What makes for good PvP?

Don't think I've ever participated in a pre-planned pvp, outside of arena 1v1s. Only sudden pvp is the real pvp.

We have not received permission from Sjelden to share the quoted post.

Ah, right. I guess sieges would be considered a pre-planned thing. Then I lied. I've participated in hundreds of those. Though even there, the best ones were always the ones that had some unexpected alliances that happened either right before the start of the siege or even right before its end. So even with sieges there'd be some unknown factors that would make the whole experience even better.

Making good PvP is easy.

Step one (and this one is important), DON'T do any of the few hundred things that make bad PvP.

Once you've done that, just decide which group of whiners you'll appease and which group you'll oppose and you're done. Simple and elegant.

More seriously, this is one of the places where an MMO can learn from MOBAs.

I'm not talking about the lobby part, I'm talking about the fact that a MOBA match is basically 'a PvX MMO server running at 100x speed'.

Everyone starts off with one ability, trying to PvE to level up faster than the other person they are near.

Everyone can roam to any location if they have time, everyone is encouraged to use a different 'class' so that if thiings get complex later, you have options.

Any players doing well because of their leveling strategy/who aren't having their leveling disrupted by the PvP segment/ganker should help out the ones who aren't doing as good.

And of course, once one person gets decently far ahead in gear (10% or so) dealing with them becomes a nightmare that requires having the numbers advantage.

So, is the 'unexpectedness' the 'good' part? For some. But 'unexpected' usually means 'disadvantaged' so some dislike it. Therefore those games have 'wards', so that you can put some effort into not dealing with 'unexpected ganking'.

If you don't ward... and your teammate who is doing well doesn't help you out in your bad matchup, and you're starved for resources or time, and fall behind, you're a liability. Once 3 people fall behind, or the opponent 'manages to take the boss drop' enough times, it takes all your skill just to squeak out a single 5v3 teamfight win.

Usually this is where people surrender the match and go on to the next match or disconnect mid-match and stop for the night. PvX MMOs are the same, they just 'surrender' 100x slower.

Oh, and there's no matchmaking in MMOs so good luck with that.

Good PvP is different to different people. I'm not suggesting Ashes should be like a MOBA. I'm moreso saying that all PvP/PvX MMOs are, and based on the standard reaction encountered in those MOBA, the only good PvP is the kind where you keep having a chance, where you 'know you can do it if your opponent messes up, at least', and you can try to trick them or force the error.

Being outnumbered doesn't really matter. Having an objective...? I guess, but if you didn't have an objective just 'being online' that would get you closer to whatever you consider 'victory', it's not much of a game. It's why MOBAs aren't just 'Team Deathmatch Battle Arenas'. Especially for a PvX game.

It's based on this premise that I don't agree with the 'unplanned PvP is fun' concept as a whole. Maybe if your opponent is an arrogant idiot or joking around, but if the game has any depth, you're not winning any unplanned PvP, you're at best hoping someone else who can 'win it for you' shows up. Which is kinda like saying 'what makes a good basketball game' by talking about players you like watching, I guess.

We have not received permission from Laetitian to share the quoted post.

I find that your posts tend to devalue the PvP experience or desire of those who don't like the same type of PvP as you do. Is this intentional?

It's starting to be somewhat common around here that the stronger vocal PvP supporters other than NiKr, Veeshan and myself/my group (others can let me know if I forgot them) have a very specific perspective of what worthwhile PvP is, and I'm concerned 'for' them sorta.

Because the PvP type that Ashes probably benefits most from is not that type, it's the type that they decry, and more importantly, it's the PvP type that Ashes' design probably leads to.

In answer to the question posed in the post, though, that's literally what MOBAs spent almost all their time solving when it comes to 'balance flows' in map and objective design. I spend 80% of a given match thinking about where opponents are or probably plan to be, and watching for pings from Wards and Teammates about it.

In that case, me losing track of that, getting jumped by an opponent with a high chance of killing me, and losing, doesn't feel like 'this game's PvP sucks because my character can't win this fight', it feels like a failure of tactics and positioning. My opponent didn't even have to do anything, they could just have randomly wandered my way and noticed I was overextended, and just fought because they are for whatever reason currently better prepared for the fight.

MOBAs have been developing their methods for years, your 'clumsy suggestion' is just 'the beginning of the answer'.

Design is convergent.

We have not received permission from Laetitian to share the quoted post.

Your simplification is incorrect, but I say this not as an issue with you, just to inform others. I didn't really put too much effort into dispelling assumptions because it makes my posts too long.

I just wanted to know if it was intentional, and based on what I'm reading (moreso what my parser sentiment scores it as, honestly) the answer is yes. I have no issue with you taking the position you do, as I hope that all are heard, it's just a model update for me.

It tells me that when I engage with you, I should engage seriously, too, since your attempt isn't to decry but to present your opinion strongly (and in turn I can ask you stuff and not expect the questions to be dismissed because of your desire or bias, other than the 'ah but have you considered you're wrong' thing at the beginning of this post).

Grati pur do.

So, onward to minor explanation:

Is it? Or is that the assumption your past experience is orienting your perspective towards?

I'm not sure what else it could be? I would think it would be assumed that whenever I say anything, it's either from that perspective or 'that, plus added studies'. Not sure how one would form a stance/perspective other than this way so I didn't think I needed to specify it.

That past experience is in 'observing players and trying to leverage ways to keep a community of about 10,000 players give or take (usual distribution of hardcore and casual, so assume maybe 200 consistent active) to enjoy a 1v1 game'. Not a big one. 10k is a small platform, but that's where many games end up these days. Not built from scratch, just 'modfix/sculpting' of something that already had a playerbase that died and I revived a bit, for context.

There are always the NiKrs of the world who 'push through no matter what', and their risk profiles and mental profiles involve very low loss aversion. You appear to be one of those people based on basic observation. I'm one too.

It therefore was difficult for me for a few years to 'consistently simulate the mindset of others not like us' well enough to figure out exactly how to make something that I enjoyed and that they enjoyed enough to not leave. It involves a lot of manipulation, which to this day I probably still feel too guilty about.

Nothing else worked for me, though. So I have a set of 'things that I couldn't get to work' and from observing other games, no other games 'got to work' either. Before I go further, please let me know if your response to this is generally 'they didn't try hard enough (to make specific thing I like work for others, without changing it much)!' or you're closer to the type to just give the 'well this works for me and here's stuff I don't want you to change because without it this doesn't work for me'.

I learned how to build things out of the feedback from the second type of people, but I haven't advanced my skills enough to benefit from engaging with the first type.

We have not received permission from Laetitian to share the quoted post.

Which brings us even further down the rabbit hole to:

What do we know about Steven's PvP vision?

My perspective is that most of the things people seem to assume Steven wants are not guaranteed interpretations of things he's said. In fact, most of what Steven has said about it is so vague that I can apply multiple models of PvP to it and they all 'work'. They don't 'conflict with what he said'. If anything, there are literal design decisions that people (rightly) think seem to contrast more with things Steven has implied wanting, than there are design decisions that we can point to and say 'yes, this here is explicitly in support of the concept of Ashes' as it seems to be.

Point is, it's very abstract from the start, so we end up discussing things from the perspectives we know. Mainly 'don't do this, it's not fun', and 'don't do this, people will leave the game in droves and you could do it differently'.

So back to a less abstract perspective.

MOBAs work because they have systems in place to prevent a specific emotional reaction from the bulk of their players, and even then they struggle compared to Team Deathmatch/Battle Arena games. My understanding is that this has nothing to do with the quality of the PvP, only how the PvP makes a given player feel (I won't bring 1v1 games into this part).

PvP MMOs often don't implement these systems and struggle even more, sometimes because of the reaction of a certain subset of PvP player who doesn't like the systems for one reason or another. By contrast, there is the 'me' in this situation who can enjoy the game, particularly the PvP, with all those systems in place, because they are given in good context.

I've never personally understood the strong drive to 'make sure to have none of these systems', because the moment-to-moment PvP experiences, even the organic ones, are mostly the same if not better for them for me personally.

Ashes has so many aspects that strongly imply to me that the game would be better with such systems than without them. My perspective is that these systems are what you referred to as 'sheltered conditions'.

Why is it important for your experience for there to be no 'sheltered conditions' to the point where it causes you to have a seemingly lesser opinion of say, WoW PvP-ers? There's no indication that Ashes is a 'no sheltered conditions' game, or needs to be, in fact the recent 'concerns' have been that Steven's wishes for Corruption are creating more of them, and it is upsetting some people who are then blaming 'the carebears' or whoever.

I am carebear enough to not get why this is important. How is the game meaningfully less fun as a whole across the playerbase because the 'sheltering' happens? And I'm speaking only in terms of PvP now. MOBA matches are not 'less fun' because of wards, catchup mechanics, etc. So let's please not take it in the 'Well PvE players would definitely have more fun with the shelters.' direction.

I am a PvP player. I spend most of my time playing PvP games. These games have some 'structured'/'sheltered' PvP, and some not. I can give lots and lots of examples if necessary.

Then my perspective is that your 'issue' if there even could be said to be one, is with WoW (funny how so many things come back to that).

So lemme go back to the point where it became my 'role' to get involved at all.

We have not received permission from Laetitian to share the quoted post.

Are you still standing by the 'carebear pandering' thing?

Or was this a stronger reaction than you meant to have, or something else?

This entire post came off as very negative toward multiple base principles I consider important and heavy on the 'assumptions about what style of thing Noaani and I think is important to build'.

To the point where I really don't know how to respond to it in the context of what I was bringing up. I'd be happy to have the discussion, but for me personally this post really came off as though it would be very difficult to have it from your stance.