[Suggestion] Pvp Can Be Done Without Rebalancing Anything

[UndeadLemon]

So, more often than not, the argument I see presented against PvP in Warframe is that it would interfere with balancing issues, and doesn't fit the style of the game. If we're talking traditional PvP, I can see that being a massive problem for the game. This game was not meant for any given Warframe to fight another, most of the abilities are AoE, with PvE enemies in mind. However, we could make a game mode with that competitive spirit in mind that not only compliments the game, but would be fun for even PvE players.

The game that I kind of got my inspiration for this was Puzzle Fighter, but you don't really need to know what that is to understand this. The idea would be that DE could create a modified Defense mode, wherein there are 2 (or more) squads of 4 fighting against endless waves of enemies. As you killed enemies, you would generate more enemies for your opponent to fight (There should be an element of choice here, i.e., deciding whether to zerg the opponent or release waves of tough enemies every now and again). This could be based on a point system of some kind, or really anything.

As your Cryopod/Reactor gets damaged, instead of having limited health there would be a sliding bar of some kind (the Shield would not be included) and as it loses health, your opponents "gains" health. The game mode could be timed (so that the goal is to have the highest health at the end) or it could be endless. There are a lot of options, and I'm sure DE could do a much better job of implementing the required Rock/Paper/Scissors balancing of any PvP mode to create a metagame, but the best part of this is that you NEVER have to balance specifically around PvP. If it's overpowered in PvE, it's overpowered in PvP. No separate skill mechanics, and no need to change the game to fit it. It fits in perfectly, and it even makes sense thematically in a clan versus clan environment.

Just thought I would throw out an idea, I doubt it will go very far, but I have high hopes for this game becoming very successful, and I believe PvP is a fantastic tool to create replayability, and that Warframe will be much better for it.

[neKroMancer]

A good attempt but still, P2P has its own issue with PvP. 4-man squad is sometimes laggy. This is going to be two squads of four at once on P2P connection. I can't imagine the horror of lag upon playing this mode.

Still an unconventional idea worth looking into.

[Satori_Mind]

This sounds a lot like the way pvp shoot 'em ups work. One player chains kills or finishes a boss first, sending more bullets and enemies over to the other player. So instead of sending bullets, the other side would get more enemies that aren't worth as much. Or just more rollers. 4v4 or 2v2 would be nice too.

[SolluxCaptorTA]

+1.

But I would like to see Frame to Frame combat, even if it's never balanced and gives no rewards whatsoever.

[AsianJoyKiller]

+1.

But I would like to see Frame to Frame combat, even if it's never balanced and gives no rewards whatsoever.

If it's not balanced, it puts people off and that generates bad publicity.

"You hear of that Warframe game?"

"Yeah. Fighting people sucks, the dumb devs can't balance anything"

Having bad, unbalanced PvP can really be bad for a games health, because word spreads (by word of mouth or reviews) and it tarnishes peoples impression of the game. There are those who may never pick a game up, not realizing that it's got fun PvE just because of a bad impression given by what they hear about the PvP.

[Venarge]

The first PVP I would really like....

[Aerensiniac]

"You hear of that Warframe game?"

"Yeah. Fighting people sucks, the dumb devs can't balance anything"

Im sorry but you are wrong on that note.

Do you know what your quote is true for? EVERY EACH GOD DAMN MMO that has been EVER created.

Do you think wow is balanced? Do you think dota is balanced? Do you think Black Light is balanced? Do you think falken is balanced?

Do you honestly think that nobody complains because of balance there?

You must be new to the internet.

People ALWAYS complain.

At the end of the day in every competitive game that has a winner, there will be always a loser, and the loser rarely admits that he is worse or worth less than the winner. So no.

In regards of balance: There will be always whining.

Hell, we are in pve, but there is still whining, and even i think that some frames are better/worse than others.

What OP suggested is a simple yet fun alternative, and pvp can be done in an indirect manner such as the mentioned example.

All it takes is fantasy, and if nothing holds, pvp can have a separate set of rules.

Its not the game breaking invention of the century to have different stats for a pvp match. A crap load of games use this already cause they refuse to screw up pve just to satisfy the always whining part of the pvp community.

And just to go with the wow example:

The only developer i value is the one which has enough backbone and common sense to not to implement **** in their game, just because the kiddies cry for it.

WoW is the prime example as to what listening to the whiners will bring forth.

WoW became a 10 million playerbase game because of what it was, not because of the "hurr durr derp, we have reduced skilltrees to a choice between 15 passive buffs, but we are sure that we can still invent a dumber system to satisfy the needs of our average 78 IQ customers".

Warframe still has a concept, the idea itself.

The moment the developers let go of the concept of "what game they wanted to create in the first place", the game will die.

It will become one amongst the many cliché pieces of mediocre crap that the market is flooded with.

So in regards of the entire topic and discussion: No. There are a million ways to be creative and make things work, but it takes resolution to refuse the sea of whiners that want their stuff easier and for less and less effort involved.

Fail to do so, and the game will be drowned by them

Edited April 7, 2013 by Aerensiniac

[Story4]

Indeed what the OP suggests is pretty interesting, I'm sure it needs alot of changes, but the basic ideea is interesting. If this could be coupled with players beign alowed to play a Stalker role (which i don't understand why people are complaining about since you would be 1 vs 4 so you'll need to play smart) i think it would make for a pretty good "PvP" system.

[UndeadLemon]

So, addressing the discussion on PvP in relation to implementing a mode where you would still fight warframe against warframe, I see no reason why the 2 cannot coexist. However, I also don't see the reason to implement such a system. PvP is about competition, and PvP in every game is always the same. Adding in a sub-par man to man pvp system would be interesting, and I'm sure fun, but balancing it would be useless and far too much effort on the part of developers.

The issue with assuming that balance has anything to do with difficulty is the problem with that Aerensiniac seems to be addressing, and while it is relevant to the topic, I would prefer discussion on specific issues inherent to this idea, such as the comment on P2P system and it's drawbacks in relation to this idea.

On that note, I could understand the network being an issue, but the idea would be that the Opponents never see each other, the only interaction they would have would be observation of the tactics/strategies being used against them. This might reduce some of the load on the network, and also lag would not be as much of an issue, as most strategies should revolve around patterns of behavior, and not well-timed attacks, but it could still present an issue. This idea would obviously require some work.

To add some discussion to the mix, what suggestions do people have for adding interactivity? Rather, what should you be able to do to the enemy team? Should you be able to send specific enemies against them (50 rollers at once, dear god), or perhaps preset waves? Or maybe you should just be able to up the stats of the enemies?

Or maybe abilities you could use? Imagine killing a massive amount of enemies, and getting to use the Disruptor Ancients disruption on the entire enemy team, or temporarily making their area have the Cryogenic effect (half shields). There are a lot of interesting ways to implement strategy, I'd be interested to see what you guys think of.

[splodead]

If I had a choice for a PvP game mode it would be like Left 4 Dead.

One team of 4 goes through a mission, but 4 players play enemies and try to stop the tenno from completing it. They would control the more difficult enemies like a stalker, and you could make it so there was a longer cooldown to respawn as the more powerful enemy - but while waiting for those you could play as a normal low level grineer.

It would be amazing if you created a few new enemy types suited to being player controlled which could synergize tactically, but that's not even required for this to be a fun game mode.

IT could also be 2v2 instead of 4v4 if 4v4 isn't viable in peer 2 peer hosting.

[Aerensiniac]

If I had a choice for a PvP game mode it would be like Left 4 Dead.

One team of 4 goes through a mission, but 4 players play enemies and try to stop the tenno from completing it. They would control the more difficult enemies like a stalker, and you could make it so there was a longer cooldown to respawn as the more powerful enemy - but while waiting for those you could play as a normal low level grineer.

It would be amazing if you created a few new enemy types suited to being player controlled which could synergize tactically, but that's not even required for this to be a fun game mode.

IT could also be 2v2 instead of 4v4 if 4v4 isn't viable in peer 2 peer hosting.

Very good. +1