Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bandit_Black

Every MEGA is going Colonies

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Jack Shandy said:

First you call him a PVEer, then go on to assume he builds PVE bases on PVP servers, even after he says he doesn’t like the looks of his own PVP bases.

No true PVP player would even contemplate playing PVE, the mere  thought of that is repulsive. Clearly he is mostly a PVE player that dabbles in a bit of PVP here and there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/22/2019 at 11:10 PM, Captain Jack Shadow said:

Reading these comments, I am now fully aware why so many of the hardcore PvPers that I know, won't come to play this.

First and foremost, offline raiding does not make you hardcore.  Being in the Mega that attacks a small company, does not make you hardcore.  Purposely joining a small company to fight on the underdog's side...that's hardcore.  Some of these kids just don't know what hardcore is.

Second, hardcore PvPers don't play games that force you to whack trees and stones for days, to be able to build a ship to go out and fight with.  They don't play games that reward time invested, over skill, and this game does exactly that due to the BPs, and grinding.

This game is going to suffer what EVE suffered, and had to create some fixes for.  People will not want to join the game when the launch happens.  Not unless there is a pre-launch wipe.  So expect legacy server, and new server, so that they don't have to anger anyone with a wipe.  But that just delays things.  People will join, make a ship, hit the enemy ship, do little damage, and get panels stripped by the first hit from the enemy.  Then they will leave.  Word will spread that you can't compete as a new company, so new companies won't come.  I've seen it before in games like this.  Every game like this suffers after a short while, because the players demand to be rewarded for their time and effort, but then this means new companies can't compete.  Within 3 to 6 months, the Megas will be running Mythical ships, meaning one or two good Brigantine can hold off an entire fleet of Vanilla ships that a new company makes.

EVE had to address the issue, and appears to have done so, but growth was still stymied.  And then there is WWIIOL: Battleground Europe, where after a short period of playing, you have access to all the best weapons.  It's still going after 18 years.  Why?  Because it is well balanced.

It's the nature of the beast.  I have said it before, and will say it again, Meta gamers kill games.  They never learned as kids that games must have balance in order to thrive.  I learned as a kid that it worked best when we divided into even teams...evenly skilled.  Kids today don't understand the concept, so they instead, try to divide into a team with the best players, so they can roll the other teams.  The problem comes when the other teams get the message that they will be rolled, and so they go find something else to do.  So who do the guys who grouped into the best team play against?  Nobody.

While I was in the Navy, me and my best friend were very good at pool.  Together, we could beat any two of our friends.  So while out with friends, or at a party, we would instead have others pair up with us, and we would play against each other.  This was more fun for everyone, including those who just spectated.  It was also more fun for us.

This game doesn't even have hardcore PvP.  It has bears, and unrealistic ship builds that shouldn't even float.

 

This only proves that those here who claimed that the Megas didn't bother with the small companies, are full of crap.  The truth is, they are afraid to be exposed for what they are.  They fear having to go up against other Megas.  It proves that they are not hardcore.

This whole post is be it consciously or subconsciously crying "Factions".

On one hand, you are opposing the zerg concept and metas, as many of us do. On another you are asking for even teams, and the ability to be at even with old guilds right away at start of your career.

Think about it. What you are really suggesting, is factions.

MMO players will embrace this right away. I am not sure how the sandbox survival types would welcome factions, myself included.

 

 

Edited by gnihar
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this game went to factions I'd be out.  Want no part of that and is the antithesis of how this game was marketed. 

 

I also find it interesting it seems that most people do not know that the devs held meetings with most of the top companies and the changes in Colonies are in part due to that.  They mentioned possibly changing company limits and the devs were told this would easily be skirted.  They did not seem to care when that was mentioned. 

The changes being made to the claim system is something "megas" wanted.  I hate that term because I don't think most "megas" don't deserve that title but whatever.  If this game ever has 40k people in it the current definition of a mega will change drastically. 

Edited by DocHolliday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

No true PVP player would even contemplate playing PVE, the mere  thought of that is repulsive. Clearly he is mostly a PVE player that dabbles in a bit of PVP here and there.

Alot of people clearly don't know what pve means then. As they seem to be filled with people too scared to play on actual pvp servers.  And me.. 😉

As for Hardcore pvp or pve really.. I always thought it meant 1 life.. when you die, you start at 0.

So it makes sense that fewer playing against alot would be indicative of a hardcore group.   It is often said that hardcore also refers to the amount of time, someone plays.  In that case I am extreme hardcore.. however, I am also extremely shit at pvp.  I can just about hit a barn door at 5 meters with a cannon.. beyond that, I can't even see the barn door..

I actually prefer logistics in games, building, taming, feeding, maintaining, designing etc.  I'm as happy on a pve server as I am on a pvp one.  That said, I don't like people stealing my poo.. and in Ark, people used to do that alot.. and my Eggs!! Seriously, never really bothered me. (yes it did)

Only thing about Pvp I don't like is awkward nastiness.  People swearing at me over voice comms or laughing at their seeming impunity to play intelligently.  Otherwise I hate taming stuff, only for someone else to get it killed 5 minutes later.. usually by doing something, it was never intended for. (which is why I dislike teams, groups, companies etc)

Factions is alot like playing solo/small teams in a mmo type map.  I've never really liked this way of playing, although it works fine for arcade pvp, ie log in, run around, shoot stuff, log out.  For survival/persistant, I don't think it would work very well, unless we just had pvp arenas and you could pick your ship, armour etc maybe get put automatically into teams or possibly join as a team, which can work in a faction like game.  Most often I'd find it was usually 2-3 groups playing on one team with 2-3 solo noobs.  (ie me) Rather than a cohesive, balanced, trained group who knew everyone and exactly what they're doing.  ie Eve, Wow etc..

Edited by Martyn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

No true PVP player would even contemplate playing PVE, the mere  thought of that is repulsive. Clearly he is mostly a PVE player that dabbles in a bit of PVP here and there.

You’re making that many false statements about PvP I wonder if you even play pvp. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Martyn said:

Alot of people clearly don't know what pve means then. As they seem to be filled with people too scared to play on actual pvp servers.  And me.. 😉

As for Hardcore pvp or pve really.. I always thought it meant 1 life.. when you die, you start at 0.

So it makes sense that fewer playing against alot would be indicative of a hardcore group.   It is often said that hardcore also refers to the amount of time, someone plays.  In that case I am extreme hardcore.. however, I am also extremely shit at pvp.  I can just about hit a barn door at 5 meters with a cannon.. beyond that, I can't even see the barn door..

I actually prefer logistics in games, building, taming, feeding, maintaining, designing etc.  I'm as happy on a pve server as I am on a pvp one.  That said, I don't like people stealing my poo.. and in Ark, people used to do that alot.. and my Eggs!! Seriously, never really bothered me. (yes it did)

Only thing about Pvp I don't like is awkward nastiness.  People swearing at me over voice comms or laughing at their seeming impunity to play intelligently.  Otherwise I hate taming stuff, only for someone else to get it killed 5 minutes later.. usually by doing something, it was never intended for. (which is why I dislike teams, groups, companies etc)

Factions is alot like playing solo/small teams in a mmo type map.  I've never really liked this way of playing, although it works fine for arcade pvp, ie log in, run around, shoot stuff, log out.  For survival/persistant, I don't think it would work very well, unless we just had pvp arenas and you could pick your ship, armour etc maybe get put automatically into teams or possibly join as a team, which can work in a faction like game.  Most often I'd find it was usually 2-3 groups playing on one team with 2-3 solo noobs.  (ie me) Rather than a cohesive, balanced, trained group who knew everyone and exactly what they're doing.  ie Eve, Wow etc..

You are mostly right. The thing is the one life and you die and start back at the beginning is actually what the true definition of hardcore actually is.

that isn’t necessarily saying you are wrong, it is mainly telling @Bullet Force that he doesn’t know what hardcore really means.

but no, pvp or pve isnt die and start over or hardcore.

Edited by Realist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

No true PVP player would even contemplate playing PVE, the mere  thought of that is repulsive. Clearly he is mostly a PVE player that dabbles in a bit of PVP here and there.

Just saying, there is no such things as a true pvper in this game.

Its not Apex thats for sure, but it does have to have some timesync, otherwise it might get a tad boring on the open seas. And if you classify a cannon bear war a true pvper? man your twisted.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

You've let the cat out of the bag with that one Mr PVE.

You don't seem to understand.  I went to a PvE server, at a time when I was concentrating on Star Citizen, and thus not able to concentrate on defending in PvP.   This allowed me to do leave the server for days, with no repercussions, or guilt for not doing my part.  It also allowed me the ability to actually explore making aesthetic bases.  Art.  Something you seem unaware of.  You are one dimensional, and your back stabbing ideology shows that to be true

 

16 hours ago, Jack Shandy said:

First you call him a PVEer, then go on to assume he builds PVE bases on PVP servers, even after he says he doesn’t like the looks of his own PVP bases.

He's not very quick on the uptake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, gnihar said:

This whole post is be it consciously or subconsciously crying "Factions".

On one hand, you are opposing the zerg concept and metas, as many of us do. On another you are asking for even teams, and the ability to be at even with old guilds right away at start of your career.

Think about it. What you are really suggesting, is factions.

MMO players will embrace this right away. I am not sure how the sandbox survival types would welcome factions, myself included.

 

 

I actually suggested factions in the Two Sides thread.  Why not?  Not as the only mode, but as a possible mode, for the people who want a faster paced game, with more PvP, and less grinding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you guys got a dictionairy somewhere that your pulling all these made up definitions of things out your asses? 

 

its all perspective , whats hardcore to me is different then what it means to you and different from how someone else defines it. its all subjective.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ljbendele said:

you guys got a dictionairy somewhere that your pulling all these made up definitions of things out your asses? 

 

its all perspective , whats hardcore to me is different then what it means to you and different from how someone else defines it. its all subjective.

Actually 2+ decades of games makes a dictionary up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Howabout.. you rename pvp in atlas to Survivor.. and call it that instead? Survivor.  No pvp involved.  If someone attacks you, you fight back, if you see something you need, you take it. If someone gets in your way you kill or disable them.  How you get there, doesn't matter. So long as you win, they lose. Leave PVPERS for cod like games or arena games.

Edited by Martyn
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Martyn said:

Howabout.. you rename pvp in atlas to Survivor.. and call it that instead? Survivor.  No pvp involved.  If someone attacks you, you fight back, if you see something you need, you take it. If someone gets in your way you kill or disable them.  How you get there, doesn't matter. So long as you win, they lose. Leave PVPERS for cod like games or arena games.

That makes not sense at all. I don't think i have ever heard the term pve or pvp even used in any arena shooter, maybe the odd shooter with some kind of coop mode. But the term pvp and pve is mainly used in mmo's. I mean you can rename pvp to what ever you want i don't think anyone else is gonna stop using the term PvP.

Edited by Pant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Bullet Force said:

No true PVP player would even contemplate playing PVE, the mere  thought of that is repulsive. Clearly he is mostly a PVE player that dabbles in a bit of PVP here and there.

I wonder where you get resources for farming ships, blueprints for better parts, weapons, cannons, armor, where you levelup your ships, maintaining you crew, leveling up etc. Oh, you are doing PvE for that 😉 

In Atlas you need to do PvE to be able to PvP effectively. Just like in ARK.

Edited by Willard
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pant said:

That makes no sense at all. I don't think i have ever heard the term pve or pvp even used in any arena shooter, maybe the odd shooter with some kind of coop mode. But the term pvp and pve is mainly used in mmo's. I mean you can rename pvp to what ever you want i don't think anyone else is gonna stop using the term PvP.

Actually it was games like Ultima Online and Diablo, Everquest that coined the terms.  We originally called it PKing.  Player Killing. Later it was termed as Player V Player or Player v Environment.  Apparently a non PVP game requires an name as well. The simple lack of distinction should be enough.

But this isn't a map or arena where people run around specifically to just hunt, kill other players or capture a flag or to score points.

You also have to build your character up, learn new technology, upgrade skills, gather resources to build weapons for siege and ship combat.  And eat, drink etc.  Much like in Ultima Online.. so perhaps we used the wrong term back then and now. Perhaps we should have termed Uo as a Survivor game.  Wether a game is mmo or mp with a few players, factions or freestyle doesn't really matter.  People seem to think that there's a specific definition to what pvp entails, there is.  You kill other players.  How you get to that position is what most people are discussing, not the "meaning of what pvp is" but how you do it.  Do you do it with rules? Or is it really purely freestyle.. if you just play as you see fit, surely you're gonna end up ruining your own gameplay as eventually the losers will quit and you'll have noone to fight.  It's all part n parcel of the entire environment.  So you could equally term a pvp game as a pve game.  Only killing players is part of the environment.

It also has a lot to do with political contentions of now versus then, many of us are over 30 or over 50.. some are only 15-20.  We all have different views due to our experience of what and how something should be done and why.

Much of what people argue over, they actually agree with, they just misunderstand or misread what is said.  And then repeat it exactly themselves.  And it spirals as an argument.  If you laid out all the replies in this thread on a board.. much like all the replies in all of the threads.  You'd find there's only 2-3 viewpoints being discussed, yet we have 7 pages in this thread alone.  What we should have is 2-3 posts per thread with alot of people either agreeing or disagreeing with them using the little emotes.

Edited by Martyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Martyn said:

Actually it was games like Ultima Online and Diablo, Everquest that coined the terms.  We originally called it PKing.  Player Killing. Later it was termed as Player V Player or Player v Environment.  Apparently a non PVP game requires an name as well. The simple lack of distinction should be enough.

But this isn't a map or arena where people run around specifically to just hunt, kill other players or capture a flag or to score points.

You also have to build your character up, learn new technology, upgrade skills, gather resources to build weapons for siege and ship combat.  And eat, drink etc.  Much like in Ultima Online.. so perhaps we used the wrong term back then and now. Perhaps we should have termed Uo as a Survivor game.  Wether a game is mmo or mp with a few players, factions or freestyle doesn't really matter.  People seem to think that there's a specific definition to what pvp entails, there is.  You kill other players.  How you get to that position is what most people are discussing, not the "meaning of what pvp is" but how you do it.  Do you do it with rules? Or is it really purely freestyle.. if you just play as you see fit, surely you're gonna end up ruining your own gameplay as eventually the losers will quit and you'll have noone to fight.  It's all part n parcel of the entire environment.  So you could equally term a pvp game as a pve game.  Only killing players is part of the environment.

It also has a lot to do with political contentions of now versus then, many of us are over 30 or over 50.. some are only 15-20.  We all have different views due to our experience of what and how something should be done and why.

Much of what people argue over, they actually agree with, they just misunderstand or misread what is said.  And then repeat it exactly themselves.  And it spirals as an argument.  If you laid out all the replies in this thread on a board.. much like all the replies in all of the threads.  You'd find there's only 2-3 viewpoints being discussed, yet we have 7 pages in this thread alone.  What we should have is 2-3 posts per thread with alot of people either agreeing or disagreeing with them using the little emotes.

I remember PKing as a term for killing a player that wassn't flagged for PvP and the term PvP was used for consensual fighting between two or more players. But all this is beside the point. Why should we name PvP survivor? PvP means exactly what it is, one player fighting another player, why would we need to complicate it with some term that doesn’t even relate to the action? What’s even the problem of calling PvP for PvP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem isn't in the term, but in the description of what it means in this specific game.  This is what the main part of the debate seems to be, what is pvp in atlas, it isn't what is pvp in any other game.  It seems to me that pvp in atlas needs its own term and Survivor seems most appropiate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Captain Jack Shadow said:

I actually suggested factions in the Two Sides thread.  Why not?  Not as the only mode, but as a possible mode, for the people who want a faster paced game, with more PvP, and less grinding.

Well, speaking only for myself, and free spiritas I am, I would probably dislike being ruled by some “big organizer” or organizer group who would be calling for action and alone decided about times and places, perhaps even deign to order around. Any constellation where I am not a boss or my own master and leader and sole organizer of myself and others, is proven to fail with me. I know, it is my problem, but obviously I was born alpha and free and will die as such.

Objectively though, this is a proven concept that works in all non sandbox mmos, and would probably severely cut the significance of many zerg companies, basically creating 2 ultra zerg factions.

Edited by gnihar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Martyn said:

Actually it was games like Ultima Online and Diablo, Everquest that coined the terms.  We originally called it PKing.  Player Killing. Later it was termed as Player V Player or Player v Environment.  Apparently a non PVP game requires an name as well. The simple lack of distinction should be enough.

But this isn't a map or arena where people run around specifically to just hunt, kill other players or capture a flag or to score points.

You also have to build your character up, learn new technology, upgrade skills, gather resources to build weapons for siege and ship combat.  And eat, drink etc.  Much like in Ultima Online.. so perhaps we used the wrong term back then and now. Perhaps we should have termed Uo as a Survivor game.  Wether a game is mmo or mp with a few players, factions or freestyle doesn't really matter.  People seem to think that there's a specific definition to what pvp entails, there is.  You kill other players.  How you get to that position is what most people are discussing, not the "meaning of what pvp is" but how you do it.  Do you do it with rules? Or is it really purely freestyle.. if you just play as you see fit, surely you're gonna end up ruining your own gameplay as eventually the losers will quit and you'll have noone to fight.  It's all part n parcel of the entire environment.  So you could equally term a pvp game as a pve game.  Only killing players is part of the environment.

It also has a lot to do with political contentions of now versus then, many of us are over 30 or over 50.. some are only 15-20.  We all have different views due to our experience of what and how something should be done and why.

Much of what people argue over, they actually agree with, they just misunderstand or misread what is said.  And then repeat it exactly themselves.  And it spirals as an argument.  If you laid out all the replies in this thread on a board.. much like all the replies in all of the threads.  You'd find there's only 2-3 viewpoints being discussed, yet we have 7 pages in this thread alone.  What we should have is 2-3 posts per thread with alot of people either agreeing or disagreeing with them using the little emotes.

believe it or not, the term PKing became popular from an MMO called Runescape, (Tibia before that.) Atlas would do well as to take some pointers from runescape.  there a lot of things in runescape that keep it goin 20 years after launch that would work excellent in atlas. duel arena, betting, rare items you get from special events and anniversaries that can be sold at player auction and so much more. (I still have my first red party hat i cracked open from a christmas cracker) 

Edited by Enki Anunnaki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Enki Anunnaki said:

believe it or not, the term PKing became popular from an MMO called Runescape, (Tibia before that.) Atlas would do well as to take some pointers from runescape.  there a lot of things in runescape that keep it goin 20 years after launch that would work excellent in atlas. duel arena, betting, rare items you get from special events and anniversaries that can be sold at player auction and so much more. (I still have my first red party hat i cracked open from a christmas cracker) 

Runescape came out years after uo.

Uo was released in 96/97, Runescape in 2001.

Edited by Martyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't really matter which game has precedence, I never played runescape, it was all the "nerds" who played that.. so I stayed away from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martyn said:

Runescape came out years after uo.

Uo was released in 96/97, Runescape in 2001.

First time I seen the term PK was in Diablo, iirc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh.. Diablo was plagued by cheaters tho, so pking with maxed out characters was expected.  If you went for that sort of stuff.  Killing BigD repeatedly was almost as much fun tho. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...