the Triggers Set.

 

And Improving that would be Fairly Easy to be Honest.

Because as I said above.

 

You could for example just Set a Certain Random Chance of 2 or 3 Actions for each Trigger.

If the Enemy has Less Crew. You could have 50% Chance to Close in and Attempt to Board. You could have 30% Chance to Attempt an Attack with Anti Personnel Ammunition into the Stern of the Ship to Widen the Advantage and a 20% Chance to Simply Ignore the Manpower Advantage and go for a Broadside Fight anyways.

 

You could Change the Trigger Setup depending on the Rank of the NPC

For example. An Vice Admiral Commanding an 3rd Rate Ship of the Line would only get Triggers for Decisions that are Expected to Improve his Chances in Battle.  While an Small Lieutenant might have Several Triggers that will actually cause him to make Bad Decisions.

 

You could give NPCs Personality by Simply Disabling Certain Triggers for them.

For example. There could be some NPCs which are very Honorable and thus will almost Always Attempt to Drive Parallel Broadside Combat. While others might be very Evasive and constantly attempt to let themselves fall back in a Broadside Battle to then Suddenly Turn in and get into your Stern. Some might be very Cowardly and Prefer to have Long Distance Fights. While others might be very Eager to Close in on you and have a Fast Brutal Close Quarters Battle.

 

 

These aint very Hard to do things.

Because non of em are Actually AIs either. They merely Simulate a Certain Intelligence and offer some Challenge by Random Elements.

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

41 minutes ago, Sunleader said:

There is not a Single Game out there that Successfully does PvP and PvE at the same Time.

Maybe of various genres but I assure you there are plenty. Escape from Tarkov for example has everything into the same melting pot. Has quite nice questing but you have to survive harsh pvp and pve. No rewards for death. Just XP. But has a lot of rpg elements and gear and collectibles while keeping the combat pretty hardcore milsim ( to a point ).

Game still under heavy development and early access is not exactly what release will be... oh wait, almost like NA.

 

 

[Sunleader]

On 7/26/2018 at 4:39 PM, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

Maybe of various genres but I assure you there are plenty. Escape from Tarkov for example has everything into the same melting pot. Has quite nice questing but you have to survive harsh pvp and pve. No rewards for death. Just XP. But has a lot of rpg elements and gear and collectibles while keeping the combat pretty hardcore milsim ( to a point ).

Game still under heavy development and early access is not exactly what release will be... oh wait, almost like NA.

 

 

 

Then do us a Favor and out of these "plenty" pls name me a few.

Because I can Guarantee you. There is not a Single Game which trys to do both and actually Succeeds.

Every Single Successful Game will be either Extremely Focused on one Side and have the other merely as an side thingy. Or will be Seperating them entirely by having Seperate Zones either by Complete Block (no PvP allowed at all) or by Mechanics (Extremely Harsh Penalties for PvP)

 

[Hethwill, the Red Duke]

Elite Dangerous. The AI will many times drink your tears. Let alone in a high intensity conflict zone with everything in the mix.

IL-2 ( when the skies are full with squadrons, player made and pve patrol, it is just amazing )

Tarkov ( simply put it is NA 10.x patch elevated at *keep practicing* level )

Arma ( insert all invasion/wasteland types here, great in hc servers where you have no idea who killed you, bot or human, who cares, you're dead anyway )

Conan, Division, even Dark Souls if you are up to have your game invaded.

C'mon man, being eccletic even in gaming is a good thing. 

One thing I can tell you, there's no "hardcore" game out there that has it so many protective measures as NA does. This I can assure you. 

[Sunleader]

3 hours ago, Sir Hethwill the RedDuke said:

Elite Dangerous. The AI will many times drink your tears. Let alone in a high intensity conflict zone with everything in the mix.

IL-2 ( when the skies are full with squadrons, player made and pve patrol, it is just amazing )

Tarkov ( simply put it is NA 10.x patch elevated at *keep practicing* level )

Arma ( insert all invasion/wasteland types here, great in hc servers where you have no idea who killed you, bot or human, who cares, you're dead anyway )

Conan, Division, even Dark Souls if you are up to have your game invaded.

C'mon man, being eccletic even in gaming is a good thing. 

One thing I can tell you, there's no "hardcore" game out there that has it so many protective measures as NA does. This I can assure you. 

1.

Elite Dangerous is not Mixing PvP and PvE at all.

Elite Dangerous can be Played Freely in a Chosen Mode. Meaning you can go with your Character into 100% Solo Mode with no other Players.

But can use that very Same Character to go Open if you want to PvP.

This means the Game is 100% Seperated and Open Mode is 100% Voluntary PvP mode.

The Focus is lying extremely on PvE by the way.

Compare that to NA. Basicly for NA to do this. NA would need to have Shared Characters between PvE and PvP Server. Meaning that you can Max out your Character and Buy all Ships etc on PvE Server and then on a weekend if you want just Play on PvP Server before going back to PvE Server on Monday.

2.

IL-2 is an Simulation Game with a Multiplayer Feature. The Multiplayer Feature is 100% laid out for PvP while the Solo Play is 100% PvE of course.

In the Multiplayer Actions where there is other Players. PvE Content is entirely Neglected.

So again. The Game has PvE and PvP entirely Seperated from each other without forcing anyone to even touch the other Mode if they dont want to.

Needless to say you dont Unlock or Buy stuff. There is no Grind. Everyone Starts out with stuff for Battle thus nobody having any Equipment Advantage due to playing Longer.

This is not even remotely comparable to NA. It would be more Comparable to NA Legends but assuming that everyone Starts with everything Unlocked and Unlimited Money.

3.

Tarkov is an PvP Game. There is no real PvE Gameplay and if you consider some parts PvE its at best a sideshow for the PvP Battle.

The Game itself is 100% Focused on PvP. It does not combine PvE at all to be Honest.  And you get Max Equipment within Minutes based on Luck.

So yeah assuming that you just Remove Levels and basicly make it so that any Ship can be Captured and of course give Players Equipment that they start out capable of just killing the Largest Ship in Game. Sure we would be around this. Of course PvE would lose all meaning then. But you would have a Nice PvP Arena like Tarkov.

4.

I myself Played alot of Arma even back when it was still called Operation Flashpoint.

And Arma does not Combine PvE and PvP at all.

All PvP Matches are 99% PvP and the only Mutliplayer PvE is Coop Missions where no PvP happens.

This is entirely Logical because the AI in Arma is pretty good but not very Human. And Scenarios need to be Scripted very Accurately. Making it Impossible to have any remotely useful AI Enemies inside an Multiplayer Match.

Again a Instanced Multiplayer is not even Comparable to NA and it cannot combine PvP and PvE because its 100% Optional. But yes again if you just removed Levels etc in NA Legends and just Started out everyone on Max level with Unlimited Money. You would get it.

5.

Conan Exiles as well has 100% Seperated Modes where PvP is 100% Optional and thus only done by thus Actively Engaging PvP and thus entirely Ignoring PvE Content.

The Division is Completely Seperating PvP and PvE as well. 90% of the World is Purely PvE and there is some very Limited PvP Matches and Zones where you can Fight others.

This PvP by the way has been slugged down over and over by any Critics because the Level Based PvE System Results in PvP Matches being absolutely unplayable for anyone who is not entirely Maxed out in PvE.

Same for Dark Souls. Which is entirely PvE and only offers PvP as an Optional thing. And even then its heavily Restricted by Matchmaking. Needless to say its still fairly Unbalanced and Generally Avoided by most Players due to that.

 

 

So Sorry.

But all of these Games are not Combining PvE and PvP at all.

All of them Focus on one of the two Modes or Seperate the Modes entirely.

 

And LOOOL

Ok then let me ask you this.

Dark Souls is a Hardcore Game.

And in Dark Souls. If I stay Hollow I can Finish the entire damn Game without ever meeting any PvP Opponents.

Pls tell me how I can do this in NA.

Hell even Dark Souls has more Protection for Players than NA Does.

But thats not even the Problem.

If NA wants to go Full PvP thats completely Fine with me. We can Remove the Protection Zones alltogether.

But then we need to Freaking Adjust the Remaining Systems to a PvP Game. Meaning that the Game needs to have 99% less Grinding. So you can actually afford to Lose Ships and Equipment over and over while learning how to Fight.

We need to Implement a Proper Matchmaking so you dont end up Ganked or Fighting Ships that have so much Armor in their Stern that you cant Penetrate it Point Blank. And most of all so that Players will at least now and then Win some Fights by Fighting People of their own Experience and Equipment level.

 

 

 

Sorry Mate.

But none of the Games you Listed are Combining PvE and PvP.

None of them try to do both.

All of them Focus entirely on One Mode. And have the other Mode as an 100% Optional side thing that you dont need to do at all.

To be more Precise. ALL of the Games except for One you Named. Are entirely PvE and only Offer PvP modes as an 100% Optional Thing that is entirely outside the normal Game.

The one Exception is Tarkov which is 100% PvP and requires absolutely no PvE to be done at all. Honestly said it doesnt really contain any PvE.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Sunleader said:

But none of the Games you Listed are Combining PvE and PvP.

PvP Conan Exiles is, 99%, all the resources/grinding is from the environment, very little is from looting other players, you can just play environment while on PvP server, you just need to be a runner! and get to T3 building as soon as you can.

PS, topic is now way off OP.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Guest