Announcements

Please do not use Photobucket to host your images on this site. They will not appear for other users but instead will give an error image and a directive to go to:
http://photobucket.com/p500/
For these images to show up it would require us to pay a premium account fee of $399.00 USD/year or our users to set up paid accounts of $99/year for this service to view these images.
We will be removing all linked images to that site and we suggest you use https://imgur.com/ or other similar site instead.

Watch this space for important information on planned twitch streams, updates and more

What kind of PvP games do you want to see?

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
Steel Cobra
Steel Cobra's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 6 months ago
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 11:25
What kind of PvP games do you want to see?

Capture the Flag? Death Match, Team and single? Double elimination tourneys? King of the Hill and Turret defense? Gladiators? All of the above?

While Death Match and Gladiators were certainly fun, CoH didn't have many other arena options. I'd love to see all sorts of arena styles, so my answer would be "All of the above, plus probably the other stuff you guys think of". I'd like to see Arenas be more than just PvP matches, too. Races, concert, conventions and sporting events all happen at Arenas. Bookies that can actually take bets would be amazing.

Note: I'm not talking about Open World PvP or Base Raids. I like the idea, and I support OWPvP and Base Raids, but this specific thread is for Arena Games.

Second Note: I am well aware this is probably far outside the scope of launch-day material. At best, this is a year down the road, minor expansion stuff. Doesn't mean we can't dream.

JayBezz
JayBezz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/08/2013 - 14:54
My suggestion for PvP?

My suggestion for PvP? Instanced Player Generated Maps. Dev Generated Scenarios. Scenarios are to support rounded out gameplay from healers to tanks to DPS to Movement Speed. Also like multiple objective points based maps in PvP.

Team Scenarios:

Battle Royale: 2-4 Teams of up to 8 players combat in an Small-Medium Sized Arena. Dedicated Rez points. Points Gained by Kills. First to 30 Kills wins.

King of the Hill: 2-4 Teams of up to 8 players fight in a Small-Medium sized Arena. Rotating Rez Points. Rotating Hill Locations.

Last Team Standing: 2-4 Teams of up to 8 players combat in a Medium-Large sized Arena. One entry Rez Point. Winner is the team who has at least one player alive in the end.

Extraction: 2-4 Teams of up to 8 players Combat in Large sized Arena. NPCs need to be escorted back to team safe zone. 10 points for every successful escort. 2 points for every enemy escort defeated, 1 point for every enemy defeated. First team to 50 points wins. Rotating NPC spawn points. Dedicated Spawn point inside safe zones. (Travel Speed to search for NPCs is a big factor in this scenario).

Meltdown: 2-4 Teams of up to 8 players must fight for interacting controls that will speed or slow the HP drain of a nuclear reactor. The team with the reactor that hits zero last wins. Dedicated Consoles and reactor spaces. Dedicated Rez Points.

Solo Scenarios:

Last Man Standing - Last player alive after start of match wins.
Battle Royale - First to 15 kills wins.

I also feel there should be some SPECIAL Scenario maps created by devs for specific scenarios like Champions Online "Zombie Apocalypse" scenario. Also a PvE Survival Scenario would be fun with escalating difficulty for 2-4 teams.

The instanced scenarios should be level gated and have a "PvP Lobby" where players can meet and create their match-ups themselves IF THEY CHOOSE TO.

Finally I would hope that a few years after launch the game can create a full open map .. lets call it another dimension where doppelgangers exist.. where there is OPEN WORLD PvP. I don't want this world to affect the lore of PvE or my character (who is a hero but will be fighting alongside players whose characters could be villains in the open world). I truly want this world to be faction based more than Good vs Bad. If the infrastructure is there to do 3 or 4 factions I'd like it more than just 2. But the most important thing to me is that OPEN WORLD PvP IS ONLY AVAILABLE AT ENDGAME/MAX LEVEL. Secondarily, I want to team with who I want at this level without concern to whether my character is "Hero" or "Villain" (Thus the Alternate Dimension).

Crowd Control Enthusiast

Sentry
Sentry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 8 months ago
kickstarter
Joined: 09/03/2013 - 18:48
I can tell you what the PvP

I can tell you what the PvP population created themselves. There were some game modes in place, but popular demand from PvPers led to other PvPers holding events.

Biggest tournaments:
10 Mins
8v8 (Also 5v5) + (Premade teams)
Inspirations allowed
Kill count

Melee Dueling:
10 Mins (Later became no time limit since Incarnate make people last 2x as long)
1v1
First to die
No outside help (Inspirations/Temp Powers)
Melee also prohibited fleeing to stall the game

Ranged Dueling:
10 Mins
1v1
First to Die
Inspirations allowed
Fleeing/Kiting allowed

Level 5 fights:
10 Minutes
Free for all
Inspirations allowed
Kills

Lastly, Kickball:
10 Minutes
8v8 (2 Captains choose teammates, taking turns)
Inspirations allowed
Kills

As you can see. Kill count or First to Die seemed to be dominant. This may have been because it was hard to execute other methods of PvP, or it could be that most people who enjoy PvP just enjoy the killing aspect the most.

EDIT: I remember a player at a CoH conference talking about bank robberies, where Heroes and Villains would try to stop each other. This seemed very popular and desired, even though it never came to light. In the earliest notes MWM made public on PvP, it seems they like a lore reason for PvP.

Darth Fez
Darth Fez's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/20/2013 - 07:53
A comment I read elsewhere

A comment I read elsewhere mentioned that one of the problems people can have with a queue system for PvP - allowing for some assumptions - is that there's nothing to do but wait for the clock to run down. The thought behind this is to make the experience somewhat more immersive and social than opening a menu and then waiting. Are there (likely to be) enough people who feel this way that it would be worthwhile to have a stadium or whatnot where people can duel/PvP without being sent to the open world PvP instance? Beyond that, it would also be a place where one can go to select which arena to queue up for via doors, portals, buttons, or whatever.

- - - - -
Hail Beard!

Support trap clowns for CoT!

chase
chase's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 days 12 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/23/2013 - 11:11
League PvP

League PvP
as opposed to "Open world" or game-defined-faction-based zone PvP.

In "Open World" PvP, sides are defined by the devs, and you fight whoever you encounter from the opposing side. This has a very low barrier to entry, but very little ability to police the type of people that can make PvP unpleasant for others... and when PvP becomes unpleasant in an open world system or zone system, your only option to avoid the unpleasantness is to not enter that world/zone.

That's a shame, because it isn't that PvP was unpleasant, it was the encounter you couldn't avoid that was unpleasant.

Different people have different goals in PvP- some want to focus on narrative even during the fight- RP-PvP'ers. Some just want a "good game" without going all hardcore-- the equivalent of your friendly informal "softball teams" down at the park, some are hardcore no-holds-barred, optimize-every-way-you can professional athlete types, and some are just people that want to be mean bastards against other mean bastards.

Lumping them all together will rarely lead to anything pleasant for anyone for any significant length of time.

So- league play is similar in structure to old mmo's that let you set guild wars (not the game)

A league is organized by faction leaders. They set code-enforced options (are sides "equalized" when imbalanced, is one side taking a handicap of sorts, is there a "prize, etc, is this a "free for all" league where anyone can attack anyone, or faction based,) as well as their own informal rules that the leaders are free to enforce by suspending or kicking out members.

This way, an RP-focused league can battle other RP-focused folk without fearing the ganker disrupting things. If he does, he's kicked out. The casual PvP'ers can match up against other casual PvP'ers just looking for a good time, and the hardcore competitors will find others that appreciate the extremes they'll go to be the best. The griefers? well, most of them won't have much fun just griefing other griefers, but some will revel in the no-holds-barred ragefests with others of their ilk, and the ones that would just prefer to be asshats with no risk to themselves... well, I don't think they offer anything of value to the community, so I don't care.

A league can form and disband anytime, or extend as long as its well-managed enough for members to join the sides. You might join a league with hundreds of players and never think of ever leaving that league for months, or you might find that your particular idea of PvP fun is better found in another league.

A lot needs addressed: how to handle things when you team with non-league members in PvP-active zones, could you be part of multiple leagues at once, and if so, how, etc, but recognizing that not everyone's PvP goals are the same should mean we should stop lumping them all into "PvP or no-PvP" experiences.

Comicsluvr
Comicsluvr's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 6 months ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/07/2013 - 03:39
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

League PvP
as opposed to "Open world" or game-defined-faction-based zone PvP.
In "Open World" PvP, sides are defined by the devs, and you fight whoever you encounter from the opposing side. This has a very low barrier to entry, but very little ability to police the type of people that can make PvP unpleasant for others... and when PvP becomes unpleasant in an open world system or zone system, your only option to avoid the unpleasantness is to not enter that world/zone.
That's a shame, because it isn't that PvP was unpleasant, it was the encounter you couldn't avoid that was unpleasant.
Different people have different goals in PvP- some want to focus on narrative even during the fight- RP-PvP'ers. Some just want a "good game" without going all hardcore-- the equivalent of your friendly informal "softball teams" down at the park, some are hardcore no-holds-barred, optimize-every-way-you can professional athlete types, and some are just people that want to be mean bastards against other mean bastards.
Lumping them all together will rarely lead to anything pleasant for anyone for any significant length of time.
So- league play is similar in structure to old mmo's that let you set guild wars (not the game)
A league is organized by faction leaders. They set code-enforced options (are sides "equalized" when imbalanced, is one side taking a handicap of sorts, is there a "prize, etc, is this a "free for all" league where anyone can attack anyone, or faction based,) as well as their own informal rules that the leaders are free to enforce by suspending or kicking out members.
This way, an RP-focused league can battle other RP-focused folk without fearing the ganker disrupting things. If he does, he's kicked out. The casual PvP'ers can match up against other casual PvP'ers just looking for a good time, and the hardcore competitors will find others that appreciate the extremes they'll go to be the best. The griefers? well, most of them won't have much fun just griefing other griefers, but some will revel in the no-holds-barred ragefests with others of their ilk, and the ones that would just prefer to be asshats with no risk to themselves... well, I don't think they offer anything of value to the community, so I don't care.
A league can form and disband anytime, or extend as long as its well-managed enough for members to join the sides. You might join a league with hundreds of players and never think of ever leaving that league for months, or you might find that your particular idea of PvP fun is better found in another league.
A lot needs addressed: how to handle things when you team with non-league members in PvP-active zones, could you be part of multiple leagues at once, and if so, how, etc, but recognizing that not everyone's PvP goals are the same should mean we should stop lumping them all into "PvP or no-PvP" experiences.

Now THIS I can get behind. I don't PvP because I had several bad experiences with gang squads. Forming into leagues like this could convince me to try it again.

I remember when Star Wars was cool...a long, long time ago...

IronAlex
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 7 months ago
Joined: 10/27/2013 - 11:01
guess whoe bizack!!!..

guess whoe bizack!!!..

what i want to see in pvp is pre i13, you build your toon to the best of your stats and gear and all who cant compete just loose.. or build a new toon to compete. Now granted in a game like cox pre i13 there were some AT that shined better than others but i hope these devs can come close to a balance than the previous devs could.. for example i accept the fact that a dominator can perma hold someone with lilttle ease.. but it should be that if a melee toon hit said dominator more than half his life is going away.. to me thats balance.. and thats what it was somewhat like before i13.. post i13 a dom had shields and a melee toon fought with range.. the world was upside down!!!..

also there should be open world pvp, zone pvp, and instance pvp. because to a pvper all these a very different and all serves a different purpose and fun level. also they should be an objective focus pvp like a capture the flag or a capture the zone type deal..

hope to get to play the game soon enough!!!

was on Freedom: Iron Acension (all human pb pvp build), Iron Widow (widow pvp build), and soo much more pvp toons.. im gonna join the new game just for pvp so please make it good, preferable pre i13

jag40
Offline
Last seen: 1 year 10 months ago
Joined: 09/17/2013 - 10:51
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

League PvP
as opposed to "Open world" or game-defined-faction-based zone PvP.
In "Open World" PvP, sides are defined by the devs, and you fight whoever you encounter from the opposing side. This has a very low barrier to entry, but very little ability to police the type of people that can make PvP unpleasant for others... and when PvP becomes unpleasant in an open world system or zone system, your only option to avoid the unpleasantness is to not enter that world/zone.
That's a shame, because it isn't that PvP was unpleasant, it was the encounter you couldn't avoid that was unpleasant.
Different people have different goals in PvP- some want to focus on narrative even during the fight- RP-PvP'ers. Some just want a "good game" without going all hardcore-- the equivalent of your friendly informal "softball teams" down at the park, some are hardcore no-holds-barred, optimize-every-way-you can professional athlete types, and some are just people that want to be mean bastards against other mean bastards.
Lumping them all together will rarely lead to anything pleasant for anyone for any significant length of time.
So- league play is similar in structure to old mmo's that let you set guild wars (not the game)
A league is organized by faction leaders. They set code-enforced options (are sides "equalized" when imbalanced, is one side taking a handicap of sorts, is there a "prize, etc, is this a "free for all" league where anyone can attack anyone, or faction based,) as well as their own informal rules that the leaders are free to enforce by suspending or kicking out members.
This way, an RP-focused league can battle other RP-focused folk without fearing the ganker disrupting things. If he does, he's kicked out. The casual PvP'ers can match up against other casual PvP'ers just looking for a good time, and the hardcore competitors will find others that appreciate the extremes they'll go to be the best. The griefers? well, most of them won't have much fun just griefing other griefers, but some will revel in the no-holds-barred ragefests with others of their ilk, and the ones that would just prefer to be asshats with no risk to themselves... well, I don't think they offer anything of value to the community, so I don't care.
A league can form and disband anytime, or extend as long as its well-managed enough for members to join the sides. You might join a league with hundreds of players and never think of ever leaving that league for months, or you might find that your particular idea of PvP fun is better found in another league.
A lot needs addressed: how to handle things when you team with non-league members in PvP-active zones, could you be part of multiple leagues at once, and if so, how, etc, but recognizing that not everyone's PvP goals are the same should mean we should stop lumping them all into "PvP or no-PvP" experiences.

good stuff. I wasa pvper but kind of *smh* at people who dare call themselves PvPers but did nothing besides to try and make anyone who enter the zone life as miserable as hell with verbal assaults and other crazy gameplay. They cant just beat someone up and leave it at that, no to make sure the opponent "feels' it, they have to make sure they throw in some insults. You know, god forbid they forget to insult someone. Then when they lose, they go into a tirade anyways and then tell peopel to accept their abusie or leave the pvp. Hello? You're basically destroying the pvp game. Less people that play less people to fight less people to fight less fun it is less fun it is less people will play it less people play it less development it will get and or more likely changes that are not good for pvp are made. Then icing on the cake, they then go on ther forum ranting and raving saying the sorry state of PVP is the fault of PvE when if they wanted to know the true cause of the downfall, they just have to look in the mirror or better look at the insults they threw at people and or count how many times, if they can count to such a high number of times they told peopel to "they should leave or take the verbal abuse." Contrary to popular belief, abuse and pvp do not go hand in hand and it do not HAVE TO happen simply because it's pvp. It's that some rather destroy pvp instead of ensuring it's health because, they always have PVEer to blame anyways. "PvP is dead because of whiny pvers." No PVP is dead because people usually wont sit aroudn and take that sort of abuse for long especially when the GMs dont seem to care to get off their butt and enforce the rules that they are suppsosed to be enforcing and rather say "Just ignore it." And guess what, most gamers and players did, and look how pvp ended up. Guess those "Dont like my abuse then leave people got exactly what they wanted. A portion of the game that will always be a side show and have negative connotations to it. AKA ruined pvp.

Wanders
Wanders's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 20:12
Interesting topic.

Interesting topic.

JayBezz wrote:

While Death Match and Gladiators were certainly fun, CoH didn't have many other arena options.

Yeah, personally, I'd like to see a set of goal-oriented PvP scenarios added. Pretty much the normal list you might see for any team-oriented PvP thingie... capture the flag, bodyguard, protect object, collect the most thingies, control points (there are a number of variations in there), and that sort of thing. The team objective stuff will be a much easier transition between PvE and PvP than the more on-on-one stuff that often gets more build-focused than a casual PvPer is willing to get.

I second the notions above about player designed maps and scenarios. If folks can create and rate we'll get an interesting set of fun and competitive maps.

Global: @Second Chances
SG: Fusion Force
"And it's not what I wanted
Oh no, it's not what I planned
See it's not where I thought I'd be
It's just where I am"

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 34 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
I would think that a MOBA

I would think that a MOBA-like arena game would work well as an option. At least when I see videos of SMITE (a 3rd-person MOBA) I kind of get some kind of CoH-feeling from it.

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 34 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
chase wrote:
chase wrote:

League PvP
as opposed to "Open world" or game-defined-faction-based zone PvP.
In "Open World" PvP, sides are defined by the devs, and you fight whoever you encounter from the opposing side. This has a very low barrier to entry, but very little ability to police the type of people that can make PvP unpleasant for others... and when PvP becomes unpleasant in an open world system or zone system, your only option to avoid the unpleasantness is to not enter that world/zone.
That's a shame, because it isn't that PvP was unpleasant, it was the encounter you couldn't avoid that was unpleasant.
Different people have different goals in PvP- some want to focus on narrative even during the fight- RP-PvP'ers. Some just want a "good game" without going all hardcore-- the equivalent of your friendly informal "softball teams" down at the park, some are hardcore no-holds-barred, optimize-every-way-you can professional athlete types, and some are just people that want to be mean bastards against other mean bastards.
Lumping them all together will rarely lead to anything pleasant for anyone for any significant length of time.
So- league play is similar in structure to old mmo's that let you set guild wars (not the game)
A league is organized by faction leaders. They set code-enforced options (are sides "equalized" when imbalanced, is one side taking a handicap of sorts, is there a "prize, etc, is this a "free for all" league where anyone can attack anyone, or faction based,) as well as their own informal rules that the leaders are free to enforce by suspending or kicking out members.
This way, an RP-focused league can battle other RP-focused folk without fearing the ganker disrupting things. If he does, he's kicked out. The casual PvP'ers can match up against other casual PvP'ers just looking for a good time, and the hardcore competitors will find others that appreciate the extremes they'll go to be the best. The griefers? well, most of them won't have much fun just griefing other griefers, but some will revel in the no-holds-barred ragefests with others of their ilk, and the ones that would just prefer to be asshats with no risk to themselves... well, I don't think they offer anything of value to the community, so I don't care.
A league can form and disband anytime, or extend as long as its well-managed enough for members to join the sides. You might join a league with hundreds of players and never think of ever leaving that league for months, or you might find that your particular idea of PvP fun is better found in another league.
A lot needs addressed: how to handle things when you team with non-league members in PvP-active zones, could you be part of multiple leagues at once, and if so, how, etc, but recognizing that not everyone's PvP goals are the same should mean we should stop lumping them all into "PvP or no-PvP" experiences.

Very interesting. Depending on how this was handled it could get me more interested in the PvP side of things (I was only a dabbler of PvP in CoH and other MMOs)

Squints
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 1 month ago
kickstarter
Joined: 11/15/2013 - 19:13
After playing ESO AvA

After playing ESO AvA (Alliance vs Alliance) style, it would be great if you can do something large scale like that. Heck why have only two factions (Good vs Evil) Why not also include a third faction of neutral where they can attack both factions. That way AvA pvp won't be so boring and with a 3rd faction (works with The Secret World and ESO) it is a bit more dynamic

To elaborate on the siege weapons in Super Hero Terms, have engineering machines (Bulldozers, Titainfall like robots where you enter etc for Natural and tech). Advantage of using these siege machines is anyone can get in and get out . Disadvantage they are very slow and reaction time is also slow in speed and attack speed

For mutant, Science, and Magic, why not have some kind of "accelerated evolution", "Strength serum", and "Higher Power" ability. Activating this works like a standard siege weapon where you can't move and you hit hard. When you move, the effects of the increased power goes away.

To add even more, have something like ESO where it will show a leader board, and has some type of mechinism to reward like how ESO gives Emperor as an incentive. Also the faction buffs you can obtain from pvp that will translate into pve (like capturing the Elder Scrolls)

JayBezz
JayBezz's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/08/2013 - 14:54
Everything that you see in

Everything that you see in Wildstar Online's PvP (Open World, Duels, Arenas, Battlegrounds, and Bases)

Crowd Control Enthusiast

desviper
desviper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 18 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
A Control vs Melee is

A Control vs Melee is balanced by having a shield that protects against mez (hold, imob, sleep, fear, etc.).

Another balance question is a ranged flier (or really any non-melee-only toon) against a melee speedster or someone otherwise unable to reach said flier. How does that fight even occur in an open space?

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad"

Please have Scaling decals!

Avatar by MikeNovember

desviper
desviper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 18 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Games I'd like to see:

Games I'd like to see:
The game I played the most in Multiplayer was Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy. it is arguably one of the best games ever, at least as far as play control, and it had some interesting games types:

Open world duels: technically not a PvP game, and CO had this, but the ability to challenge another player to duel, without the interference of others, is always fun. Imagine martial arts fight on the top of a skyscraper, or fire vs ice battle in phoenix plaza. Anywho, each player would have to be scaled to level, and maybe prevented from fleeing, but this is more than viable.

Power Duel: a handicap duel where one player has twice the health, and maybe mana, stamina, whatnor too.

Siege: an objective-based multiplayer where one team has a set of objectives and the other team seeks to stop the first. E.g. Team 1: breech wall, place red stone on ted altar, place green stone on green altar, place blue stone on blue altar, take staff, destroy sarcophagus . Team 2: Stop team 1 from breeching wall, Stop team 1 from placing stones on altars, Stop team 1 from taking the staff, Stop team 1 from destroying whatever.
The objectives were unique to each map, and while JK:JA has a pretty one-dimensional implementation of this it's a good model for it.

We could have a "save the major/president" mode, where the "heroes" have a series of shields and other methods to block the "Villains" from kidnapping the mayor/president/governor.

Another could be a "stop the breakout" mode/map. Villains attempt to circumvent or defeat security to cause a prison breakout, possibly to extract a certain villain or knowledgeable criminal. Heroes can systematically resecure the facility and maybe lock all the villains in, causing victory for the heroes.

There could also be various "stop the terrorist/whatevers" from deploying a bioweapon, nuke, or otherwise destructive thing.
(I know I just followed the mistake of JA in making them very "do this" and "stop them from doing that", one-dimensional orientation, I lack creative powers on monday)

The creative team could come up with better, more 2D ones for CoT,or even better, three-teamed instances. Like in the "stop the terrorists" one above, there could be the villains/terrorists trying to set off the bioweapon (an objective could be to secure the antidote for themselves), the heroes trying to stop the bioweapon or whatever, and a third party trying to secure the weapon for themselves (also would seek the cure, and fight villains)(Heroes would also try to stop them).

Away from JK:JA:

Paired tournament and free-for-all: in this type, a support character (Corr,Def,Contr, maybe MM) would be paired with an attack character and battle other couples or complementary types.

Similar to the EOS mentioned above, a team deathmatch with a super-buffed player on the team could be fun.

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad"

Please have Scaling decals!

Avatar by MikeNovember

desviper
desviper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 18 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Maybe this deserves to be in

Maybe this deserves to be in the Mission Creator section, but what're people's thoughts on player-generated games. These would be more complex than duel, FFA, CTF, etc. but it also opens the variety of games wide open.

It would, of course, be subject to the same ranking and scrutinyas a player-generated mission and carry similar rewards.

Mechanically, it wouldn't be that hard. And game-wise makes PvP much more attractive. RP-wise, some stories are better told with two sides, although such a multi-sided multi-team arc would be incredibly complex, but very rewarding.

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad"

Please have Scaling decals!

Avatar by MikeNovember

ZigZag
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 11 hours ago
kickstarter
Joined: 01/05/2014 - 11:50
doomsday device- Game mode

doomsday device- Game mode where one team has a doomsday device that one player controls and the rest of the team protect. Other team tries to destroy it either directly or through world object interaction. Id like multiple maps and types of doomsday devices like a fixed point megalaser that the controlling player can fire and a giant robot that can be controlled like a player avatar.

dawnofcrow
dawnofcrow's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 2 weeks ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/31/2013 - 08:56
Dungeons where last boss he

pve Arena where battles boss's from different Dungeons Raids. and take bets work both pvp pve Arena who win in a battles i.e i bets 100$ on red team if win double bets 200$?

whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster and when you look into the abyss, the abyss also look into you, -Friedrich

Darth Fez
Darth Fez's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 3 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 09/20/2013 - 07:53
I think it would be neat if

I think it would be neat if there were some PvP maps that were part of a TV game show, which could either pit players against each other directly or indirectly.

- - - - -
Hail Beard!

Support trap clowns for CoT!

Neuronia
Neuronia's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 2 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/07/2014 - 09:39
What I want:

What I want:

Arenas where we can get together and plan team games or 1 v 1s;
Some kind of pvp rewards (whehter IOs, titles, inspirations);
A ladder system would be great, even if it's player run;
A clear differentiation between what powers do and don't do in PvP. Pre-Issue 13 was pretty amazing stuff, despite the obvious power imbalances. After Issue13? Needing a ton of KB protection was bleh.

Do not want:
Duel spam in open world settings;
Open world PvP;
Obscure power structures that hinder plaver v. player combat;
Buggy Arenas. :p

PvP goals:
Death match is fine, NO SUDDEN DEATH PLEASE.
Again, no sudden death? Draws are fine if the two teams or players are well-matched;
If there PvP ZONES, like Warburg and so on, then having goals there would be great like nuke runs, territory control and so on.

Most important:
Allow FULL MOVEMENT in PvP areas. What made CoX PvP great (pre I-12) was that you could zoom around and attack, evade, do all that stuff at very high speeds.

XxBudweiser4xX
XxBudweiser4xX's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 8 months ago
kickstarter
Joined: 07/20/2014 - 15:13
All of the above for sure

All of the above for sure

"8 years.... What a ride"