Which all of those are non-essential, and arent actually skills so are still not neccessary. Agreed wasting such skills when not really needed can degenerate on what you really need unless you get it from big-set bonuses(sets and runewords).
Not really sure what any of this is supposed to mean, but I'm glad we agree on something apparently?
And the point is, any PvP that is built to do PvP can pull damage to handle PvM like nothing, so it isnt skill, its built.
Yes, that was along the lines of the point I was trying to make. Glad we agree. In D2, if you can deal lots of damage to players, then you can also do lots of damage to monsters. The game uses the same mechanics to calculate damage either way.
PvP is definitely more of a challenge. All of my characters were capable of standing there and tanking monsters for extended periods of time (max resists, max damage reduce, plenty of hit points, and a nice block rate if applicable.) It didn't really matter if I stood there like an idiot while fighting monsters, most of them couldn't really hurt me.
You can't really get away with doing that when fighting other players, even with all the best gear (try it!) You have to know when / where to move in order to avoid your enemies attacks while still being able to launch your own attacks. Call it whatever you want but I know some people who would consider this to be 'skill.'
PvM requires a completly build with emphasis on other aspects if you want a true PvM and not PvE. There is diff between Pve and PvM its the PvM that require more skill cuz your building them to be master of one task, not guide-built tank of everything. True a tank of everything is probably stronger than a true PvM, bu were talking skill to create one, and the truth is, the guides are there to build PvP and reading directions isnt a skill
I'm talking like PvE = killing monsters and PvP = Killing players. Either way you gotta deal damage to make them die while mitigating or avoiding their attacks so you stay alive. These are basic game mechanics.
If you're concerned about guides, I'm sure there are guides to PvP, PvE, and MF alike. If you're turning up fewer guides to PvE, that is probably because PvE is less of a challenge, and they are not as needed.
I never said there wernet PvM guides, but next to noone uses them. You have to be really lowly to go for a PvM build guide, those are most things that are figured for yourself, the reason PvP guides are used are to be the best, how do you prove your the best PvM? Most people dont use PvM guides, so their build are usually more authentic than PvP
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
I never said there wernet PvM guides, but next to noone uses them. You have to be really lowly to go for a PvM build guide, those are most things that are figured for yourself, the reason PvP guides are used are to be the best, how do you prove your the best PvM? Most people dont use PvM guides, so their build are usually more authentic than PvP
Didn't realize we were debating build authenticity!
Maybe no one uses the PvM guides 'cuz no one needs 'em. After all, as you said, 'You have to be really lowly to go for a PvM build guide, those are most things that are figured for yourself.' Are you supporting the idea that PvP is more challenging? It sure seems like it. What are we even arguing about?
Just so long as it doesn't pervert the reason we have the Diablo game. It's an epic PvM game with a rich PvM storyline.
Some say that PvM builds suck against PvP builds or whatver. It is irrelevant to the call for PvP exclusive areas in D.
So long as PvP areas are pure battle arenas with nil storyline and nil gear / gold / experience drops then the only reason you'd go to the place would be to pose off your uber PvP build against someone else's lame build.
No PvP player, who honestly just wants a fair fight, would be asking for anything more.
And with PvP in a special arena, the D game will be cleaned up of PKers and most of the potential for griefing in D3.
Yeah, give D its own special PvP arenas so that the PvM players can get on with the job without distraction.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
So we've got over the problem of colour in D3. Great. Now let's argue about everything else not yet set in stone and help make this game simply great! Game on.
Do you not get the idea of Diablo 3? First off, backup, D2, everyone still plays, more for the game than PvP, and D3 if crating IMMENSLY more randomized events, areas, and occurances to create evne more interect in the general game. Even the randomization of quests means you can play through 10times and still have quests youve never done. Its being done so u can JUST play the game IF thats what you want, and not be tiered of it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
Because the random quests at a demo, that is even smaller than the REAL demo will be, are wayyyy way less than will end up in final, and to even TRZY to argue the quests from the trial at blizzcon, is just stupid. and if ANYONE can even GET tiered of playing Diablo 3 before 98% of the popl who will play it, you arent a real fan, and I think you shouldnt even play. If i had that demo, id be doing that constantly for weeks untill I had every single droppable item IN that demo.
And if you can find 1000 pvp people to our so little base of PvM why are 95% of games PLAYING the game, and 5% duel games? Even figure in games where 1-3 asses come in to ruin it, ATLEAST bare bottom least, 80% are still playing the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
Ok then, if your bitching about the demo, ur not a real fan. And ummm the duel games are always full becasue there so few, more dont need to be made, the few who do it fill the 3 gamees up. And btw, any current cow level games, the players in them outnuber PvP alone at anytime. There are more cow gfames at one time then PvP, and the rest are still PvM, And I dont know where your off thinking that PvM usually arent full, most of them ARE unless there bullshit games, sorry.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
So they can get on the job of getting bored in a few months and only want to PvP cause thats all there is left to do in Diablo.
I've been playing Diablo for years and the only reason I keep coming back is because of PvM. PvP was always horribly unbalanced and in most cases is over so fast it's really nothing short of a one-shot kill, although of course the exceptions are marvelous to watch.
Lets all get happy for no randomness in Diablo at all!!!! Generic PvM all the way!!! yay!!!
That's a weird thing to say seeing as most of what they've announced that is highly randomized is relating to PvM. Actually, all of it was since they've announced nothing of what they are actually doing with PvP.
Arenas are trash and remove any sort of randomness or adrenaline that was provided by Diablo 1 and 2's system.
Because dueling in the front of the encampment in Diablo II was so random and refreshing?
This is, and always will be, an argument of tastes. Some people like PvP, some PvE, they want different conditions and rules for their game, etc. But there's one thing the PvP crowd needs to understand:
Diablo has always been, and Diablo III is being, aimed at the PvE audience, not the PvP audience. Any PvP audience Diablo had was always a derivation of the PvE audience and generally an extension of holes that the developers forgot to cover up properly because the game was simply too new at that time.
If you're requesting for a game with randomized disbalanced items, disbalanced skills, and a generally sandbox approach to pretty much everything to be a PvP game, you're kind of creating an oxymoron. PvP games have always been relatively limited, and these games are Guild Wars, Nox, most FPS games, StarCraft, EVE, and many others. They have strict rules to make sure everything is balanced and even and fair. Diablo was never on the list, and the only people who think it's on the list are people who got bored of Diablo II's PvE after playing it for 10 years. Disbalanced PvP, albeit fun for some small amount of people, are really not interesting for anyone outside of the diablo PvE fans group, so making Diablo a PvP-geared game is simply not in Blizzard's best interest...
Your my favorite seth, I really must say.
Horribly unbalanced you say? How so? Tell me a build, ill tell you how to kill it.
There's no need. I know who you are and how you argue.
Highly randomized pvm huh...I didn't see that at all in the d3 demo, I saw about as much randomized as d2 is.
There's actually more, but because of your heavily non-factual basis of arguing, I could say that there's a "D" in "Diablo" and you would say there isn't.
Which is still good but won't last long. These quests like I said better get real good cause I found myself just bypassing em after doing em once.
Good, then we won't have to see you around for long.
Having the ability to duel in front of the encampment, or anywhere outside of town made D2 pvp random.
No it isn't, that's just called choice. And I have never been in a PvP game- well, there was one, outside of Lut Gholein- that have not been in front of the Encampment. Why? Because it's easy to get to, it's a common field that everyone accepts to go to to PvP, and it's a short distance from duel to respawn point.
There was no randomness in it. None.
In d3 thus far if its arena either A ) You leave game and make an arena duel which is not random,
That's not what random means, although I get where you're going.
In d2 I can hostile you and kill you anywhere, thus random. You don't know where I am coming from thus random.
That's a good point, props for that, actually.
And let's take Blood Moor for example, am I coming from CP or from gate?
I would argue that the overwhelming majority of PvP games come straight from camp and that it would render that argument invalid. If the game was setup better to allow for more diversity- as it is, since all the areas are linear, you just have to watch your front and back, and that's only two ways- I would agree with you.
Hmm random...lets look at Arena...im coming from..oh wait..im in an arena im right in front of you...SO RANDOM!!!!
I'm not even arguing for the inclusion of arenas and never have, but how do you know that they wouldn't work with multiple access points? You don't.
Unless they make some huge ass arenas which is a waste of space
Well, since you're claiming that nearly everyone plays Diablo for PvP, I don't see how you can make that argument and stay true to your own beliefs. If everyone likes PvP so much in Diablo like you're saying, it wouldn't be a waste of space.
considering they can easily allow PvP or not within the areas outside of town
However, yes, I would generally agree that since not as many obviously care about PvP as much as PvM so far in Diablo III, it would be a waste to do all that extra crap and just do PvP from outside town like usual.
Umm sorry to say thae largest majority of D2s players are old faitfulls that have been playing for years. And random killing isnt "I can kill you anywhere" becuase people go places and try to hide, not random at all, the randomness, is finding out hwere somone is, hositling them and thenn suprising them when you come through the waypoint after the cooldown, and it isnt right.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
Im glad you can pick me out of the crowd of 3 by now. I am shocked tho..no ban yet, but im sure its cooking.
Oh, no. We're working on something even more fun for you. You're going to be going places.
You're right, most pvp games are right outside of encampment. Aside from the PK games 99% of duels happen in the Moor, but what if im fighting 6 people at once and use the strategy of picking them off 1 at a time while i back peddle to Stony field..don't see that every day now do you?
The section I highlighted is my point exactly. It's not random because not many people, as in, 99% (to use your imaginative percentage, as well, I guess) do not do that. The opportunity for it is there but since the overwhelming majority don't do it it makes itself not random. And furthermore, that isn't random in my opinion, it's simply strategy. Random in this case would be, to me, using a skill with a random effect or damage attribute.
I feel this will depend on realm, and how good of a dueler you got and what circumstances. If you are being town guarded on, most would take the CP. Depends on circumstances but you prove a point.
East or West. I've never really seen a difference. I guess the good duelers are all just hiding in private games with their peers. I tried to get in to dueling but it really just, forgive me if this is offensive, bored me. I've never enjoyed it in any game except for 007: Nightfire and I felt that Diablo II's PvP system was weak at best.
It would be cause everyone would like to just PvP wherever, whenever, however. I would like to restate my belief, PvM is crucial to Diablo, always has been. PvP has been in the underground of development for um ever, and has also been a major part of End game and during game content for almost any player. Killing monsters is fun, but not as dynamic as dueling other players. Thus from my years of playing which is great and I am sure yours are great as well, I have noticed a trend of MF or PvM for gear to make a PvP. Not a majority to play and MF to get better at PvM.
I would be the opposite of your last statement, but other than that, I think that is a very agreeable way to put it.
There is no set area for griefing now, so PvP can be all over. Yea alot are done in the traditional areas that everone is used to, but it goes everywhere, every act, and people figure out where you are. PvP is excellent, griefing is not. Now as to differences in PvP by realm, idk ive never nbeen able to get into a relam other than my own, but I dont think there would be that much difference. Its not like one part of the world is more violent than the other, everyone has human nature, and a game is a game, people everywhere get on to play.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
Yes that does solve it, I said that a long time ago, and ive even asked if a fame or rep system could be available to keep small check on shittalkers, but your still going to be an ass by taking out innocent firneds of shit tlakers, youll get yours.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Nobody can go back and start a new beginning, but anyone can start today and make a new ending.
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.
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!!!
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:
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:
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:
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:
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):
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.
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.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Not really sure what any of this is supposed to mean, but I'm glad we agree on something apparently?
Yes, that was along the lines of the point I was trying to make. Glad we agree. In D2, if you can deal lots of damage to players, then you can also do lots of damage to monsters. The game uses the same mechanics to calculate damage either way.
PvP is definitely more of a challenge. All of my characters were capable of standing there and tanking monsters for extended periods of time (max resists, max damage reduce, plenty of hit points, and a nice block rate if applicable.) It didn't really matter if I stood there like an idiot while fighting monsters, most of them couldn't really hurt me.
You can't really get away with doing that when fighting other players, even with all the best gear (try it!) You have to know when / where to move in order to avoid your enemies attacks while still being able to launch your own attacks. Call it whatever you want but I know some people who would consider this to be 'skill.'
I'm talking like PvE = killing monsters and PvP = Killing players. Either way you gotta deal damage to make them die while mitigating or avoiding their attacks so you stay alive. These are basic game mechanics.
If you're concerned about guides, I'm sure there are guides to PvP, PvE, and MF alike. If you're turning up fewer guides to PvE, that is probably because PvE is less of a challenge, and they are not as needed.
Didn't realize we were debating build authenticity!
Maybe no one uses the PvM guides 'cuz no one needs 'em. After all, as you said, 'You have to be really lowly to go for a PvM build guide, those are most things that are figured for yourself.' Are you supporting the idea that PvP is more challenging? It sure seems like it. What are we even arguing about?
Just so long as it doesn't pervert the reason we have the Diablo game. It's an epic PvM game with a rich PvM storyline.
Some say that PvM builds suck against PvP builds or whatver. It is irrelevant to the call for PvP exclusive areas in D.
So long as PvP areas are pure battle arenas with nil storyline and nil gear / gold / experience drops then the only reason you'd go to the place would be to pose off your uber PvP build against someone else's lame build.
No PvP player, who honestly just wants a fair fight, would be asking for anything more.
And with PvP in a special arena, the D game will be cleaned up of PKers and most of the potential for griefing in D3.
Yeah, give D its own special PvP arenas so that the PvM players can get on with the job without distraction.
And if you can find 1000 pvp people to our so little base of PvM why are 95% of games PLAYING the game, and 5% duel games? Even figure in games where 1-3 asses come in to ruin it, ATLEAST bare bottom least, 80% are still playing the game.
I've been playing Diablo for years and the only reason I keep coming back is because of PvM. PvP was always horribly unbalanced and in most cases is over so fast it's really nothing short of a one-shot kill, although of course the exceptions are marvelous to watch.
That's a weird thing to say seeing as most of what they've announced that is highly randomized is relating to PvM. Actually, all of it was since they've announced nothing of what they are actually doing with PvP.
Because dueling in the front of the encampment in Diablo II was so random and refreshing?
Diablo has always been, and Diablo III is being, aimed at the PvE audience, not the PvP audience. Any PvP audience Diablo had was always a derivation of the PvE audience and generally an extension of holes that the developers forgot to cover up properly because the game was simply too new at that time.
If you're requesting for a game with randomized disbalanced items, disbalanced skills, and a generally sandbox approach to pretty much everything to be a PvP game, you're kind of creating an oxymoron. PvP games have always been relatively limited, and these games are Guild Wars, Nox, most FPS games, StarCraft, EVE, and many others. They have strict rules to make sure everything is balanced and even and fair. Diablo was never on the list, and the only people who think it's on the list are people who got bored of Diablo II's PvE after playing it for 10 years. Disbalanced PvP, albeit fun for some small amount of people, are really not interesting for anyone outside of the diablo PvE fans group, so making Diablo a PvP-geared game is simply not in Blizzard's best interest...
There's no need. I know who you are and how you argue.
There's actually more, but because of your heavily non-factual basis of arguing, I could say that there's a "D" in "Diablo" and you would say there isn't.
Good, then we won't have to see you around for long.
No it isn't, that's just called choice. And I have never been in a PvP game- well, there was one, outside of Lut Gholein- that have not been in front of the Encampment. Why? Because it's easy to get to, it's a common field that everyone accepts to go to to PvP, and it's a short distance from duel to respawn point.
There was no randomness in it. None.
That's not what random means, although I get where you're going.
That's a good point, props for that, actually.
I would argue that the overwhelming majority of PvP games come straight from camp and that it would render that argument invalid. If the game was setup better to allow for more diversity- as it is, since all the areas are linear, you just have to watch your front and back, and that's only two ways- I would agree with you.
I'm not even arguing for the inclusion of arenas and never have, but how do you know that they wouldn't work with multiple access points? You don't.
Well, since you're claiming that nearly everyone plays Diablo for PvP, I don't see how you can make that argument and stay true to your own beliefs. If everyone likes PvP so much in Diablo like you're saying, it wouldn't be a waste of space.
However, yes, I would generally agree that since not as many obviously care about PvP as much as PvM so far in Diablo III, it would be a waste to do all that extra crap and just do PvP from outside town like usual.
Oh, no. We're working on something even more fun for you. You're going to be going places.
The section I highlighted is my point exactly. It's not random because not many people, as in, 99% (to use your imaginative percentage, as well, I guess) do not do that. The opportunity for it is there but since the overwhelming majority don't do it it makes itself not random. And furthermore, that isn't random in my opinion, it's simply strategy. Random in this case would be, to me, using a skill with a random effect or damage attribute.
East or West. I've never really seen a difference. I guess the good duelers are all just hiding in private games with their peers. I tried to get in to dueling but it really just, forgive me if this is offensive, bored me. I've never enjoyed it in any game except for 007: Nightfire and I felt that Diablo II's PvP system was weak at best.
I would be the opposite of your last statement, but other than that, I think that is a very agreeable way to put it.
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.
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.