@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@bloodybil said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@mferr11 said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.
You've hit the nail on the head in my opinion. I don't think there's enough balance between friendly and hostile encounters. Simply because there's no reason to team up. Don't get me wrong, I love a good naval battle as much as the next guy, but there's no real reason to team up. You get a little bit more gold and rep from alliances and that's about it. There should be more things that require teaming up. World events so powerful that it would be unreasonable to attempt it as only one crew. Alliance specific quests that require two crews. Just things to encourage teaming up. Right now I'd say it's like 80% hostile 20% friendly. I'd like to see that change to 60% 40%.
I'd love stronger threats, but I think people would end up complaining about being forced to ally, and being unable to participate because social anxiety this, not enough friends that, hell some people already complain about not being able to do regular events because they insist on playing by themselves and refuse to crew up.
I am sure it might lead to more friendships and more social interactions, but I am willing to bet there will be still as many betrayals, and saltiness ensuing. In the end, no matter how strong a threat is, once it's defeated and loot is up to grab, what remains is the other crews. You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share.
@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@mrbadabing said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
The whole vision of Rare for this game was the Unknown of what would happen. That boat on the horizon if they are friends or foe.
The fundamental problem that is making the PvE focused players want PvE servers is that there is no longer an unknown. The answer is, the VAST majority of the time, that boat on the horizon are foes. The game has not done a good enough job balancing incentives between PvP and PvE to make it a question that people have to consider when they see another ship. No, that other ship is not going to help you. They are going to attack you.
The thing is, people always polarize things into 2 piles, the friends and the foes. It's not so much a black and white situation when it comes to crews, it's not good vs evil people, but a whole D&D range of alignments.
There will be aggressive players, there will be friendly players. There will be neutral players doing their things, their will be neutral players who will run, neutral people who will defend themselves. There will be aggressive players who will say GG and ally with the people they just sank, there will be friendly players that will proceed to betray others when the opportunity arises. That's plenty of unknown. Hell, even within the aggressive category, you don't know how good they are, you don't know what is their play style. Are they naval aces, are they boarders, tuckers?
There are more factors than just friend or foe, and that's part of the shared world concept, devs are putting all these different types of players in the same pot on purpose.
I mean... it pretty much is 2 categories. People that will interfere with me and people that won't. Whether they do it via being sneaky, throwing their bodies at me over and over, or pretending to be friendly only to betray me, that's one single category of people - people who are playing the game in a way intended to interfere with my playing. PvP is the "name" given that category.
The unknown of how that crew is going to interfere with me is irrelevant to the known of "that crew is going to interfere with me, so I'll just avoid them."
The friend vs. foe imbalance I pointed out earlier isn't solved by making more enemies that require teaming up to beat, because that doesn't actually make more friendly players - it shifts the unfriendly players from outright aggression to sneaky aggression. There's a million and a half (hyperbole, obviously) ways to interfere with other players, and far less ways to help them.
Obviously the alliance system gives some incentive to help, but that incentive apparently isn't enough given how many people aren't in it for gold, they just want to fight.
The fact remains that when you see a ship on the horizon there is no reason (outside of a desire to fight) to approach or let them approach you. There isn't a balance of encounters where sometimes you run into friends and sometimes you run into foes. In the 7 months I've been playing I can count on one hand the number of friendly crews I've encountered. [Edit: that includes the crews that sank me, but were cordial afterwards]
No matter how many categories, the fact remains that having all kinds of different playstyles, player intentions and motivations within the same server is absolutely on purpose and by design. Up to you to find those with similar ones or flee the ones that don't.
@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
Regarding this: "You can be forced to cooperate, but not to share."
That's actually not true. Rare can set up systems that force you to share, but they have chosen not to. Systems that reward sharing (not replacing existing things) would be an interesting mechanic. Maybe a loot type that is worth less stolen, or a loot type that rewards allies more than the crew that turns it in.
Imagine a specific event reward (akin to Ashen Skull) that you get from doing an event where the allied crews get double money from it, or the commendation is earned by having an allied crew turn it in - not your own crew. The incentive shifts from stealing it to helping someone else turn it in.
Rare can set up systems that force you to share. Rare hasn't, but that doesn't mean they can't.
They actually have via events like Stronghold Sharefest, some daily bounties, christmas gift commendations, etc. Those are simply events and not something they chose to keep permanently. Again, by design and on purpose. Also, you are given the opportunity to share, you are not forced. As always, the design philosophy is tools, not rules.
@cptphteven said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@yetanotherfox said in [Mega Thread] PvP and PvE Playstyle Discussion:
@lady-aijou 70 hours in the game, I would love a PvE option. I'm not interested in PvP at all, and I don't have time to spend 20 minutes running into a headwind in a solo sloop when a brig crew just won't quit trying to catch up. They can't, it's not fun for anyone.
At least give the solo sloop players an advantage for those wanting to avoid PvP. Like, ditch the cannons for a big speed boost.
Running into the headwind is that advantage, and as you noted it's not enough to evade a dedicated crew. What you are likely to run into here (on the forums) are experienced players who could care less that the game churns through new players, as long as they have a steady supply of ships to attack.
It sucks, and I think a PvE mode would be great - but it's not going to get a positive reception from most people here.
New players that are willing to learn the game are always welcome. The ones that have buyers remorse after getting a game which 50% is not interesting to them, and ask for changes that will impact the whole playerbase, slightly less.