Page 27 of 27 FirstFirst ...
17
25
26
27
  1. #521
    Brewmaster Alkizon's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Strasbourg
    Posts
    1,439

    Arrow

    crusadernero
    As I said, back before WM there was no wpvp. It was only ganking and killing of lower lvls with hugely imbalanced servers. the wpvp that was happening was a result of horrid systems controlled by Blizzard.
    *cough-cough* Sorry, apparently choked on this nonsense... imo, we already talked in detail what wPvP(+/+/+/+/+) is and what organized PvP process is...
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkizon View Post
    you, as well as devs, continue to not understand what wPvP really is - it's unorganized, not specifically motivated, unpredictable process): so about WM - either there is incentive and this is BG, or there is no incentive and this is ghost town.

    = = = = simple proof from point of healthy game conditions = = = =
    since, from game's adequate technical side, in order to receive rewards (and nobody needs it without rewarding), you need to participate in more or less complication-balanced activity, activity with at least some complexity (matching rewards to "labor-time"), and it can't be organized in framework of current WM design (whole world toggle)... so it have to be BG (which is only working such one here, balance&rewards, but with commitment, no choice in participation, was built for mandatory fight activity) and PvP servers (which is about no balance&rewards, but about every minute freedom of choice) should be returned. Q.E.D.
    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    (more in place of quoted message and a little bit here)

    Moreover, exactly current process is completely controlled by devs' will (you find yourself in their separate kingdom with separate conditions, requirements and regulation - aka BG), but before that it was chaotic, unpredictable and completely controlled by players (this is directly based on definition and characteristics of this activity, in fact, hence all their current problems - due to lack of understanding of how it works)...
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkizon View Post
    There is difference between being able to fight and wanting to fight and it's exactly PvP+PvE (servers)vs(toggle) issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkizon View Post
    because they can, because it's their choice, because game (as it sure should be) doesn't make any choice for you, doesn't impose anything in this situation, it's pure freedom (PvE server don't have it, rules are more restricted there, that, by the way, why many people don't choose it)
    They annihilate element of moral choice by their decision. All were on the same server with the same rules and legal (not material/not complicated/"not hardcore") escape didn't exest back then - ie meeting of two characters of opposing factions led both owners to this choice. There won't be any moral choice now - "You can always go back to the city, push the button for leave any fight activity, and since you didn't do this, that means that you're the one who should be blamed for the fact that I'm killing you and there is no problem with my moral choice. You always have very easy solution to this". Moreover, new mode won't only "not condemn", but rather encourage decision to attack. Which'll lead community to an even more embittered state. There is also second negative psychological consequence/experience: easier to avoid, means less reasons for resistance/mutual assistance (group activity)/progression (learning, finding solutions)/confrontation (meetings) (it's very funny considering what they tried to achieve by this change). Ie this all is completely different condition and shape than PvP-server, and has nothing to do with it. Lets go ahead...
    I understand that I have already left message in this thread, so it should be enough, but presence of such heresy in "recent" posts is difficult to ignore.

    *pointing at one of posts above* just like I said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Alkizon View Post
    Conclusion: when next time people will “fight for wPvP”, they, due to inexperience and lack of education in this question, will begin to “fight for WM” already, and WM, given all its current stupidity and uselessness, is easier for devs to “remove/overcome” than if people will return to talking about PvP servers, which simply unmasks and devalues their such a tricky (also! in devs' opinion) move
    person says quite correct things, but doesn't know (wrong in terminology, which causes general difficulties in understanding process and mutually exclusive points (conflict is already embedded in the very way of WM creation, purpose and organization) in theses *pointing to rest participants' answers to it* same situation with post below) any other solution except "stuff happening" in front of eyes, which is doomed to failure from moment of its appearance even with infinite number of crutches.

    WM is not wPvP, this is large BG with direct PvP objectives and indirect PvE ones (similar to AV, Ashran) = doesn't create conditions for momentary choice and randomness of attack (enemy is almost guaranteed will going to attack because this is meaning of mode, this is its purpose), which means it doesn't create feeling of real "undefined/unexpected" danger, still is "switchable"/provides opportunity to escape "completely"/become inaccessible... which, all together (PvP objectives + ability to leave), by definition, turns it into BG. The sooner you realize and admit this, the sooner you'll begin to solve "its problems", but fixing this monster won't return you wPvP anyway. You'd need PvP servers for this. In other words, WM make you decide at entrance, otherwise you aren't playing by its "rules" and rest of participants will have objective claims (and the more PvP tasks the more objective, but without them the whole mode turns into another PvE branch ~ mutually exclusiveness) to you... like in any other BG, but PvP servers postponed it until particular specific event (has no PvP objectives, but doesn't prohibit attacking if desired, still you're staying forever inside it/such situation ~ free choice).
    Last edited by Alkizon; 2021-06-22 at 09:13 AM.
    __---=== IMHO(+cg) and MORE |"links-inside" ===---__

    __---=== PM me WHERE if I'm unnecessarily "notifying" you ===---__

  2. #522
    A lot of people having a lot of issues with the trivial bonus that the least represented faction gets from being in Warmode.

    All that trivial stuff aside: Warmode is fun. The uncertainty of having other players descend on you is great (although it’s debatable if flying should be allowed tbh). And the change of pace with you descending on others is fun too!

    I play Alliance and therefore often outnumbered. Doesn’t matter, makes my Horde kills that more enjoyable. I sometimes don’t engage - Horde sometimes avoid that as well. That mirrors the decision-making process in real life quite closely - and it adds another element of uncertainty: Will that big Tauren prot pally engage me?

    It’s the best feature added to WoW since they added battlegrounds. And it might even be better, because it allows the whole world to be used for PvP, while adding the toggle to just turn off PvP if you so chose.

  3. #523
    Elemental Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    And how do you do this? Don't come with "that's Blizzard's job, not mine". You tell me, how are they supposed to get more alliance players to activate warmode so that it evens out?
    Well, it is Blizzard's job to come up with systems to achieve outcomes. And like I said, their problem has never been in finding solutions to problems, it's been understanding the problem they need to solve.

    But here are some possible ideas:

    • Give a tenacity type buff, in WM, based on the ratio of players in the zone on the shard. Hell, make the buff strong enough that even if you're outnumbered 3:1, you can take down three players solo.
    • Give stronger rewards for killing opposite faction players when your faction is outnumbered - increasing according to how outnumbered you are. Give diminishing rewards to the faction that outnumbers the other.
    • Boost the amount of resources you get from gathering professions inversely with the number of players your faction has active in the zone.

    Literally, it should be an advantage to be on the less populous faction. More gold per hour, more honor per honor, more AP per hour. The idea here is that it drives players towards equilibrium, so in the end neither side actually achieves a noticeable buff.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    Sharding is definitely a problem with world pvp. It has nothing to do with PvE rewards, though. Even without PvE rewards people would abuse shards to get those PvP rewards.
    While I can agree that the sharding issue extends beyond PvE rewards, I think it's disingenuous to pretend that added rewards have nothing to do with it. As I have said multiple times now, I advocate for the bonus rewards from WM to be tied to PvP activity (and not just switching modes). By decoupling WM rewards (like a 10% bonus to WQ rewards) from any actual PvP, it absolutely encourages players to use sharding to find groups where the probability of encountering opposition is minimal because that is how you maximise your efficiency. However, if the bonus rewards were tied to actually engaging in PvP, then people would be more likely to use shards to try and find opportunities for PvP instead of avoiding it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    And how do you do that? Horde has the numbers advantage. Remove all PvE incentives to activate warmode and Horde will still have a numbers advantage because the PvP community is on Horde side. So now you need to give Alliance extra incentives to activate warmode. What do you give them?
    As above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    ...seriously? When I say "PvE rewards" I'm obviously talking about the 10-30% bonus you get from warmode, not worldquest rewards. How do you even come to the conclusion I would think no PvE rewards from warmode means PvE is deactivated? Seriously man...
    1) That's what you literally wrote
    2) That's the only way your argument makes any modicum of sense....

    I mean you were literally going on about how the ONLY thing people would do in WM was to hunt down opposition players.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    To give the sense of danger back to the world. How often do I have to repeat myself?
    Well obviously you're not answering the question I am seeking an answer to, so maybe stop repeating yourself and answer the actual question. But let me apologize for not being clear enough about what I was asking and rephrase. What is the value in putting that sense of danger back into the world?

    And as I already said, I know full well that it's about providing a more engaging and more enjoyable experience for those players who find it appealing. But if the majority of players opting into that experience are only doing so because you've bribed them to do so, then what is the point?

    My contention is this: For players for whom there is actual value in having that sense of danger, there is zero need for the +10%. It's a better game experience. Add to that the prospect of extra rewards for doing what you enjoy (ie PvP) and it's a perfect fit. But when you add the +10%, what you're actually doing is trying to get people who don't enjoy that heightened sense of danger to chose the mode that is worse for them, purely for the sake of expedience.

    So, in that context, I ask again: What is the point in pushing a feature that players don't actually want to use?

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    Back in the days of PvP servers, people didn't want to do world pvp 100% of the time all the time. But it could be forced upon you. With warmode, you can opt out of world pvp if you don't feel like doing world pvp and that would remove the experience of having this dangerous world where you might get attacked anytime.
    I am totally 100% fine with that. I like the fact that you can choose the mode of play you want to participate in on according to how you feel at the time. My objection is to the fact that the +10% reward is what is actually driving the decision to activate WM rather than the mode you'd rather be playing in. And I know for a fact that a lot of people only play with WM because they want to maximise their PvE rewards, and as such they actively avoid PvP - I believe - to the detriment of people who actually do like WM.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    What opportunities could present themselves to you if you want to do your handful of worldquests without a group and have warmode active? Come on, man. Give examples. All you're talking about in this thread is some vague stuff.
    • You come across an opposing player and have the option of engaging in combat.
    • Maybe there are multiple enemies, you can call for help, world PvP ensues
    • This is a powerful incentive to group up to do world quests. If you do the assaults in Vale/Uldum, there are always multiple groups doing them in WM, almost none with WM off. This makes for many more potential PvP opportunities.

    [QUOTE=Wuusah;52609898]I don't understand why "get more rewards, but you might be killed by other players" is such a bad idea in your opinion.[/quest]

    In spite of having explained it (and not just me, but others too)? Maybe you just don't want to understand, but it's essentially the same reason any form of bribery or coercion is a problem. It's about enticing players to choose to play in a way that they don't enjoy for the sake of expedience, the consequences of which are detrimental to everyone involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    Having players who don't want to participate in pvp but get dragged into it is a big part of world pvp. It has always been a big part of world pvp. Many battles I encountered started just in this way. You're minding your own business and then someone comes along and kills you, so you come back and kill him, then they come along with a buddy and camp your corpse. So you get a few buddies to help you out and suddenly it's 3v4, etc. That's the cool part about world pvp. The part where it escalates.
    Saying that someone doesn't want to participate in PvP can be ambiguous. It can mean from simply feeling apathy towards it, to active wanting to avoid it. What you're describing is the former. Someone playing with WM on and not actively looking to PvP doesn't mean they're not open to PvP if it happens. And that's a valid scenario for playing with WM on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    This mentality of "if you don't like it then don't use it" would rob a lot of players of cool experiences. I think you are looking at it in a very shallow way.
    What? The feature is there for anyone to try and see if they like it. Trying to argue that if you take away that 10% bonus, players would suddenly be unable to give it a bash is rather disingenuous. What I am talking about is players who know what it is that they like/dislike, but who will play with WM on even though they know won't enjoy those "cool experiences" because of expedience.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    Why is there zero value to be forced into world pvp even if you don't want to world pvp?
    Are you serious? Do you really have to ask? (And take note on the ambiguity of "you don't want to world pvp". I am talking about "I actively dislike wpvp and want to avoid it" as opposed to "I am not actively looking for wpvp but I am fine if it happens")

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    What's so bad about this? What is bad about making the world more dangerous but also more rewarding?
    Stop trying to strawman. I am not arguing that making the world more dangerous but also more rewarding is bad. I am arguing that it's bad to coerce players into participating in a mode of play that they actively dislike because that is what is most expedient. I am arguing that the choice of whether to enable WM or not should be made by players on the basis of the mode that they enjoy playing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    I am convinced that if you removed PvE rewards from warmode then world pvp would die. One side would dominate so much that the other side would stop bothering with it and never activate it again. It's always going to be a shitshow. People will always deactivate it when they do PvE because it's just not worth it to get ganked all the time, unless they play Horde where they won't ganked anyway because there is no Alliance in warmode. That's what warmode was in BfA release.
    Then it's a failure and it deserves to die.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    There is no way to give meaningful PvP rewards. Meaningful PvP rewards come from rated PvP. World PvP will never be rated. They'd have to make special rewards that you can only get from world pvp, like mounts or transmog styles or whatever. And in such a case, Horde would still dominate the servers because they also want those mounts and transmog styles. You will always have more Horde doing PvP. That's the baseline faction difference. Horde does PvP, Alliance doesn't. So how do you fix it with your PvP incentives? Give examples.
    To be honest, if WPvP was inherently worth saving it wouldn't need such incentives.

  4. #524
    Elemental Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitepaw View Post
    A lot of people having a lot of issues with the trivial bonus that the least represented faction gets from being in Warmode.
    That's not what anyone is taking issue with. What I am taking issue with is the generic concept that if you have WM on you get more rewards, which then becomes the only reason that most people switch WM on. Even my opponents don't disagree, on that (they just don't understand why it's a problem).

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitepaw View Post
    All that trivial stuff aside: Warmode is fun.
    For some players, sure. But you shouldn't need to be bribed in order to do something fun. So to me, the fact that they do bribe players to switch it is tantamount to an admission that, for most players, it really isn't fun. Importantly, I think that by coercing a lot of players into activating WM who really don't want to be there, it detracts significantly from the experience for everyone who likes WPvP.

  5. #525
    Quote Originally Posted by Raelbo View Post
    To be honest, if WPvP was inherently worth saving it wouldn't need such incentives.
    It all comes down to this one mentality of yours that something shouldn’t “bribe” players to participate. I don’t think it’s bad that Blizzard bribes players to activate warmode. It doesn’t give anything special that you cannot get otherwise. It’s not like islands where there are all kinds of unique cosmetic rewards. You just get a bit more of the stuff you already get. It is completely fine. You are overreacting.

    It would be nice if warmode gave some extra PvP incentives to activate it in addition to the PvE incentives. But the PvE incentives are there for a very good reason. If you remove them then people would inevitably divide their PvE and PvP activity to optimize their time in the game. People would deactivate warmode to quickly do their worldquests and activate to get their special warmode rewards you are talking about. And that would be really sad because people would optimize the experience of world PvP out of their game. Not because they don’t enjoy it but simply because it would be more time efficient to do so.

    This is the one thing you continue to not understand. People won’t do it if it’s not worth doing. If it’s detrimental to your efficiency to do PvE with warmode on, then people will deactivate it when they do PvE.

  6. #526
    Elemental Lord
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,389
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    It all comes down to this one mentality of yours that something shouldn’t “bribe” players to participate.
    No, it's about the consequences of doing so and how they effectively ruin the WM experience. But hey I've been over all of this, so clearly your mentality is to just ignore the argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    I don’t think it’s bad that Blizzard bribes players to activate warmode. It doesn’t give anything special that you cannot get otherwise. It’s not like islands where there are all kinds of unique cosmetic rewards. You just get a bit more of the stuff you already get.
    You're right that Warmode is not like Islands. Warmode is a mode of play, Islands are an activity. Interestingly, Islands have a mode which is the equivalent of WM, PvP, which, yes does reward greater rewards than the other modes. However I don't have an issue with that because you do Islands in PvP mode, you are playing against other players. Even if you don't even engage in combat with the other team, it's still a race and you can be beaten. So the extra reward is earned, and doesn't become an automatic incentive to play them in PvP mode.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    It is completely fine. You are overreacting.
    If you're the kind of person who doesn't care about WPvP, who just wants a way to play slightly more efficiently, sure it's fine. I am simply pointing out what is wrong with the system, why it makes for a worse game experience for its intended target audience and how it should be addressed. If you think that's overreacting, then maybe you shouldn't bother with debating forums.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    But the PvE incentives are there for a very good reason.
    They're there because Blizzard want WM to be deemed a success on the basis of participation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    People would deactivate warmode to quickly do their worldquests and activate to get their special warmode rewards you are talking about. And that would be really sad because people would optimize the experience of world PvP out of their game. Not because they don’t enjoy it but simply because it would be more time efficient to do so.
    But you think it's ok that they optimize the experience of world PvP into their game. Not because they enjoy it, but simply because it would be more time efficient to do so?

    I think it all comes down to this one mentality of yours that the world PvP experience has inherent value. It does not. It does to some people, but to others it detracts from the game. I simply think that people should be left to choose between WM on or off based on their personal preference, not based on what is more optimal. And achieving that means that the system should be designed so that it is optimal to play in the mode that you prefer.

    The problem with WM is that it is optimal to play with it on whether you like PvP or not. That is why I advocate for changing the bonus rewards to be based on doing actual PvP while in WM. Because that would make WM optimal for players who do engage in PvP, while making it sub-optimal for players who want to avoid PvP. The result would be players basing their decision on whether to activate WM or not on their willingness to get involved in WPvP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wuusah View Post
    This is the one thing you continue to not understand. People won’t do it if it’s not worth doing. If it’s detrimental to your efficiency to do PvE with warmode on, then people will deactivate it when they do PvE.
    But I am not advocating for making it inefficient to do PvE with warmode on. I am advocating making the efficiency of using WM contingent on engaging in PvP.

    If you activate WM and go and do an emissary quest, but encounter no-one from the opposite faction, then you get the standard PvE reward.
    If you activate WM and go and do an emissary quest, but do encounter members of the opposite faction, but everyone decides to just eye each other and get on with their own business, then you both get the standard PvE reward.
    If you activate WM and go and do an emissary quest, but encounter players from the opposite faction and actually engage in combat with them, then you get the standard PvE reward plus some bonus.

  7. #527
    Quote Originally Posted by Raelbo View Post
    But you think it's ok that they optimize the experience of world PvP into their game. Not because they enjoy it, but simply because it would be more time efficient to do so?
    and that's exactly the point. It's not necessarily time efficient to activate warmode. You could be killed over and over again and a 5 minute worldquest could suddenly end up taking you 30 minutes. When finishing a quest takes you 500% longer for 10-30% extra rewards, then that's not efficient.

    Have you never heard of the term opportunity cost?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •