Do you think PVP can be successful ?

[Tricky5hift]

I think it could be successful if they really wanted it to be.

Right now it just isn't a priority because the playerbase has already established itself.

[(XBOX)The Repo Man151]

7 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Not only does he not say Co-op PvE

He said those exact words, actually.

[Felsagger]

PVP can work here with dedicated servers without rewards. There are ideas that can produce healthy competition. Looks like DE is not interested looking into PVP anymore. 

[Sevek7]

44 minutes ago, SneakyErvin said:

Kinda stretching what he says in several different ways. Not only does he not say Co-op PvE, but most of the things you listed are effectively also covered by the E as in environment. Fashion is also not a seperate game mode, which is what he is refering to with PvP.

edit: Just as solo play is not a seperate game mode, it is an option to tackle game modes.

I'm really confused here. You're right that they didn't say "Co-op PvE," they said "PvE Co-op." Can we agree that these are the same? You're right that mining, fishing, conservation, open worlds, fashion, etc... can all be considered "environment" if you extend the definition of environment. (Usually, the environment in PvE refers to combat against AI controlled opponents, but of course we can extend this definition beyond combat.) Nevertheless, the point made was that DE should not stray from the original intention of the game, PvE Co-op [or Co-op PvE as you prefer]. The point I tried (and apparently failed) to make was that games that want to survive must cater to a wide variety of players, so this mentality of "don't try new things, just stick to what the game already is" is incorrect. The devs obviously know this, which is why they've added so much variety and so many different things that players can do. PvP is no different, and the devs have tried PvP but it's not been very successful. This failure is quite obviously because there was never a system put in place to punish exploiters / cheaters. Warframe is not that different from similar looter-shooter style games. I'm sure if those other games also let exploiters run rampant their PvP would also fail. 

 

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Sevek7
Spelling :(

[GreyDeath789]

4 hours ago, Felsagger said:

PVP can work here with dedicated servers without rewards. There are ideas that can produce healthy competition. Looks like DE is not interested looking into PVP anymore. 

Agree that DE doesn't look interested in PvP.

Was curious what you mean by dedicated servers....also the "without rewards"...

Dedicated server to me means something like a test server where the population and account is completely separate from the main game. Is that the kind of thing meant?

If a "dedicated server" is more like Rift where players can play against other players in an instanced zone but if they turn on PvP in the open world it is possible to PvP anywhere...then maybe DE could add an instanced area where players can PvP...just not sure setting a flag to PvP anywhere in the game would go over very well. Oh wait...Warframe has an instanced PvP area...just not a dedicated server.

(Note I haven't played Rift in a while so some of the PvP may have changed but a quick review of the game site and some videos shows it is about the same as it was)...

So, a dedicated server for PvP might be an option...if DE was interested.

The "without rewards" part...what would encourage players to join a separate server to just PvP but have no rewards?

[GreyDeath789]

4 hours ago, Sevek7 said:

The point I tried (and apparently failed) to make was that games that want to survive must cater to a wide variety of players, so this mentality of "don't try new things, just stick to what the game already is" is incorrect. The devs obviously know this, which is why they've added so much variety and so many different things that players can do. PvP is no different, and the devs have tried PvP but it's not been very successful. This failure is quite obviously because there was never a system put in place to punish exploiters / cheaters. Warframe is not that different from similar looter-shooter style games. I'm sure if those other games also let exploiters run rampant their PvP would also fail.

As we have discussed in another thread...exploiters/cheaters are just a part of the PvP ecosystem (trying to avoid confusion with the word environment).

Could it be that the failed PvP in Warframe (no doubt it is a failed implementation) has lead DE to decide to focus on trying other things that have been more successful with the development resources available?

Implementing PvP in a game means a lot of dedication to finding and fixing exploits as well as identifying and punishing cheaters (aimbots, ghosting, etc.) in just the PvP aspect of the game. Fixing exploits in the PvE or PvP is something DE does (at different speeds of fixes it seems...Scarlet Spear -> insta nerf frames, Conclave -> still existing exploits months/years later?) but the cheats in the PvE or PvP parts of Warframe seem to be either very rare or get little to no publicity.

In the end it is probably better, for now, that DE not spend extra resources on PvP...and instead continue to work to 'right the ship' for the near term.

[Felsagger]

48 minutes ago, GreyDeath789 said:

Agree that DE doesn't look interested in PvP.

Was curious what you mean by dedicated servers....also the "without rewards"...

Dedicated server to me means something like a test server where the population and account is completely separate from the main game. Is that the kind of thing meant?

If a "dedicated server" is more like Rift where players can play against other players in an instanced zone but if they turn on PvP in the open world it is possible to PvP anywhere...then maybe DE could add an instanced area where players can PvP...just not sure setting a flag to PvP anywhere in the game would go over very well. Oh wait...Warframe has an instanced PvP area...just not a dedicated server.

(Note I haven't played Rift in a while so some of the PvP may have changed but a quick review of the game site and some videos shows it is about the same as it was)...

So, a dedicated server for PvP might be an option...if DE was interested.

The "without rewards" part...what would encourage players to join a separate server to just PvP but have no rewards?

Servers within the game where we have a lobby and choose our foes and allies. A classical server has a lobby without RNG or match making. You don't log off the game or the whole thing is a different module. This helps to contain content drought moments and of course pass some time playing and sharpening our skills. Without rewards, because this evades people getting angry or jealous. The leader boards only displays results but it doesn't stores them so people don't get bragging right either intimidating other players. No kill death ratio is storaged in your account so the whole thing is oriented more as a friendly match or a place to experiment and have some fun. 

[(PSN)UltraKardas]

8 hours ago, Oreades said:

As long as it remains a distant afterthought, then lol no. 

That said if they try to force it to the forefront they're likely to tank the PvE side of the game soooo also no. 

Mmmm. Railjack wars kinda prove you wrong. 

The railjack wars were a mess in every phrase of the word. But the rewards of railjack made it completely worth it. 

Maybe like give Conclave really good rewards, first. 

[Sevek7]

2 hours ago, GreyDeath789 said:

As we have discussed in another thread...exploiters/cheaters are just a part of the PvP ecosystem (trying to avoid confusion with the word environment).

Could it be that the failed PvP in Warframe (no doubt it is a failed implementation) has lead DE to decide to focus on trying other things that have been more successful with the development resources available?

Implementing PvP in a game means a lot of dedication to finding and fixing exploits as well as identifying and punishing cheaters (aimbots, ghosting, etc.) in just the PvP aspect of the game. Fixing exploits in the PvE or PvP is something DE does (at different speeds of fixes it seems...Scarlet Spear -> insta nerf frames, Conclave -> still existing exploits months/years later?) but the cheats in the PvE or PvP parts of Warframe seem to be either very rare or get little to no publicity.

In the end it is probably better, for now, that DE not spend extra resources on PvP...and instead continue to work to 'right the ship' for the near term.

Yes! As we discussed in the other thread we're also in total agreement here. Of course exploiters/cheaters are just one part of the PvP ecosystem, but the fact remains that choosing not to punish them or fix the exploits is unique to warframe. There are problems with increased toxicity as we've discussed, but other games have been able to create successful PvP despite that. Ultimately, when something works in one place and not in another, we should ask "what's different about the two places?" This is why I still cling to this notion that Warframe's unique approach to PvP (let exploits be plenty and exploiters roam free) is the reason for Warframe's PvP downfall. 

You're right that the devs have certainly noticed that PvP has not been successful, and this has most likely informed their decision to not spend any resources on it. You're also right that the resource demand to fix exploits and ban cheaters and exploiters is a lot more than they're currently devoting to PvP, so it's unlikely that they'll begin doing this any time soon!

Here comes my cynical side: You're right that the cheats in PvE don't get a lot of publicity, but that's because they're not called cheats, they're called "unintended interactions" (bug exploits) that are "used" (abused) by players. The PvE side of the game encourages us to buy into the grind mentality, in which anything (including cheats) that increases the speed at which we get rewards is a good thing. So, as a community we generally turn a blind eye to these issues.

Perhaps you're right, perhaps with a proper balancing of PvE or "righting the ship" as you say, we'll be in a better position to propose a more popular PvP system. Personally, I don't have much faith that the devs can balance the game without massive nerfs to basically all mods, Warframe abilities, arcanes and operators due to the massive number of interactions that can negate all challenge in essentially every PvE scenario.

In any case, this particular thread asks the question "Do you think PvP can be successful in Warframe?" I will answer this with my hopes and dreams 🙂 

Yes, I think it can be successful. But, I think the main thing it will require is vigilant fixing of exploits and banning of players that abuse them.

 

[(PSN)Darth-Escar]

10 hours ago, (PS4)NemitheNem said:

Skills work the way I like, mostly. But the guns don't handle the way they do in PvE, especially considering I mod then for handling preference.

I wanted to try my castanas in with Loki. They flop. Not the damage, the flight arc. They go a few meters, if that. I admit, that was my first experience and it tainted the whole experience, badly.

Well, I guess Castanas could be an exception, although I never noticed a difference. If you are boosting the flight speed on some weapons, that could be making the difference for you, but they're almost always the same at base. Most AOE weapons can't have their flight speed increased, as well as Lanka and throwing melee, but I think every other non-hitscan weapon can.

10 hours ago, (PS4)NemitheNem said:

Powers that you have to mod for you no longer can, not unless you do massive conclave standing grind for the mods, and even then...

Well, in conclave most powers are useful without any sort of upgrade. There are only a few that I'm not yet convinced are worth using with are Shadows of the Dead, Mend and Maim, Rift Surge, and Warcry. Some can be really tricky to use well, like Prowl, but it definitely can be done, and players who can use a whole frame's kit very well are especially threatening.

10 hours ago, (PS4)NemitheNem said:

And then there's the...damage? Satisfaction? Lunaro it is either yay I got a point/points vs drat I missed. PvP is, you hit, but not hit enough, so you don't get the high of success in every engagement, or fast turn over, or quickly adapting to doing better next time, because chances are you are dead.

What would you suggest to make conclave engagements more satisfying? I'm really bad at understanding people's satisfaction, so I'm more interested how it would potentially have to change to be more generally satisfying.

 

58 minutes ago, (PS4)UltraKardas said:

Maybe like give Conclave really good rewards, first. 

Yes! I think some basic balancing/fixing should come first. (Telos Boltace, Saryn's passive, toxin melee, and Zakti. Not that this is everything that could use a change, but everything that I think needs top priority.) I, as well as many other players, got into conclave after playing for rewards. Trying hard in conclave was a challenge with tons of depth, which rewarded me stuff that I wanted. Most of that depth is missing due to misbalance, and the rewards very much fall short of the challenge and time investment required to get them.

[Felsagger]

I'm imagining a Rail jack capture the flag for PVP. 

 

LOL, omg. That would be total chaos. 

[(PSN)UltraKardas]

7 minutes ago, (PS4)Darth-Escar said:

Yes! I think some basic balancing/fixing should come first. 

I think new rewards should come first, so people have a reason for it first. 

As of right now, I have everything from conclave. The special syndana, the ability augments, some skins, and a few stance mods. 

Railjack had terrible balance, but the rewards were amazing enough to make it worth it. 

I agree conclave should be balanced, and more work should be put towards it. But let's be honest. If Teshin's  dual nikanas became a reward, and a stance mod for them was released?

Everyone would be doing conclave for dual nikanas. If they were tradeable, I would do conclave indefinitely and sell the dual nikanas for plat for anyone who wanted them, but had no interest in conclave. 

[Oreades]

1 hour ago, (PS4)UltraKardas said:

Mmmm. Railjack wars kinda prove you wrong. 

The railjack wars were a mess in every phrase of the word. But the rewards of railjack made it completely worth it. 

Maybe like give Conclave really good rewards, first. 

I-I-I'm sorry was there a PvP railjak I'm completely unaware of? or was Railjack Wars another game that I am unaware of? And am totally fine with continuing to not know exist....

[(PSN)UltraKardas]

3 minutes ago, Oreades said:

I-I-I'm sorry was there a PvP railjak I'm completely unaware of? or was Railjack Wars another game that I am unaware of? And am totally fine with continuing to not know exist....

I said railjack, what I meant was rail wars. (You needed to build a solar rail to hold down the node, then every mission that was on that node, clans would get a % of the resources from that mission) 

So clans who held the node had very little to worry about when it came to research, or building clan dojos. They just made immense amounts of credits and resources.

[AreaneR.]

42 minutes ago, Felsagger said:

I'm imagining a Rail jack capture the flag for PVP. 

 

LOL, omg. That would be total chaos. 

What about bombing run? Ball would spawn in the middle and you have a boost meter and a shield in the front,but are vulnerable from the back and side. The goal would be a sentient anomaly,shooting the ball inside it and scoring would earn 1 point while charging in the goal would earn 3 points. The goal keeper would be a mandatory ofc and destroying a ship puts him on cool down. Repairs,boosts and weapons would spawn in the back of the map for extra advantage. The rewards are received same way as Conclave and anyone who completed the Railjack quest is able to compete.

[Felsagger]

12 minutes ago, AreaneR. said:

What about bombing run? Ball would spawn in the middle and you have a boost meter and a shield in the front,but are vulnerable from the back and side. The goal would be a sentient anomaly, shooting the ball inside it and scoring would earn 1 point while charging in the goal would earn 3 points. The goal keeper would be a mandatory ofc and destroying a ship puts him on cool down. Repairs,boosts and weapons would spawn in the back of the map for extra advantage. The rewards are received same way as Conclave and anyone who completed the Railjack quest is able to compete.

This sounds way too similar to Rocket League, but I don't mind, seems fun to me. 

 

Yes the whole thing works as a 'soccer' game. It would be fun but the idea needs some details for a strict game type. I find it interesting. 

 

A short list of PVP alternatives should suggested in a small list in here. Then we could submit these ideas seeing what DE says about them. 

[Oreades]

1 hour ago, (PS4)UltraKardas said:

I said railjack, what I meant was rail wars. (You needed to build a solar rail to hold down the node, then every mission that was on that node, clans would get a % of the resources from that mission) 

So clans who held the node had very little to worry about when it came to research, or building clan dojos. They just made immense amounts of credits and resources.

So the mode that they literally removed from the game because it was a toxic quagmire disproves my point?

[(PSN)UltraKardas]

2 hours ago, Oreades said:

So the mode that they literally removed from the game because it was a toxic quagmire disproves my point?

Yup. 

Because entire alliances of Tenno would clash. It gave players a lucrative reward for owning the solar rail, and at the time was something that was heavily heavily dominant of the playtime back then. 

Wasn't balanced, and the game modes swapped from PvP to different PvE sabotage missions. But any time you see a clan's name on a dark sector? Proof that PvP can be successful, or TOO successful. 

It's pretty common for competitive game modes, to get toxic after all. 

[AshenHaze]

There was an experiment called steel rain or something like that where you were forced to only use the throwing secondary and a melee weapon the game provided.

That is going to be the only way to make pvp work so long as mods exist, just by not allowing them at all. It was a fun game mode too imho... I got the max rank reward.

[(PSN)UltraKardas]

22 minutes ago, AshenHaze said:

There was an experiment called steel rain or something like that where you were forced to only use the throwing secondary and a melee weapon the game provided.

That is going to be the only way to make pvp work so long as mods exist, just by not allowing them at all. It was a fun game mode too imho... I got the max rank reward.

Have you even played conclave? 

Like... you don't need mods in conclave to kill people. The mods that exist in conclave do very little compared to the rest of the game. The strongest mod in PvP only adds damage if you hit an enemy twice within like half a second.

[SneakyErvin]

19 hours ago, (XB1)The Repo Man151 said:

He said those exact words, actually.

No he didnt, the way he wrote it the meaning is different if you have the slightest reading comprehension skills. "PvE co-op" is not the same as "Co-op PvE". 

 

19 hours ago, Sevek7 said:

I'm really confused here. You're right that they didn't say "Co-op PvE," they said "PvE Co-op." Can we agree that these are the same? You're right that mining, fishing, conservation, open worlds, fashion, etc... can all be considered "environment" if you extend the definition of environment. (Usually, the environment in PvE refers to combat against AI controlled opponents, but of course we can extend this definition beyond combat.) Nevertheless, the point made was that DE should not stray from the original intention of the game, PvE Co-op [or Co-op PvE as you prefer]. The point I tried (and apparently failed) to make was that games that want to survive must cater to a wide variety of players, so this mentality of "don't try new things, just stick to what the game already is" is incorrect. The devs obviously know this, which is why they've added so much variety and so many different things that players can do. PvP is no different, and the devs have tried PvP but it's not been very successful. This failure is quite obviously because there was never a system put in place to punish exploiters / cheaters. Warframe is not that different from similar looter-shooter style games. I'm sure if those other games also let exploiters run rampant their PvP would also fail. 

They mean different things the way they are written. It is just plain old simple english, grammar and structure.

While I agree a game should try new things, it has already tried those things and failed at them prior. No point trying again. If it hadnt been tried and failed before I would have supported the idea of adding such things.

 

[(PSN)Akuma_Asura_]

On 2020-05-15 at 11:06 AM, Sevek7 said:

I mean, not everybody has the time to check the forums every single day, the situation you describe seems pretty common to me.

I want to make a point about some of your earlier posts, I've skimmed the entire thread but may have missed if someone already pointed this out, so I apologize if this is a repetition!

You mentioned that every time DE have tried to make PvP a thing, it has failed. This is correct, of course. But perhaps instead of saying "It's always failed therefore don't try again," maybe we should ask why it failed? PvP is generally popular in many games, including the typical Looter-shooter games. So what has warframe done differently? Perhaps if we can find the differences, we can isolate the reason for failure. 

I'm not sure how many differences there are. But there is one glaring one that I think is probably the main reason: DE does not punish or ban exploiters and cheaters. This is a radically different approach to the other games. I suspect this is the reason why PvP has failed in Warframe. Let me know if you think there is another reason that might contribute more than this.

Wow another smart person , love this response but you won’t see a lot of this thoughtfulness on the forums mate 

[(PSN)Akuma_Asura_]

On 2020-05-15 at 2:34 PM, OrlockCedar said:

I honestly think the whole PvP in Warframe should be axed. It's an aspect that is getting more and more outside of what DE wants the game to be intended for: PvE Co-op. 

Why not axe zephyr flappy bird?

[(PSN)Akuma_Asura_]

1 hour ago, SneakyErvin said:

No he didnt, the way he wrote it the meaning is different if you have the slightest reading comprehension skills. "PvE co-op" is not the same as "Co-op PvE". 

 

They mean different things the way they are written. It is just plain old simple english, grammar and structure.

I love how not only did you insult him in a very rude way, you also didn’t explain the difference between Co-op PVE and PVE Co-op. 😂

Like why are you people like this ? Can’t have a simple constructive conversation without 1. Insulting people and 2. Explaining what you’re trying to say . Toxic

[SneakyErvin]

10 minutes ago, (PS4)Akuma_Asura_ said:

I love how not only did you insult him in a very rude way, you also didn’t explain the difference between Co-op PVE and PVE Co-op. 😂

Like why are you people like this ? Can’t have a simple constructive conversation without 1. Insulting people and 2. Explaining what you’re trying to say . Toxic

Why should I explain it?

And where was the insult? I stated a fact, you need minimal reading comprehension skills to get the difference between the two phrases. Me explaining in detain to him would be rude since it would be like treating him as a child. He also missquoted the phrase, so I didnt imply that he couldnt understand the right one, just that it is simple to understand.