[rockstar]

I have to say, I am personally imagining a very large arena (if its used for pvp then I definitely wouldn't consider that a waste of space) with multiple entrances. There could be random events that take place in the arena. For example, like in the movie gladiator when the lions are unleashed from their cages beneath the sand. Perhaps an extra powerful version of those sand crawly monsters could pop up randomly (if the arena has a sand-looking floor, as I tend to imagine). Or the arena could have traps that pop up randomly. Additionally, in a duel game with many players, it might be possible to add objectives. For example, a king of the hill style duel involving multiple players. You earn points for staying alive in the arena and killing other players. Whoever stays alive the longest / kills the most players is declared 'king of the hill' or whatever. I remember an arena in WoW that has a chest in the middle. Whoever is strong enough / lucky enough to open it gets to keep its contents as a prize. I think there are lots of exciting and random possibilities for an arena, many of which would be impossible to implement in open world pvp.

If the word 'arena' makes you uncomfortable, then maybe instead of a coliseum style arena, there will be a 'battlefield,' a big chunk of randomly generated map (like the blood moor) where pvp happens.

I'm a huge fan of pvp in D2, in all its flawed glory, but I have to admit I'm excited that blizzard is looking at reworking pvp for D3. There are lots of possibilities that would be fun, and add much more to the experience than just killing other players.

This post has been edited by rockstar: 06 November 2009 - 01:16 PM

[JNM-illiquid]

I haven't read all the replies, just some of them, but I seriously agree 100% with the original poster. if they apply this to diablo3 I'll be so happy :) This really needs to be submitted to blizzard it has my full support!!!

[KaylinL]

Yea, I didn't pick the title. I'm not a fan of PvP myself. I can do 350 baal runs in a sitting if I put my mind to it, but I can't pvp for more than a few minutes without needing a strong drink. In any case after reading all your replies I grabbed a few quotes to reply to. emilemil1:

Quote

Avoiding PKers is pretty much equal to a timer that appears every once in a while that will kill you if you don't leave the game when it hits zero. Would that be a fun event?

Heh, well some like it, it's not for me. Obviously Blizzard didn't like it too much when it was forced anyway, remember "this game will end in 90 seconds?" That sure didn't make a return in LoD. Lucion:

Quote

There is a built in assumption in several places in this thread that PvP characters are superior to non PvP characters and so should enjoy better rewards.

Pretty much. I mean I didn't want to make them needed rewards, but really if you're a normal character you're fighting monsters, if you're a PvP character you're fighting monsters AND player at the same time. This has nothing to do with organized dueling. PK + PvM is harder than just PvM. Rockstar:

Quote

If a player chooses non-pvp upon character creation, I'd like to see the ability to change to pvp later on. It is entirely conceivable that someone new to the game might feel a little overwhelmed by the pvp option at first. Of course, a few months later they could be high level with powerful gear and looking for an additional challenge. I know its not that difficult to make a new character, I've made dozens, but not all of us have the time or dedication to create and level multiple characters.

Seeing the services Blizzard offers WoW players this would likely be a paid service, but I don't see why it would be a bad idea. Some items are Bind on Equip IIRC. Rockstar:

Quote

One concern about this system is the invitation to join pvp combat given to players who are in a party with someone who has been hostiled by another player. I'm wondering if this invitation should have a time limit.

I totally agree it should have a time limit. Either that or maybe when the entire other team (or single player) has died and not yet engaged in hostile activities the choice could be deactivated. Something like that in any case. PvM(guest):

Quote

I love how people say PvM are the majority or how the majority hate PvP or PK. WHo ran these statistics? How new are they to Diablo? How long have they played? Im just curious where you guys are getting your info. The developers who seem to know absolutely nothing about Diablo?

Blizzard ran these statistics at Blizzcon. I am unsure on the specific numbers ask Bashiok. Most players do not like random PvP. There are fewer WoW realms with fewer people for PvP, there are few people who wanted it at Blizzcon, I am guessing they are using this data.

[rockstar]

Quote

Heh, well some like it, it's not for me. Obviously Blizzard didn't like it too much when it was forced anyway, remember "this game will end in 90 seconds?" That sure didn't make a return in LoD.

Sorry, this is totally off topic, but I totally forgot about 'the game will end in 90 seconds' after diablo died. It was a pretty good griefing mechanic. I didn't use it a lot, but a few times I'd join an open game where a bunch of lowbies were trying to work their way through the catacombs and kill andariel. I could quickly kill diablo, and end the game while they were still in the middle of their quest. Pretty lame, I know.

This thread is a really great compromise between people who like the D2 pvp system and those who don't. If it works, there is pks for those who want it, and none for those who don't. There is plenty of room for improvement over the D2 pvp system, but as flawed as it may be, the fundamental problem is still the griefers. As KaylinL pointed out in the original post, even if pvp were removed entirely, these people would still be around, and there will most likely be a variety of ways for them to ruin an open game.

Anyways, nice thread, very thought provoking.