PC "Civilized PvP system"
- Thread starter RestInPieces
- Start date
RestInPieces
New member
None needs to shallow any pills, nothing makes everything better for everyone. That's why there are options for different tastes. And there is already pvp in this game, it just isn't the focus and none asked for pvp to be its focus or be obligatory, so what's your point?
RestInPieces
New member
They are not two different games. I understand that most modern games will give you that impression though. As for the degraded PvE experience it's only because it is not done correctly.
zombie4hire
New member
I wholly agree. PvP and PvE should be different games entirely. Shoehorning both experiences in the same game does not work.
RestInPieces
New member
UO, Shadowbane, T4C, Lineage, MU, KO, Eve and many others - all of the older mmos included. I made it work in a minecraft server with builders. Let me guess - you will mention Rust, DayZ which virtually have no PvE, Arc which lets other players destroy people's hard work when they are offline and the h1z1 cashgrab.
But none should think like that in the first place - the "if other games didn't make it work, it won't work - and this conversation would be more constructive if you analyzed the reasons why, instead of (both of us) making examples that are anything but credible because of various other factors.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian9824
New member
Well for one your entire list seems to be MMO's which are a totally different type of game then this, but here you go. This was found in literally 5 minutes of searching. If i wanted to spend more time I could find a ton more examples.
Eve - Complaints about pvp nerfs effecting PvE -
MU - http://forum.webzen.com/forum/en/mu-legend-english/mu-legend-english-forum/general-discussion/2297767-no-nerfs-buffs-only-politic
ESO - https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/382659/should-zenimax-separate-pvp-from-pve-balancing-etc
Destiny 2 - https://www.bungie.net/en/Forums/Post/227061088?sort=0&page=0
Ark - https://survivetheark.com/index.php?/forums/topic/168691-should-pvp-nerfs-effect-pve/
I can post hundreds of games that have the same issue, i'm not that familiar with all of your abbrieviations or i'd post more.
The problem is you have to start adjusting mechanics like zombie spawning, damage, etc and that bleeds over into PvE. Just effecting the boosts skills do or trying to balance the game so that a new person has a chance joining an established server bleeds over into PvE.
For most of those games you posted classes get nerfed because one class is overpowered in PvP, however that nerf effects PvE as well. I've seen it happen with EVERY MMO in existence, and it will continue to happen because the only way to avoid it would be to literally program two totally different skill sets for use in PvP and PvE which basically makes it a seperate game. Otherwise every change to balance PvP is going to effect PvE
As its been said before there are thousands of PvP games out there, but very few cooperative games like 7dtd. So i'm glad the dev's have said that PvP is not their focus and that it takes a backseat to PvE. Clearly their strategy has been working well for them.
Last edited by a moderator:
RestInPieces
New member
They are one of the most comparable types in fact - long term open world with the possibility of both pve and pvp elements. In UO and Shadowbane you could also build.
If you search enough you can find complaints about anything really. Most of which stem from the need to balance everything to absolute equality - which can't really happen in any RPG. Most are contented with shifting the meta every now and then e.g. wow. It proves absolutely nothing. But as I said this is a wrong way of thinking in the first place.
You do know that they can just use two values of damage for PvE/PvP separate from each other with just a couple of lines of code on a weapon for example, right? They don't have to touch absolutely anything in PvE. In fact they can adjust the values in a way that skills in 7dtd wouldn't even matter, so I don't see much value to this argument.
But again, why should they be absolutely equal in the first place? Would they be equally equipped in a realistic situation? No. Doesn't the newly joined player, after a protection period, have more than enough odds to beat an old player? I don't see why he doesn't or why you find the lack of absolute equality intolerable - it is not even realistic.
Brian9824
New member
MMO's are not really comparible at all. The comparable games would be Empyrion, Ark, Rust, Day Z, Project Zomboid, Survive the nights, H1Z1, etc. All small scale local player games many whom don't have official servers or shared worlds and focus on smaller amounts of players on a map.
Ok, so now that I found examples your agreeing that PvP nerfs DO effect PvE. Got it.
It's nowhere near as simple as using 2 values for PvP/PvE, clearly you haven't been listening. Everything from skills, loot spawning, zombie damage, block durability, SI, survival mechanics, horde mechanics, etc are effected.
Here is a simple example. With the change to 7 day horde each person contributes to more zombie spawnings. Well a LCB only protects against player damage. 3-4 people could easily go around on horde nights and pull zombies to poeple's bases and use the zombies to destroy their base as it provides no protection against their damage. So the mechanic works GREAT for cooperative as people working togethor get larger hordes proportionate to their numbers, but works horribly for PvP. So fundamental changes have to be done if you want to have both PvE and PvP in a game.
Or back before A16 they had to change water mechanics because it was a absolutely devastating way to grief people yet worked fine in PvE for filling up areas with water.
Also I never said a new player joining a server had to be "absolutely equal" please don't put words in my mouth. I said they had to have a chance which is very different. If the game is skewed so badly that skill can't overcome raw levels then its not fun and it will drive people away.
RestInPieces
New member
I don't think you quite got it...
and I keep telling you that "finding examples" is futile because there are myriads of other underlying reasons of why it didn't work in the recently released similar games you like to compare it with.
I've been listening what you think that should be done. Listening is different to agreeing though. Please go ahead and elaborate on why they would have to change skills if the pvp damage value isn't affected by them, loot spawning, zombie damage, block durability, SI, survival mechanics, horde mechanics etc.
And the whole game must obviously be changed to combat this typical kind of griefing! First of all, when owners are offline their land will just simply have to be protected. And if they are in their base, zombies hone in on the players anyway, leading to a very interesting situation where the ones running on the outside are at a disadvantage. If they are out exploring on that horde night, there are more ways to combat it like player proximity to the claim block to ensure a fair and engaging fight. No fundamental changes to what already exists, have to be done.
Which is completely irrelevant with pvp, since it could be done on any co-op server and they did well to change it, so what is your point?
So you don't have any problems with the players not being absolutely equal, but you just don't think that a new player will stand a chance of beating an old player after a, say, a grace period of one week, when the pvp damage value of weapons makes them roughly equal? How exactly wouldn't they stand a chance?
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian9824
New member
Again it looks like your just arguing for the sake of arguing.
It's been proven that time and time again PvP changes effect PvE. You've admitted that its true and it happens with balancing. There has not been a single game in history where this has not happened and there is a reason for that.
Your "solutions" are a joke.
Very simple PvP exploit. Player 1 builds base, Player 2-20 stays in base. During pvp Player 1 is offline thus making their base invincible while players 2-20 get to enjoy having an invincible structure. It also allows for invincible bases in PvE because you changed how LCB work so that people could use them in PvP. After all LCB are ALSO used in PvE since they do much more then just protect your base.
Also again, nothing you said stops a player from breaking into someones base which requires possibly making a few holes, and then just waiting for horde night and letting the base be destroyed while they are not on. Far less work then trying to destroy their base block by block and you can just run into their base naked once you make hole for no risk. If you make their base invincible then you have the issue above as I described.
Again not completely irrelevant. It was used as a griefing tool in PvP which was why it was changed. it would basically destroy peoples bases rendering them unusable, yet it worked great in PvE for building lakes, pools, and other bodies of water. So PvE lost functionality to prevent PvP exploits
Well for starters an established player will have armor, access to a stash of weapons, a fortified base, meds, etc. Then their is the more complicated issue of a grace period. Is it physical time, play time, a combination of both, etc. However thats not the argument. That type of balance doesn't effect PvP, but it does take away from resources that are needed to actually finish the game which is why PvP is pretty much on the backburner until after the game is done.
Again your not thinking of the entire picture. Your fixated on one thing which is damage which is common for people who only care about PvP.
Their is block damage, healing, armor, and dozens of other stats to think. It's also not always clear cut if someone is in a PvP or PvE scenario. Healing to full health with 1 medkit is great in PvE, not so great in PvP when its less balanced. Being able to resist damage with armor skills is great in PvE, but not balanced when in PvP people are fighting in a totally different style.
Heck even if they have seperate stats for PvP and PvE damage now you have SKILLS affecting those stats differently. So now every skill that effects your weapons, block damage, stamina, etc have to be rebalanced and have alternative values that work with the PvP values instead of the PvE values. Plus some skills are completely overpowered for PvP and would need major rebalancing and aren't really able to be differentiated between PvE and PvP.
So again, I posed 1 hypothetical way to easily grief someone that took 30 seconds to come up with. Your "solution" introduces invincible bases and a complete rewrite of how the game logic has to work that effects both PvP and PvE. So perhaps there is a reason why no game in the history of gaming has been able to have balanced PvP WITHOUT changing PvE along with it.
The only way to keep it balanced would basically be to have 2 completely different sets of xmls for PvE and PvP with customized skills, damage, buffs, spawning, enemies, etc and then have to lock a server into either PvP or PvE. However even that poses a massive issue as you've now doubled the potential amount of bugs, doubled balancing, require changes to be replicated, and added a ton of complexity and room for errors all for PvP.
Plus again, the most basic fact that cannot be disputed is people are ♥♥♥♥s. No matter how hard you try to balance it someone will min/max, find exploits, or do whatever they can to disrupt other people just for the sake of being a ♥♥♥♥. Hence why so many people don't want PvP even forgetting about all the PvE changes.
Last edited by a moderator:
RestInPieces
New member
In mmos where they are trying to achieve absolute balance. I never had to quote myself twice before, but since you insist, here you go on what I "admitted" when talking about 7dtd:
And like I predicted in my first post, you hang on to your examples of games that failed or got their PvE ruined by PvP, completely ignoring the other reasons I mentioned in that post.
With the player 2 not being in the player's 1 party, him not being able to use anything inside the claimed territory or open/close doors for that matter, that doesn't sound like a problem at all. In fact I would think it's a bit silly if someone attempted that. You haven't put much thought on your problem it seems.
Since I replied to your issue above, what I said in my previous posts does stop the player from breaking into someone's base while he is offline so... your point?
Not completely irrelevant? It could be used as a griefing tool anywhere, co-op included, as long as there were people, and had to be changed. You want to make it sound like it was "changed for the sake of pvp, ergo pvp harms pve", but that is not the case.
Play time ofc. Yes, on that I agree. I also mentioned it on one of my first posts. As I said, there are way too many things that need to be fixed before one contemplates doing something with PvP. Still, some extra scripts won't exactly waste resources or developer time like new content would.
For the most unfortunate deduction of the year, this one takes the cake!
The medkit isn't exactly an end-game item, but let's presume that the old player has a lot more of these and can use them in abundance. It's not exactly instant to swap your weapon and use a medkit and then switch back again to a weapon and while this does give the old player a large advantage (it should, since the player consumes a valuable item), the new player's odds at killing him would still be quite decent.
It's not like I have any idea how their code is (I would like to see parts someday to understand some things better), but pvp damage not being affected by skill modifiers should not be an issue at all. So no skill would really need to be rebalanced.
You didn't, as explained above. Do you think my solutions where more well-thought? It's not like I get paid you know. But I never said I had all the perfect solutions to the perfect system anyway. If I did I would be working for NASA etc - that's why I wrote "feel free to add to it" in the OP. Your problems until now though are very easily counterable.
As said above skills shouldn't have to change - there is no reason, since their modifier can just not apply (personally I would prefer if it did apply but anyway). Still, you didn't explain how spawning, enemies and all these other things must change. As for the "ton of complexity", I wouldn't call a few scripts that complex and doubling the amount of bugs in the game - I think you may be exagerating a bit.
And that explains your unconditional hate for PvP. Bad experiences - and I can't really blame you (as I said in the OP). I have many too, but I was fortunate enough to gain great ones as well despite me being a mostly PvE player. If you check my post history you will realize that. The idea of this thread is to eliminate these behaviors through mechanics on the already existing PvP. But instead of you being indifferent (because of not caring), or trying to enrich it (because you may want it to change for the better), you fight against it. The point that devs shouldn't waste time to improve it is valid, but I never said they should prioritize it over anything in the first place - the opposite in fact.
Last edited by a moderator:
KingSlayerGM
New member
My favourite pvp server is called "Let's kautsch". It is a modded server with very active admins and moderators. I would say that the experience is VERY close to civilized pvp. There is no bounty system unfortunately, but there are very strict rules enforced constantly.
Destroying bases is forbidden, collapsing buildings is forbidden, killing fresh spawned players is forbidden.
In my 2 years with them, there has been very little of this...
Last edited by a moderator:
Gazz
Fun Pimps Staff
@ RestInPieces
The simple fact of 3-4 page argument posts should tell you that it's not simple. =P
Other than that I can't see anything obvious standing in the way. Well, maybe world size/generation.
Oh, and probably the voxel terrain, too.
But other than that...
I'm not saying it's impossible but to claim that it would be easy or only changing one value... is optimistic.
The simple fact of 3-4 page argument posts should tell you that it's not simple. =P
Yeah, nothing but damage, weapon/armor/gear/item availability and scaling, skills type and progression, enemy staging, harvesting/building mechanics, how claim blocks and teams work.
Other than that I can't see anything obvious standing in the way. Well, maybe world size/generation.
Oh, and probably the voxel terrain, too.
But other than that...
I'm not saying it's impossible but to claim that it would be easy or only changing one value... is optimistic.