Why can't there be both official PvE and PvP servers?

Why can't there be separate, official servers both with PvE-only content and with open world, unrestricted PvP content? Is there not enough development money or enough of a development team to come up with both? If the open PvP server dies off due to lack of players, doesn't that say something about the preferences of the player base? It just seems like sheer folly to try to keep PvE and PvP players all happy together on the same server. Most other MMO's figured this out years ago. And if the answer is just to have private shards with different rule sets, why bother with official servers to begin with? They're apparently important to players who want server stability and longevity.

What do you guys think?
«13

Comments

  • PvP game, its why im here and I love the PvE… Risk and reward my friend.
  • Scan said:

    PvP game, its why im here and I love the PvE… Risk and reward my friend.

    OK, but why can't all of the people who crave risk vs. reward play on the PvP server? If there are enough of them, the server will be viable.

    Also, from the way the developers have wildly flip-flopped on how PvP should be handled, it's evident that they're not wholly committed to a PvP game, even if that's what they pitched to begin with. They went from a lot of PvP, to mostly PvE, and now to almost all PvP. This indicates that they realize they have two very different player types they're trying to please, but don't know how to do it. So, again, why not separate PvE and PvP servers?
  • PetrPetr Czech Republic
    Because if you separate them, then the whole PK system will be useless :) And this game is more or less based on PK system.
  • AspetraAspetra USA, Maine - Verdant Earth
    edited November 30
    One of the main reasons for there being no separate servers, is population. All though I wish they would of done something like that during the server merges that way when the F2P players begin to come they have a choice.

    But another reason is because PKers are the leeches of this game, and need "sheep" because they refuse to fight each other for a challenge. They are some of the most vocal people in the discord. The typical PKer thinks the upcoming changes are the greatest thing ever, because it favors them and their ability to gank helpless people.
    But as I said they are the most vocal and CS has a lot of PKers as their "Ambassadors" Sadly they will be the death of this game.

    Whenever this issue comes up they typically will respond with "well we tried the pve thing and the game died, now the game will be alive again!"
    Hate to say it, but before steam release we had PVP and the game was dead then too. So the argument makes 0 sense.

    The other argument is that the new rules on reds will "fix" everything. It will not. Many reds have numerous accounts each with red capable toons ready to go. They will just rotate through them every 24 hours to avoid the penalty of being red.

    PVE did not work out because there is nothing in the game currently to hold a PVE player. The upcoming patch is finally beginning to scratch the surface with reputations. Things that should of been in with steam release.
    It's truly a shame they did not give the current ruleset more of a chance while adding in more pve content.
  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    Aspetra said:

    But another reason is because PKers are the leeches of this game, and need "sheep" because they refuse to fight each other for a challenge. They are some of the most vocal people in the discord. The typical PKer thinks the upcoming changes are the greatest thing ever, because it favors them and their ability to gank helpless people.
    But as I said they are the most vocal and CS has a lot of PKers as their "Ambassadors" Sadly they will be the death of this game.

    The original ruleset allowed anyone to be a red without any repercussions and led to a ton of half-assed, low skill players roll red. That was the mistake. The new ruleset has the potential to filter out those players and should limit the population difference of red to blue. I definitely think they need to revise the system a bit though, it doesn’t really do anything to protect the little guys, of sheep’s as you call them.
    Aspetra said:

    Hate to say it, but before steam release we had PVP and the game was dead then too. So the argument makes 0 sense

    PvP was dead because every change they were making was killing people’s desire to play. Then redundant updates without any content burned away the PvE crowd. There were tons of legit battles before I quit which was after the removal of Mounted Combat. Ganking wasn’t so rampant that it killed pop. Lack of communication and content did that.
    Aspetra said:


    The other argument is that the new rules on reds will "fix" everything. It will not. Many reds have numerous accounts each with red capable toons ready to go. They will just rotate through them every 24 hours to avoid the penalty of being red.

    Agreed. It will likely happen as you say, but I’m already seeing players, that I remember as being red, cower at the thought of skill loss. Hopefully it keeps the murder pop down, but I definitely see your point becoming an issue.
    Aspetra said:


    PVE did not work out because there is nothing in the game currently to hold a PVE player. The upcoming patch is finally beginning to scratch the surface with reputations. Things that should of been in with steam release.

    PvE players do the same thing in every game though: burn through content and complain about lack of content. Once they finish the content then it’s back to square one for the devs. PvP players make their own content.
    That being said, I wouldn’t be back if this game was just another PvE game out of the thousands already out there. I’m glad CS has the balls to make the game they wanted.
  • edited December 1
    Well, I don't know what to think at this point. Not enough content to keep PvE players interested even if there were official PvE servers? A vocal minority of gankers who just want to make everyone else's experience miserable on official PvP servers? Both of those sound like recipes for a failed game with a dying population. And that's, I'm afraid, exactly what we have. With those being the dominant themes, I don't see how a new, F2P crowd is going to be any more pleased with the game than its current players. I wish it were otherwise, because I do have a bit of a financial investment in the game, if not too much.
  • How do you know there will tons of ganking going on? Have you played the new patch on live servers with all the new PvP rules and pk penalties? Right, you haven't.

    So don't tell us how awful your pve life is because of gankers that don't even exist yet.

    There isn't PvP, there isn't PvE, in this game there is just RvR, risk vs reward.

    You'll risk venturing out to get rares and goods with the chance of getting killed and looted. Others will risk skill loss and being freely attacked by anyone with a chance of getting riches by stealing it from others.

    Stop making it an argument of you deserve your own bubble land and see it as it is, a compromise of all play styles in order to play together in a sand box world.

    FYI I'm a crafter/pve'r



  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    edited December 1
  • beater07 said:

    How do you know there will tons of ganking going on? Have you played the new patch on live servers with all the new PvP rules and pk penalties? Right, you haven't.

    So don't tell us how awful your pve life is because of gankers that don't even exist yet.

    There isn't PvP, there isn't PvE, in this game there is just RvR, risk vs reward.

    You'll risk venturing out to get rares and goods with the chance of getting killed and looted. Others will risk skill loss and being freely attacked by anyone with a chance of getting riches by stealing it from others.

    Stop making it an argument of you deserve your own bubble land and see it as it is, a compromise of all play styles in order to play together in a sand box world.

    FYI I'm a crafter/pve'r



    Yes, it's one big compromise. No one really gets what they want, unlike in MMO's which have separation of PvE and PvP, even sandbox MMO's.

    Also, gankers have always found ways of working around the rules meant to control them. But hey, with the incredibly clear vision that the developers have displayed so far, I'm sure that they'll be the ones to get it right.
  • And I'm not being critical because I want the game to fail. I'm being critical because I want the game to succeed, and I don't believe it will on the current path. LoA and Camelot Unchained are about the only MMO's I'm still rooting for.
  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    Pve and pvp servers were the worst thing to happen to MMO’s. Splitting pop, splitting the games focus. It’s a cop out. Balancing is 1 of the most time consuming aspects of video games and you can’t force it. That’s what splitting servers and focusing on 2 different types creates. Then they have to balance each version, and what might work for 1 patch might break that balance the next patch. Unless they’re making 2 very different games per version, each server type will disrupt the other and cause problems. Too many people have played WoW and games like that and now have this pve/pvp server mentality, where they actually believe it’s the only way. It’s the only way because it’s the only way you know. I’m glad CS is willing to change the norm and actually make a game worth playing cohesively among everyone.
  • Soap said:

    Pve and pvp servers were the worst thing to happen to MMO’s. Splitting pop, splitting the games focus. It’s a cop out. Balancing is 1 of the most time consuming aspects of video games and you can’t force it. That’s what splitting servers and focusing on 2 different types creates. Then they have to balance each version, and what might work for 1 patch might break that balance the next patch. Unless they’re making 2 very different games per version, each server type will disrupt the other and cause problems. Too many people have played WoW and games like that and now have this pve/pvp server mentality, where they actually believe it’s the only way. It’s the only way because it’s the only way you know. I’m glad CS is willing to change the norm and actually make a game worth playing cohesively among everyone.

    Well, we'll have to wait and see if they are able to make a game that satisfies all player types. It's no easy task for a huge development team to figure out, much less a small, indie developer with very limited resources. Other than EVE and maybe BDO, I can't think of many that have succeeded.
  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    @glowyrm
    I can’t think of many who try either. And I hope they are more focused on making the game fun rather than trying to appease everyone or any one side. That’s usually the cause of a game backfiring.
  • Soap said:

    @glowyrm
    I can’t think of many who try either. And I hope they are more focused on making the game fun rather than trying to appease everyone or any one side. That’s usually the cause of a game backfiring.

    That's the trick with trying to make this kind of game work though, right? Making the game fun for everyone who's playing. From what I've seen in MMO history, it's particularly difficult to make a game fun for carebear PvE players while they're getting ganked, and fun for gankers who are getting penalized for doing what they love. My guess is that this type of mixed game play will only appeal to a very limited number of people, and based on the current number of players, that seems to be the case. We'll have to wait to see what happens when their last hope at saving the game, F2P on Steam, launches.
  • ZaphieonZaphieon Philippines
    The reason there is not. is because the developers have chosen for it to be played like this. it might change again in the future. but if you want the ONLY PvE there are community servers for this. if you view the community servers as some low-end 2nd rate experience well you haven't really given them a full-hearted try.

    on a separate note you do not know what the new ruleset will bring. if anything the new ruleset will make it much harder to be a PK. someone mentioned there is nothing to protect the sheep... that is not true at all the fact the higher the murder count the more skills a player can lose, is what make a red, not bother with the "sheep" - the most prized kills now will be the reds.. so you will see a lot of red on red fights ALOT.. those heads will be worth upward to 40p so yeah...

    why not wait until the patch is out before complaining about what you think it is going to be.
  • CerynCeryn Japan
    edited December 2
    I know that red populations on Azure Sky were pretty large but on Verdant Earth it went the other way. Blues actually banded together and reigned the majority of the earlier Red guilds (SE / Love). These guilds barely fielded members while blue groups were constantly patrolling for them.

    It wasn't until the populations of those guilds got so low that their was no one left to hunt that the "Blue Blob" guilds started fielding their own red guilds to hunt other blue competitive blue guilds.

    This was all true even in spite of the fact that reds could just rearm and come back. This will basically add a 24 hour death timer to each red if they don't want to absolutely ruin their character.

    You talk about multi-accounting stopping penalties for reds but that assumes that there aren't going to be people who just hunt reds... Do you really think that reds are going to have enough 6x characters on separate accounts to make death a trivial experience?

    I think there is a point where you have to accept that you will win some fights and you will lose some. You will definitely be able to farm a positive income during your play session if you stay away from the absolute highest traffic areas.

    Losing the occasional haul should not be enough to dissuade you from playing the game and if it does you probably shouldn't be playing multiplayer games. I'm not sure why people are arguing that they deserve to be absolutely free of any competition or interaction with other players in an MMO. You won't need to PvP if you don't want to, but you might need to actually talk to other players and "call the police" if a group of reds keeps patrolling through the spots you want to farm.
  • Deadmau5Deadmau5 ...
    edited December 2
    Why can't there be both official PvE and PvP servers?
    The remaining player base likes soft targets aka easy kills. They won't engage in hard fights. It's one of the reasons dev put resource chokepoints into the game. This was to make these PKS feel like they are good at PVP. In reality, they murder naked people who can't really fight back. These same players get flamed and owned on real PVP games. The real question is why would anyone play an official server? I have been playing a community server sense like dumb dev choice 3 on week 4 of the release and never looked back. My homes on the community server have stood longer than the official server. The Devs on the official servers are a shet show and constantly flop the rules. Almost every MMO on the market has both server types. It's simple in 2019 the industry is full MMO and nobody is going be forced into a playstyle. This forced pvp shet worked in UO original time because it had few competitors in a fresh MMO market. As the MMO market developed and EQ1 relased UO had to change to retain its players. Thus Trammel spawned or UO would have died or lost 80% of its player base sooner without it. The few hardcore PVP will tell you otherwise but forcing 100% of the player base to play like the 10% PK player base playstyle is a failing business model. I am interested to see what shet show the devs have in store for us on December 5th, 2019. I will log in for a few and laugh then go back to my community server.
  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    Deadmau5 said:

    The remaining player base likes soft targets aka easy kills. They won't engage in hard fights. It's one of the reasons dev put resource chokepoints into the game. This was to make these PKS feel like they are good at PVP. In reality, they murder naked people who can't really fight back. These same players get flamed and owned on real PVP games.

    Since you left so early you have no experience in the actual fights that went on. I played 95% of my time as a Blue player prior to quitting as more and more PvE “changes” were made. Plenty of reds would fight with even or lesser numbers all the time. The couple players that went to gank miners were easily dealt with by having your guild or friends protect them.

    Maybe instead of saying “We need a PvE server” (which means more dev time, more pop splitting, same copy/paste of every other MMO out there, etc) you could test the experimental, provide feedback, and provide alternatives. I’ve seen a couple fairly in depth posts already, but here we are making noise instead of trying to be constructive.
  • glowyrm said:

    Why can't there be separate, official servers both with PvE-only content and with open world, unrestricted PvP content? Is there not enough development money or enough of a development team to come up with both? If the open PvP server dies off due to lack of players, doesn't that say something about the preferences of the player base? It just seems like sheer folly to try to keep PvE and PvP players all happy together on the same server. Most other MMO's figured this out years ago. And if the answer is just to have private shards with different rule sets, why bother with official servers to begin with? They're apparently important to players who want server stability and longevity.

    What do you guys think?

    Instead of open PvP, just implement/allowed PvP only if they have PvP tag on, and with 1 week cooldown timer.
  • RavenHarvesterRavenHarvester United States
    That is basically what factions were .
  • We tried PvE server with some pvp. It didn’t work. The new rule set has people pumped up again. Vets are returning, population is better than it’s been in months. Recent Steam reviews have flipped to “very positive” and PR8 hasn’t even been released yet.

    This game was not made to be a PvE game. It was built to be a sandbox pvp game with crafting, gathering, hunting and housing. If you want pure PvE there are much better games out there for that kind of thing, in my humble opinion.
  • AspetraAspetra USA, Maine - Verdant Earth
    edited December 3
    Teufel said:

    We tried PvE server with some pvp. It didn’t work. The new rule set has people pumped up again. Vets are returning, population is better than it’s been in months. Recent Steam reviews have flipped to “very positive” and PR8 hasn’t even been released yet.

    This game was not made to be a PvE game. It was built to be a sandbox pvp game with crafting, gathering, hunting and housing. If you want pure PvE there are much better games out there for that kind of thing, in my humble opinion.

    https://steamcharts.com/app/594770#3m

    Population has not come back. In fact it is still dropping. It only appears to be better due to everyone being on one US server now. (and yes I know there are people who use the standalone client that these numbers do not show, but it just allows you to get a feel for trends.)

    We will not see the true effects of the changes in terms of population until beginning of February, that is when we can see if there were true retention levels, based on current and future state of the game.
  • TeufelTeufel Aria
    edited December 3
    Aspetra said:

    Teufel said:

    We tried PvE server with some pvp. It didn’t work. The new rule set has people pumped up again. Vets are returning, population is better than it’s been in months. Recent Steam reviews have flipped to “very positive” and PR8 hasn’t even been released yet.

    This game was not made to be a PvE game. It was built to be a sandbox pvp game with crafting, gathering, hunting and housing. If you want pure PvE there are much better games out there for that kind of thing, in my humble opinion.

    https://steamcharts.com/app/594770#3m

    Population has not come back. In fact it is still dropping. It only appears to be better due to everyone being on one US server now. (and yes I know there are people who use the standalone client that these numbers do not show, but it just allows you to get a feel for trends.)

    We will not see the true effects of the changes in terms of population until beginning of February, that is when we can see if there were true retention levels, based on current and future state of the game.
    As you stated, Steam charts reflect only players whom log in via Steam. Many if not most vets use the stand alone launcher which is not included. I polled members of GoT today, all of which are vets and out of the twelve of us who still play daily, only I use Steam launcher and only with one of my several accounts. The several members whom have already returned to prep for pr8 also exclusively use the legacy launcher.

    Everyone I know who quit did so when the guarded zones were added. Some of these people backed the game in the hundreds and even thousands of dollars. I now get daily PMs from vets who have come back or plan to come back at PR8.

    But the above is besides the point. The guarded zones and optional pvp killed the game. Let’s see how pr8 goes before judging.The game needs a niche, and older UO vets who disliked Trammel are it. 30 to 50 year olds with a lot of disposable income. Sounds like people I wouldn’t want to piss off with yet another carebear land.
  • Petr said:

    Because if you separate them, then the whole PK system will be useless :) And this game is more or less based on PK system.

    I was always curious as to why the PVP community is never happy with fighting other PVP'ers?; They are the loudest complainers when anyone even hints at removing their access to non-pvp players.

    I would love to hear the rational from PVP'ers as to why the game must co-mingle the two communities or they are not happy? Why must you have access to easy prey to make the game fun for you? Why is an entire community of just PVP'ers not satisfying? What is it that a strictly PVP community is missing that doesn't fill the void? Get these answers and I think the PVE community can have a more reasoned conversation about balance.

    I still want to reserve any real judgement of the game till we see how the new system plays out. Perhaps it helps create a real balance. Maybe it needs some tweaks, we shall see. I would recommend the dev's watch the community population like a hawk and a simple 2 or 3 questionnaire may go a long way to giving them insight post update as to how the community is feeling. Like twitter; forums and Discord do not represent all players; I would argue that the casual players dipping their toe in from Steam will concentrate more on the game and less on community interactions. So their voices will never be heard, they will simply stay or walk. My brother and his wife have played WOW since it came out; they are daily players. They have never visited or interacted with the forum or Discord but still are part of the player base..Experience tells me that "Game Community" is not just those that interact online outside the game. I would argue that once a game goes live the community of players not using forums exceeds those that do.
  • Question 1: How many walkers have you have you killed?

    Question 2: many people have you killed?

    Question 3: Why?
  • Kraxis said:

    Question 1: How many walkers have you have you killed?

    Question 2: many people have you killed?

    Question 3: Why?

    I was thinking more along the lines of:
    1. Do you prefer PVP, non-PVP or a mix?
    2. What do you like about the current system?
    3. What do you dislike about the current system?

    I would code this up so it came up at the login screen. Include an "ask me later". Just in case you were running late for a Guild event. :)
  • SoapSoap Paper Street
    PvE’ers are never going to agree on “non-consensual PvP” but that is the type of game CS wants to make (this month at least). I’m grateful and applaud them for this move, personally, because I have quit every other MMO out there due to 0 risk involved. I want a game where leaving town could mean I also lose all my stuff, and where playing as a murderer is hard and not for the faint of heart.

    I also hope CS just keeps developing the game they want to first and foremost, then our feedback second. Nothing is worse than when companies try to appeal to all their players demands. Just stick to the type of game you want and go from there.
  • Soap said:

    PvE’ers are never going to agree on “non-consensual PvP” but that is the type of game CS wants to make (this month at least). I’m grateful and applaud them for this move, personally, because I have quit every other MMO out there due to 0 risk involved. I want a game where leaving town could mean I also lose all my stuff, and where playing as a murderer is hard and not for the faint of heart.

    I also hope CS just keeps developing the game they want to first and foremost, then our feedback second. Nothing is worse than when companies try to appeal to all their players demands. Just stick to the type of game you want and go from there.

    Ideology does not a successful business make.
  • Soap said:

    PvE’ers are never going to agree on “non-consensual PvP” but that is the type of game CS wants to make (this month at least). I’m grateful and applaud them for this move, personally, because I have quit every other MMO out there due to 0 risk involved. I want a game where leaving town could mean I also lose all my stuff, and where playing as a murderer is hard and not for the faint of heart.

    I also hope CS just keeps developing the game they want to first and foremost, then our feedback second. Nothing is worse than when companies try to appeal to all their players demands. Just stick to the type of game you want and go from there.

    Regardless whether they will agree to it; I would still like to hear someone from that community Rationalize it. My guess is they wont. It would be admitting something they don't want to admit. Namely that they require a predatory environment to find enjoyment.
Sign In or Register to comment.