PvP in World of Warcraft, Again
I just had the most ridiculous "discussion" ever in general chat in World of Wacraft. I was killed 4 times in a row in Hillsbrad Fields by several players 20 to 30 levels above me (I was a level 23). Is there anything wrong with those players killing me on a whim? No, certainly not. It's the PvP server and players will do whatever they can do. But it propted me to ask this question in general chat: "I've been killed several times in a row by high level players where I had no chance because of the level difference. What is the point of the PvP server, again?"
Several people started saying nasty things to me, so I clarified that I was not criticizing the server, nor did I want to leave. I am actually really asking what the point is. Surely it's not the constant high vs. low level fights because no skill is involved and the outcome is determined. I postulated that perhaps once you reach the cap, there is lots of meaningful pvp (at level 60 vs. level 60). I expected answers such as "yes that's true, and also there are these other good things..."
But no. I think one person attempted an answer, but only came up with a single sentence saying that it increases the danger of the area, and therefore the challenge and the fun. That's a start, but 8 other people answered questions I didn't ask at all, that they assume I was asking.
"Do you think level 60s on the other side should hold your hand and give you candy?" one person said. "Uh no, that is not what I asked. Of course they should do what they do, the question is what is the point of the pvp server? I'm not saying there is no point, I want to enjoy it."
Then people said it was silly to criticize a system that isn't done yet. "I never criticized anything, I'm actually honestly asking what the point is."
"It sounds like you are criticizing with such sarcastic comments."
"I have said nothing at all sarcrastic, or with hidden meaning. It is a real question."
Then someone trash talked me for being "just a lowbie" because I'm only level 23. I guess they didn't take into account my 17 other characters (not kidding) over the last 11 months.
It was all really quite amazing. These players were all so ridiculously defensive, that they took my question as a disguised attack, even though it was actually a real question. I was hoping to use their insights to defend the seemingly pointless state of the pvp server...but even the pvp players themselves could hardly offer one shred of explanation to the sad state of affairs.
Before you go writing me letters about this, you should realize that I am Mr. Competition, and that there's a 99% chance that I'm more interested in player vs. player conflict and that I'm a better player than every single one of those fools who just insulted me. But...the kind of competition I've seen so far has been totally uninteresting.
I think a good answer on their part might have been, "Level 60 vs. 60 pvp is meaningful. Other equal level pvp is meaningful, and you'll be more likely to find it another zone, such as Ashenvale (someone did say this, though not in such a friendly way). High vs. low pvp where one side has a 0% chance of winning is not meaningful, and will be greatly reduced by the upcoming honor system that discourages such things."
A strange thing has occurred to me, though. I actually think there will be more meaningful pvp on the NON-pvp server than the pvp server! To lay the groundwork for this seemingly crazy arguement, let's first look at the things that will be the same on pvp and non-pvp.
1) Both systems allow consentual duels between people in your faction (yeah, yeah I know that's not "real" pvp to most. I'm just listing the things that are the same.)
2) In both systems, the starting areas (where you are for about level 1 to 20) do not allow you to be attacked unless you voluntarily do something to turn your pvp flag on.
3) Both systems will feature "battlegrounds," areas marked as pvp only that will feature big battles between horde and alliance. You can earn "honor points" by participating in this kind of pvp. The better your faction (horde or alliance) does, the more honor points go to your side, and in turn, to you.
4) In both systems, you can attack all enemy NPC's including quest givers, merchants, and travel-enabling NPC's. After doing this, your pvp flag is on and you can be attacked by anyone on the other side. (On the pvp server, you could be attacked regardless.)
So what's different?
1) On the non-pvp server, after you go to an enemy town and attack some npc's, you won't be able to attack random people checking their in-game mail or sitting around afk. You will only be able to fight real combatants...people who have decided to defend the town.
2) On the pvp server, you can attack and constantly be attacked, by people of such radically different level that you have no chance.
3) On the pvp server, you can attack and constantly be attacked by people who happen to be a close enough level to you, that a meaningful fight might occur.
People interested in 1) and 2) have cloaked themselves in a false veil of "competition." They are not seeking actual competition, but instead mindless fun. Mindless fun is fine, but don't pretend you are doing anything remotely interesting or "skillful." Now, 3) actually is interesting. That's what it's really all about. But if you take all the pvp interactions that occur on a given day on the pvp server and the non-pvp server, the percentage of interactions that falls into category 3 (interesting pvp between similar level enemies) must be embarassingly low. The percentage on the non-pvp server I would expect to be much higher, because people are consensually entering combat, and will presumably tend to do that when there is a remote chance that an interesting battle might happen. They would tend not to do it when the battle is so lopsided, that even entering into it is a farce, and waste of time.
There is definitely hope that the honor system will save the day on the pvp server. Even then, though, I have to believe that more interesting pvp would happen in a more consensual system, just by the nature of it. Or at the *very* least, a much better ratio of "real pvp" to "pointless, predetermined" pvp would happen under the more consensual system. I'll reserve judgment until the honor system is unveiled, but here is my current plan:
I will play on the non-pvp server (pve, aka the standard ruleset). I will engage in pvp at times when it's interesting, which includes raids on enemy towns and participation in battlegrounds. And I will start a guild to do this. Hopefully the people in the guild will be at least one of the following: a) civil and interested in game design, perhaps even game designers themselves, and b) are incredibly, ruthlessly good at games. Open Beta starts very soon. So who's with me?
--Sirlin
Several people started saying nasty things to me, so I clarified that I was not criticizing the server, nor did I want to leave. I am actually really asking what the point is. Surely it's not the constant high vs. low level fights because no skill is involved and the outcome is determined. I postulated that perhaps once you reach the cap, there is lots of meaningful pvp (at level 60 vs. level 60). I expected answers such as "yes that's true, and also there are these other good things..."
But no. I think one person attempted an answer, but only came up with a single sentence saying that it increases the danger of the area, and therefore the challenge and the fun. That's a start, but 8 other people answered questions I didn't ask at all, that they assume I was asking.
"Do you think level 60s on the other side should hold your hand and give you candy?" one person said. "Uh no, that is not what I asked. Of course they should do what they do, the question is what is the point of the pvp server? I'm not saying there is no point, I want to enjoy it."
Then people said it was silly to criticize a system that isn't done yet. "I never criticized anything, I'm actually honestly asking what the point is."
"It sounds like you are criticizing with such sarcastic comments."
"I have said nothing at all sarcrastic, or with hidden meaning. It is a real question."
Then someone trash talked me for being "just a lowbie" because I'm only level 23. I guess they didn't take into account my 17 other characters (not kidding) over the last 11 months.
It was all really quite amazing. These players were all so ridiculously defensive, that they took my question as a disguised attack, even though it was actually a real question. I was hoping to use their insights to defend the seemingly pointless state of the pvp server...but even the pvp players themselves could hardly offer one shred of explanation to the sad state of affairs.
Before you go writing me letters about this, you should realize that I am Mr. Competition, and that there's a 99% chance that I'm more interested in player vs. player conflict and that I'm a better player than every single one of those fools who just insulted me. But...the kind of competition I've seen so far has been totally uninteresting.
I think a good answer on their part might have been, "Level 60 vs. 60 pvp is meaningful. Other equal level pvp is meaningful, and you'll be more likely to find it another zone, such as Ashenvale (someone did say this, though not in such a friendly way). High vs. low pvp where one side has a 0% chance of winning is not meaningful, and will be greatly reduced by the upcoming honor system that discourages such things."
A strange thing has occurred to me, though. I actually think there will be more meaningful pvp on the NON-pvp server than the pvp server! To lay the groundwork for this seemingly crazy arguement, let's first look at the things that will be the same on pvp and non-pvp.
1) Both systems allow consentual duels between people in your faction (yeah, yeah I know that's not "real" pvp to most. I'm just listing the things that are the same.)
2) In both systems, the starting areas (where you are for about level 1 to 20) do not allow you to be attacked unless you voluntarily do something to turn your pvp flag on.
3) Both systems will feature "battlegrounds," areas marked as pvp only that will feature big battles between horde and alliance. You can earn "honor points" by participating in this kind of pvp. The better your faction (horde or alliance) does, the more honor points go to your side, and in turn, to you.
4) In both systems, you can attack all enemy NPC's including quest givers, merchants, and travel-enabling NPC's. After doing this, your pvp flag is on and you can be attacked by anyone on the other side. (On the pvp server, you could be attacked regardless.)
So what's different?
1) On the non-pvp server, after you go to an enemy town and attack some npc's, you won't be able to attack random people checking their in-game mail or sitting around afk. You will only be able to fight real combatants...people who have decided to defend the town.
2) On the pvp server, you can attack and constantly be attacked, by people of such radically different level that you have no chance.
3) On the pvp server, you can attack and constantly be attacked by people who happen to be a close enough level to you, that a meaningful fight might occur.
People interested in 1) and 2) have cloaked themselves in a false veil of "competition." They are not seeking actual competition, but instead mindless fun. Mindless fun is fine, but don't pretend you are doing anything remotely interesting or "skillful." Now, 3) actually is interesting. That's what it's really all about. But if you take all the pvp interactions that occur on a given day on the pvp server and the non-pvp server, the percentage of interactions that falls into category 3 (interesting pvp between similar level enemies) must be embarassingly low. The percentage on the non-pvp server I would expect to be much higher, because people are consensually entering combat, and will presumably tend to do that when there is a remote chance that an interesting battle might happen. They would tend not to do it when the battle is so lopsided, that even entering into it is a farce, and waste of time.
There is definitely hope that the honor system will save the day on the pvp server. Even then, though, I have to believe that more interesting pvp would happen in a more consensual system, just by the nature of it. Or at the *very* least, a much better ratio of "real pvp" to "pointless, predetermined" pvp would happen under the more consensual system. I'll reserve judgment until the honor system is unveiled, but here is my current plan:
I will play on the non-pvp server (pve, aka the standard ruleset). I will engage in pvp at times when it's interesting, which includes raids on enemy towns and participation in battlegrounds. And I will start a guild to do this. Hopefully the people in the guild will be at least one of the following: a) civil and interested in game design, perhaps even game designers themselves, and b) are incredibly, ruthlessly good at games. Open Beta starts very soon. So who's with me?
--Sirlin
