I'd like someone at Netdevil to confirm it, I read in an interview it was being spoken about using the WAR approach to battlegrounds. Each ship has a jumpdrive and when there is room in the BG it activates and jumps you into the instance.

Well it was implemented in WoW because open world PvP caused lag and it has destroyed open world RvR in WAR. So are they going to do it in JG:E and why? If so I may not buy this game as everyone will be grinding BGs and there'll be no open world PvP.

Be patient; don't jump to conclusions. Give the game the benefit of the doubt before you decide

Wow, I sincerely hope not. If it does I won't be playing it.

 Yea I think they call it "Battlespace" and it features stuff like 50 vs 50 where you have to destroy the opponents' capital ship

yeah, but it wont give rewards that you can use in open pvp.. so battlegrounds would be more like practice area.. iirc

Yes that's a great idea to have that kind of PvP, but its ridiculous to put it in instances where its just going to be no big deal. If it were a capitol ship in the open-space that your Squad could own, and people could attack it and you would have to defend it...it would be amazing and great to have...even if the attackers had to have some scheduled time to attack.

If its just some scenario instance where people will constantly be doing these pointless fights just for the fun of it, it will lose its novelty/thrill and just because possibly something that needs to be farmed like a WoW BG. Like I said in that other thread, PvPers don't just want PvP..if that were the case we'd be playing Counter-Strike or something. We want a PvP based MMO...where PvP is an integral part of the game.

For example a station/planet/capitol ship that could be under attack and captured/won by clans, would be a way to have organized PvP and gauge yourself against other clans or people would be an amazing feature. It would be in the open world/space, a large part of the game could be based off of it, and the PvP would be integral to it. If it was just some Battleground that went on all day long back and forth, it wouldnt be serious, nobody would care about it. Even if it was some RvR control point objective, it would have no thrill or seriousness to it. PvP needs real accomplishments, PvPing just for the sake of you vs. another person gets old fast.

Jumpgate Classic had similar thing. It was called a simulator.. but fighting there didnt create adrenalin like in Open Space where it mattered.. It wasnt much of a problem, it wasnt exciting as open space so people didnt spend most of their time there.. especially as it didnt give out rewards. It was mainy used for aiming practice and testing ships as you could equip any ship and equip in simulator available in game.

If JGE does make it more like BG or whatever those autoattack games call it, then it will hurt open space combat, as it will draw people away.

Thats true...if its just something for fun with no rewards, and open PvP was far more worthwhile when it came to PvP progression, it would be allright.

Even WoW's open world PvP got the adrenaline pumping, but it's never happened in a BG, and arena matches are never solid enough PvP to count on.

Well Netdevil DEVs have spoken about having evey ship equipped with a jumpdrive so you can instantly jump to a battleground. Netdevil seems to think that Warhammer scenarios are a good idea for JG:E, don't ask me why since it screwed up that game! WoW only did it because the server couldn't handle the large open world battles taking place.

If this happens open space will become desolate and Netdevil haven't decided what rewards there'll be in scenarios. If they do implement it I'll wait until a month or two after launch before I consider a purchase, pulling this kind of crap to chase the big numbers is just gay in my opinion!

Originally posted by Agricola1

If this happens open space will become desolate and Netdevil haven't decided what rewards there'll be in scenarios. If they do implement it I'll wait until a month or two after launch before I consider a purchase, pulling this kind of crap to chase the big numbers is just gay in my opinion!

I disagree. This will only be the case if the benefit/rewards from instanced PvP outweight the benefits/rewards from open PvP. WAR's problem was that scenarios originally rewarded players much more than oRvR ever did, so people just queued for the scenarios and ignored the fun of keep sieges, etc.

And... it's 50 vs. 50 vs. 50 according to a recent interview. Three Nations, remember ;)

Keeps and sieges don't have to be the only form of open world PvP content the basic form of PvP should always be open world ganking. Its a lot more thrilling, it gets the adrenaline pumping, and it's that much more satisfying when you know the person you killed was in the middle of a quest or something, has a death penalty and will likely have to come back a long distance. Graveyards/ghosts are the stupidest idea...the fact that you can come back to life at the exact spot your char died is just ridiculous, no matter how long it takes.

Look at the top 5 most subscribed MMORPG's right now:

1. World of Warcraft

2. Lineage

3. Lineage 2

4. Aion (could possibly be in the number 2 spot, its subs won't be published until Q2 2009, but its been announced over 550 000 subs in Korea alone).

5. EVE

4/5 of those are PvP based, all based on open world PvP content, no scenarios, no instances, no minigames, no alternate server choices, etc...They are all based on Open world PvP, whether its fighting over missions/PvE, raid bosses, or castle sieges for clan rewards...the mechanics and systems in the games are geared towards open PvP style objectives.

WoW is the exception, but I think its pretty obvious that WoW's success has little to do with the quality of gameplay, and a lot more to do with the Developers name, funds and advertising...And practically every game that tried to emulate WoW has failed.

You could also consider GW on that list...Both Lineage 1/2, Aion, EVE and GW have similar PvP systems, the difference being GW is more about GvG and arena battles, because there is no open PvP...while those other games are all based on Guild PvP for things like Castles (or Systems in EVE), Raid bosses, PvE areas, etc...Aion is also a RvR faction game, but the individual Guilds are still fighting for control of Castles and to win raid bosses, because they get greater rewards when their clan wins, opposed to the rest of their faction. And the basic form of PvP that people will be doing 24/7 in all those games, is just running around ganking. WoW's basic form of PvP is Battlegrounds lol, why not just play Counter Strike?

If they just have a simulator, or some sort of instanced PvP with no rewards at all, then I won't really mind. If they start handing out rewards for instanced PvP, then I probably won't play.

Is the problem the existence of instanced PvP or is the problem rewarding PvP.

People assume that battlegrounds are bad which is provably false.  The problem in WAR was that BGs were far more regular and rewarded very well.

In Jumpgate Classic people do instanced PvP in the simulators for no reward at all (other than bragging rights).  Granted that has no structure other than launching your ship in simulator mode so its pretty informal.  Yet that is not viewed the same as the world PvP and you can't destroy someones ship in the sim, yes you destroy their virtual ship but it has no real loss.  World PvP has ship loss and system control etc.  If they were stupid enough to do what WAR did and include simulator victories as part of what determine control of a system then I would be with OP and start ringing the DOOM bell.

The real problem is when they make BGs and world PvP reward for the same stuff.  They are not the same and should not give the same stuff.  This was one of the major flaws in WAR.  In fact WAR is riddled with this flaw all over the place.  They have tons of activities all of which interfere with each other and then they are somehow surprised when the players actually figure out which is more efficient and gravitate towards.

Players may not exactly be stupid in that they are capable of quickly and intelligently figuring out the practical points of a system the developers create, but it seems that many of them are not smart enough to figure out that Battlegrounds are completely neutral just like anything else.  The problem is the dumbass designers who sabotage their own content.  In general most players are very practically capable, assuming they are stupid because they are usually pretty poor at the abstract analysis is a common mistake of developers.  In point of fact the players, in general, are far better at understanding the practicallities of a game than the dev.  They usually have it down in a month or two the devs work on it for years and rarely have that fine of an understanding of the game at release.  And that is what happened with WAR and BGs they had absolutely no effing clue about the practicalities.

You could add BGs into EvE and it would be perfectly fine as long as it played no part in 0.0 space and only rewarded ISK at a similar rate to generic missions.  The majority of EvE players are in empire space anyway.   Seriously people don't kid yourselves.

Same thing can be said for solo versus group content debate.  Its a false dichotomy created by designers who mash things together when they shouldn't.  Anyone who has played City of Herores should realize this by now.  Most of these conflicts are BS created by artificial and hamfisted restriction or reward conflicts.  Either through rewarding special items, not differin the gameplay, or creating one way to get everything much faster via one route.

There is a reason DDO is not a solo-friendly game.  Some fanboys will lie and tell you its a solo game.  I personally even think the solo experience can be very fun and challenging.  But the content is the same and you rate/quality of rewards is about 1/4 that of grouping.  Of course there is a conflict there.  Solo is a waste of time for any reason other than fun.  Which is terrible for an RPG that you may have to choose fun over progress/rewards.  Thus DDO is not a solo-friendly game.

Conversely CoH is a solo-firendly game.  You can do almost everything you want solo.  It rewards almost the same.  And the instances are different.  You can choose to do either solo or group.  You can progress similarly either way so there is no reason to disqualify one or the other and they both offere a different experince to take advantage of.

Now contrast this to WAR BGs.  They operate in the same way DDO does for soloing versus grouping.  At least in the first 3 months of WAR's release.  Any time you went and did RvR instead of a BG's you were basically get rewards at about 1/4 the rate of dedicated BG use.  So people start to feel that RvR is a waste of time.  I like to solo in DDO but doing so on a level 10 character feels like a vast waste of time and makes the idea of doing it a bit depressing.  Same thing in WAR a number of people would have done RvR but it was a waste of time.

If instead WAR had operated more like CoH than the only issue is would there be enough people?  Well like I said already the majority of EvE don't even PvP much, they stay in empire space.  Anyone believe that everyone must be PvPing is either ignorant or dishonest. 

What tends to happen is just like the forced grouping crowd people get paranoid about what other people are doing and that a lack of population might impact their favored way of playing.  Their solution is to put on crazy and silly restrictions to force everyone into that style so that their fears are calmed.  But this is simply wrong.  For each activitiy you merely need an adequate population.  EvE clearly has an adequate population of people willing to duke it out in 0.0 even though a majority of their players are not doing it.

This issue is quite obvious when you consider that 90% of the people grinding BGs in WAR hated doing it.  And I am not exaggerating that number.  Even people who liked BGs hated grinding them and did it anyway.

When people are doing activities they hate, it is always always always because they are getting "paid".  So look at the payment paradigm not the activities.  Don't let yourselves get fooled.  There were more than enough people to be playing BGs and do RvR at the same time.  Yet this didn't happen.  Nor did Mythic ever do something as obvious as only allowing a certain number of BG matches to occur at one time.  You had tons of people do something they hated and not taking advantage of an activity that many of them actually said they liked.

-people didn't go do something they said they liked even when they were doing something everyone knew they hated

-Mythic made no attempt to balance populations.  Niether by faction nor by activities.  Due to the instanced nature of BGs population management is not hard to implement

-According to Beta testers the RvR was an after thought.  Keeps were added roughly 8 months before release. 

Just put the pieces tofether.  The BG issues with WAR had nothing to do with BGs themselves.  It had everything to do with Mythic.  BGs are fine when implemented properly and with context. 

Don't let Mythic fool you.  The problem was not BG's.  Thier RvR was simply an inferior product with inferior rewards and everyone knew it.   Of course BGs cut into RvR.  The RvR was crap and BGs rewarded exactly the same stuff far quicker. 

There was no differentiation and there was attempt to make sure there were enough people to do either one.  The mere existence of BGs is not what caused WAR problems.  You have to understand that a large portion of the backlash against BGs was by DAOC type people who automatically assumed RvR was better because they were stuck on DAOC RvR, much like those sad SWG vets will never stop living in 2003.

But even those DOAC vets now mostly realize that WAR RvR is just crap.  You see their analysis was "There is this awesome thing in RvR and yet everyone is play BGs even though they hate it.  BGs must RvR by their  very nature"  But that is false because WAR RvR != DOAC RVR.  They assumed that because it was Mythic and they called it RvR it was mostly the same maybe with some refinements in mechanics.  But it wasn't.

The real case is : "There is this crappy thing in WAR RvR and yet everyone plays BGs.  Oh yeah that is because they reward alot more and the RvR has no strategy and piss poor population issues.  Duh why would anyone play crap when there are at least ok BGs avaialable".

At the release of WAR everyone wanted and thought about the RvR in an idealized DAOC sort of way.  But the reality is that it sucked.  And the BGs did not cause this, they merely exposed it.  And the out of whack rewards made the problem worse in that it made the BG grinders seem neurotic.  However they were simply following the rewards and everyone knew it.

Rewards like Titles, and lottto tickets for "Fun" ships ect. would be OK for battlegrounds...

But Something like this would be better haveing open areas and open pvp.. my 2copper

Originally posted by IstvanND (JGE developer)

 

At present - and I mean to make it very clear that this is still subject to change - the server design includes an area that is consensual-PvP-only, and an area that is open-PvP.   This is somewhat like the old Jumpgate Classic system of regulated and unregulated space, or EVE's system of high-security and no-security space.  We will also have PvP arenas, an equivalent of staged battleground "games" - not unlike a traditional multiplayer FPS environment.

In the consensual-only areas of space, both parties must set flags to participate in PvP.  This is a big departure from the JGC system.  These consensual-PvP areas will, understandably, have much of the PvE content.  However, there will also be optional PvE content (really, all the PvE content in the game could be considered optional - but on the other hand the same can be said about the PvP) available in the open-PvP areas, though balancing that PvE content with the need to not interfere with the open PvP nature of those sectors is still in some question.  I believe it is safe to say that the game can be played however one wants, without anyone being forced into a PvP path (by being "ganked") or PvE path (by a need to grind) not of their choosing.

We are designing with this hybrid server ruleset in mind, but this does not rule out having open-PvP-only servers, or no-PvP servers.   Also, but this is my opinion only, I would imagine that our arena-based (consensual) PvP would be available on all servers, as the arenas are decoupled from the rest of the game environment.

As far as measures to avoid the slide toward "easy mode", that is a question that would be better answered by our Producer.

I hope this response at least partially addresses your questions.

An answer that might relate tto the OP's question.

Originally posted by Ekibiogami

Rewards like Titles, and lottto tickets for "Fun" ships ect. would be OK for battlegrounds...

But Something like this would be better haveing open areas and open pvp.. my 2copper

One thing people need to understand is that the simulator is an absolute necessity.  This is not an MMORPG.  You really do need to practice.

I understand that JGE will probably have auto docking.  But go play JG classic and try docking with out the auto-dock mod then try it on a really exensice ship.

Anyone who has not played JG classic is most likely very much missing out on just how easy it is to crash due to pilot error.  Also fighting other pilots in the simulator is a necessity or you will get slaughtered.

If people don't want formal BGs with rewards that is fine.  But getting rid of simulation PvP would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I cannot empahsize enough that if JGE has anything even clsoe to similar the crashing mechanics of JG classic that you will thank your lucky stars for a simulator. 

Seriously its completely different than EvE you can crash extremely easy if you are not paying attention.  Asteroids kill you in JGC unlike in EvE.  You have to do your orbit manually while you mine and if you are off and run head on into at even medium speed that is it you blow up.  Ship gone.  Cargo gone.

Flying in EvE is much much safer than JGC.  In eve you click you a Jumpgate and say "Warp".  IN JGC you have to fly through a four pointed triangle and hit "J" while inside the energy field.  If you collide with a point you crash. Ship gone.  Cargo gone.  Every single jump is dangerous, pilot error can easily cause a crash, you need to get used to approaching things obliquely.

if you fly JGC like you fly in EvE you crash ALOT.  Same thing can be said for dogfight but with a different and less obvious variation.  Believe me you NEED the simulator for dogfights and normal flying.

There is an entire layer of stuff astracted out of an RPG that people seem to be forgetting about.  JGC requires a facility for practice.  I really cannot stress this.  The game would utterly fail without it.

Now put this into the context of BG's.  If BG's are like say an american football or a soccer game.  Then that actually helps out world PvP.  Football and soccer are group oriented activities tha trequire group tactics and coordiation.  They operate off of match play.  They are, in a way, practice for WAR.  Imagine trying to play american footbal as some African guy who has never seen a game like that.  Sure maybe you played soccer that is pretty popular the world round, but at first you will be pretty lost even if that soccer experience helps it won't teach you how to run Wider Reciever routes and catch balls with your hands instead of kicking the ball.

There is an entire effect that is absent from RPG based games, because these only require coordination not real practice. 

I think we can all agree that the way thing get rewarded could completely screw up world PvP in a lot of different ways.  But I suggest to you that BGs that operate like sports would actually be very beneficial to a game like JG.

I think that a lot of people on this site are applying RPG thinking here.  Which is fine for gneralized stuff.  But because of this you are forgetting that RPGs abstract out a lot of stuff and basically put it onto autopilot.

The only reason you would have a simulator in an RPG is to test out builds and strategies.  Its nice but not really necessary because so many other things are on auto pilot.  Guild Wars has a practice area for example. 

But in a flight sim like JG this simulator type stuff becomes a necessity or you just wind up flat out dying over and over doing regular things.

This game is not EvE in a dog fighter.  Even if the infrastructure of EVE was copied verbatim.  Which they could do since they both operate on a jumpgate based instance strucutre with specific "paths" to get around.

EvE is an RPG and JG is not.  JG may try to give a lot of "auto-pilot" type stuff which does not exist in the classic version.  But either way its still flight sim based and you will most likely be lost and fumbling really badly without a simulator for individual flying mechanics and some kind of match play for coordinated flight squad play I think there will be serious problems.  In Eve yo ucan set a course and jump where you like within 5 minutes of starting the game up the first time.  In JGC you will probably crash your ship the first time you try.  It really is different.

I think most of agree that rewarding a match play BGs like WAR did would be bad for the game.  And when you think about it that would be stupid.  No country ever get control of a place by winning a soccer game.  Unless you count the riots ;).

nice reply Gestalt, too bad so many eve fanboys will skip the reading.. auto-pilot FTL

Yes but I failed to see how Battlegrounds and instanced style PvP over open world PvP has anything to do with auto-pilot or ezmode features...Battlegrounds is more EZ mode.

Originally posted by Calind0r

Yes but I failed to see how Battlegrounds and instanced style PvP over open world PvP has anything to do with auto-pilot or ezmode features...Battlegrounds is more EZ mode.

Because it will be a circus and a comedy of errors if you do not provide the environment people use to prepare so that they can perform World PvP in a competent manner.

In Eve as long your tactics are sound you will perform well.  You might get owned for some other reason, but you will perform as well as might be expected.  And just about anyone will be able to execute those tactics.  It is merely a matter of knowledge. 

In JG even if you have a sound tactical plan there is absolutely no reason to believe you can execute it if you have not tried it out multiple times in the simulator.  Part of this is match play.  That is what match play is about.  That is why it is "playing".  People seem  to conviently forget that playing is simply a way to make practice non-boring.

In an RPG situation that is fine as you do not need to hone your skills merely your build and your knowledge and your ability to execute such things on the fly.  In JG you will need to hone your skills.  That means you will need practice and constant practice.  If you take time off you will become less accurate merely because you have not practiced aiming in a while.  RPGs do not work this way.

There is a whole other level considerations when it comes to providing repeatable and fun content both for PvP and PvE.  One of the reasons to do so is to actually increase the quality of World PvP. 

Originally posted by Calind0r

 

Look at the top 5 most subscribed MMORPG's right now:

1. World of Warcraft

2. Lineage

3. Lineage 2

4. Aion (could possibly be in the number 2 spot, its subs won't be published until Q2 2009, but its been announced over 550 000 subs in Korea alone).

5. EVE

 

LMAO, what's Eve doing in that list?   !!!

Eve <  Club Penguin.

Why is Lineage above Runescape?

Where is Dofus?

Where is Final Fantasy?

Warhammer, Conan, Lord of the Rings....

Don't get me wrong with 250K subs Eve is a game with a PvP model well worth discussing, but er it's not exactly a top ten title.

Eve is an RPG?

Really?  Where are all the interactive NPC's? Where are all the quests, sidequests and storyboards? Eve is very poor in the RPG department. Very poor.

Runescape and Dofus don't have subscriptions. FFXI is under the 100k mark. AoC was over a million, but it's since declined to 100-150k subs. Warhammer is under 200k and losing subs fast.

And to the poster above that, have you ever played a PvP based MMORPG other than EVE?

I dont have any problems with battle ground type instances as long as there are NO rewards, Zero.  WAR showed us that even if you make world pvp vastly more rewarding, as long as battlegrounds are convienient, quick and give some ok rewards, players will flock to them.  Having them as sort of a practice area seems good.

Battlegrounds flat out destroyed WAR.

It seemed like a good idea. It was logical that it would be good idea.

But when the game went live. It started to be apparent:

1. People flocked to obviously easier to get into and better rewarded Battlegrounds - instead of world PVP

2. As result world became empty

3. People got bored of battlegrounds since such instanced PVP is allready offered for free in other games (like GW)

So Battlegrounds infact eaten themselves up. Destroying sadly WAR

Hopefully NetDevil payed attention to WAR, and learned the lesson !

Would be unprofessional of me to mention DarkSpace here.

Oh well :-(

Originally posted by Agricola1

I'd like someone at Netdevil to confirm it, I read in an interview it was being spoken about using the WAR approach to battlegrounds. Each ship has a jumpdrive and when there is room in the BG it activates and jumps you into the instance.

Well it was implemented in WoW because open world PvP caused lag and it has destroyed open world RvR in WAR. So are they going to do it in JG:E and why? If so I may not buy this game as everyone will be grinding BGs and there'll be no open world PvP.

If true. It will be greate. BG works well in WOW and would work well here too.