204 replies to this topic

[Solis Obscuri]

Lord Khyron, on 20 May 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

It's addressed in the FAQ

Apparently the big yellow menu button that says "FAQ" is too subtle...

[Woska]

I think a PvE element to the game is very important for the long term viability of the product. First and foremost of course, a fully realized PvP campaign system must be established. But once that is done, or at least well along the way, I think a PvE play environment would provide more gameplay options. And that can only help.

[Talon Thorn]

JP Josh, on 20 May 2012 - 08:50 PM, said:

i would like a pve system to take place in the beginning of the clan invasion say we are in normal pub match and all of a sudden half way through the match the clans arrive this will go on for two weeks before pub matches are back to normal player vs player

but with a added options of a pvp campain and a pve campain

pvp path will be same as pve just with players playing clan instead of AI thus it will be harder/ more rewarding.

How awesome and immersive would that be, you and your lance(or company) are in game, right, and you're slugging it out with some other bunch of guys, and then, all of a sudden, out of no where a star of AI clanners crash the party...totally unexpected...that would be soooo freaking cool!

What better way to capture that "OH CRAP!" feeling IS Warriors must have felt the first time they saw the Clans in action?

Edited by Talon Thorn, 21 May 2012 - 05:04 PM.

[Roaxis Stalomainis]

Rejarial Galatan, on 20 May 2012 - 08:13 PM, said:

I really do not know what all of you peoples problems with PvE is. PvP is a badly broken system, atleast every single time I have encountered it. Just because you PvP fanatics enjoy it, and more power to you FOR enjoying it, there is something to be said for having an ACTUAL story to follow, with characters you get to know and feel bad for when/if they get killed. I am sorry, but PvE is wonderful. yea yea, the box for your pitchforks is on the left, torches and fuel to the right. Until you know the 'fun' of having the enemy spawn camp you and kill you as soon as you materialize or have a horde of enemy slaughter you in a decidedly unfair fight, you will not understand the pain that is PvP. There is a more, clear comparison I can make, but etiquette forbids it. Suffice it to say, it involves a ruler. Whether you agree or not, this game is at the least, story driven in how the timeline will play out.

Yes, someone who understands what I was thinking. If people want PVP and a storyline at the same time or some interesting combat why not make some "missions" that are both PVE and PVP. Example would be a convoy mission, House Steiner sends in their "Scouting Party" to defend the convoy while a team playing as the Clanners can move in and join the mission as the opposing force and mess things up for the mission runners along side PVE challanges such as scripted airstrikes and other previously mentioned SRM units and various kinds of turrets such as LRM, MRM, SRM, Pulse Laser and etc. This would provide a wide range of tactics and force players to be smart about what they are doing when they are selecting their mission loadout.

[Freric]

I feel that PvE should only be used for training and testing new mechs. The main focus needs to be PvP development.

[PANZERBUNNY]

I think there is room for PVE elements similar to EVE online.
Depending on how the map changes it could prompt access to certain mission types that let players form a lance and make some extrta c-bills or faction points insead of diving into PVP slaughterfest each and every match.

for example:
The battle lines draw close to the dieron district on the star map.
"Civli Unrest in Dieron"
Mission
Subdue all aggressors and investigate the source of the dissidence.
Bring any information you can gather back to the drop pod and bug out.

They could create default mission types with random mission elements that can challenge the players and help support their team building skills.

EVE online has various spam missions for differetn corporations that grant you perks and points when you complete them.

Nothing wrong with borrowing awesome concepts and ideas from established games...especially when a mech is involved.

[Sassori]

PANZERBUNNY, on 21 May 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

I think there is room for PVE elements similar to EVE online.
Depending on how the map changes it could prompt access to certain mission types that let players form a lance and make some extrta c-bills or faction points insead of diving into PVP slaughterfest each and every match.

for example:
The battle lines draw close to the dieron district on the star map.
"Civli Unrest in Dieron"
Mission
Subdue all aggressors and investigate the source of the dissidence.
Bring any information you can gather back to the drop pod and bug out.

They could create default mission types with random mission elements that can challenge the players and help support their team building skills.

EVE online has various spam missions for differetn corporations that grant you perks and points when you complete them.

Nothing wrong with borrowing awesome concepts and ideas from established games...especially when a mech is involved.

There is absolutely 'Room' for PvE. What there isn't however, is Funding for PvE. They tried to make a PvE game to begin with and couldn't get the funding, so they ended up going pure PvP.

MW:O is thusly a pure PvP game and doesn't have any PvE elements atm beyond the environment of needing c-bills for upgrades and picking a merc contract.

For those who are rabidly anti-PvP, this isn't the game for you. Just how it is right now.

[Threat Doc]

PvE doesn't have to be the bane of PvP players. Rather than having a disparity between PvE and PvP, there is an opportunity to allow PvP players to play in matches in a PvE universe, where one never knows if they will be facing live pilots or bots, and it would actually add a level of healthy respect -some might even call it fear- because you never know. In THIS game it could be made a reality, since this game will be about the missions; THIS game makes it a possibility without removing anything from the PvP possibilities.

Devs, if you read this and decide you're going to include PvE, including missions, multiple objectives, etc. once we drop into a mission, don't let us know if we're facing bots or live-pilots until the game is over, or we're able to detect the live-pilot.

And, with that, I leave this conversation, because I hate being flamed by those incapable of thinking beyond their own wishes.

[Howlin Wolf]

I'm for having PvE content at some point down the road, be it paid download offline play or built into the game itself. Im not concerned whether it gives any rewards for playing it but it would be a welcome breather from the match grind.

I'm willing to pay for it as others have stated. I'd even be willing to make a preorder refundable if they dont get the funds they need to start or convert it to premium currency whatever its called, but i doubt that would be the case. I would like to know how they plan on doing it before paying tho some ideas are a bit strange that i've read.

Variety is the spice of life. Its better PGI make a buck on PvE rather than some folks getting burned out on the same old same old over and over again. Just my opinion.

Edited by Howlin Wolf, 21 May 2012 - 06:43 PM.

[Bolo Warden]

Christopher Dayson, on 21 May 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

There is absolutely 'Room' for PvE. What there isn't however, is Funding for PvE. They tried to make a PvE game to begin with and couldn't get the funding, so they ended up going pure PvP.

I quote you only to state I think you missed stating "What there isn't however, is Funding for PvE at this time".

My understanding is that in the beginning the devs were trying to get a PvE game in conjunction with a PvP game. But, due to the investors, or lack thereof, limited funding was granted. Now, since PvP has a large following in a lot of games today, the devs focus was drawn to this crowd for a quick way to start the game. I believe the FAQs identify that a future PvE hasn't been eliminated, just potentially post-poned at this time.

For myself, I'd like to see PvE content included within the game. Eventually, if/when it occurs, the AI could be tested and tweaked against other players through the matchmaking system. Future missions could range from protect this location/convoy to go raid x location and/or retrieve this/that item. Would PvE disrupt the PvP system, I don't think so. Or if there was the potential, have the matchmaker make every other/third/fourth/etc mission a PvP mission.

Edited by Bolo Warden, 21 May 2012 - 06:44 PM.

[Sassori]

I said 'Right now'. So yeah taking my comment out of context is cool...

I'm not anti-PvE, I'd love for some PvE, I just think complaining about the lack of it is pointless as it is a PvP game at this current time.

Do I wish we had a long single player campaign? One for each House? Hell yes I do, but we don't... and whinging about it isn't going to change that.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Christopher Dayson, on 21 May 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

There is absolutely 'Room' for PvE. What there isn't however, is Funding for PvE. They tried to make a PvE game to begin with and couldn't get the funding, so they ended up going pure PvP.

MW:O is thusly a pure PvP game and doesn't have any PvE elements atm beyond the environment of needing c-bills for upgrades and picking a merc contract.

For those who are rabidly anti-PvP, this isn't the game for you. Just how it is right now.

Oh I wouldn't expect anything like that for launch. I'm thinking down the road when some new money can be injected into the development the two playstyles can merge into a happy CASE unit.

[Trevnor]

Okay, this will likely be the only post I make in this thread, as it seems there are many disparaging views on what, exactly PvE is. PvE does not strictly mean that you have to grind for XP, or gear, or equipment. It simply means, in it's most simplistic form, Player versus Environment. That could literally mean anything you wanted it to. As some have already pointed out, it could be a star or two of Clanners dropping into the middle of a normal battle between to players during a normal match. It could be player ordered mobile armour elements, or battle armour that's AI controlled running amok on the battle field in amongst the actual players. It doesn't mean that we would have to play missions to get XP or certain gear, and if you think that, get that outta your head right now.

Yes, right now, MWO is pure PvP, which is fine. But adding PvE elements, such as outlined above wouldn't make me hate the game, in fact, adding AI battle armour, or hover tanks, or aerospace fighters would only add to the realism, because BT isn't just about the Battlemechs.

In my last note for you all to think on. It is, and always has been, up to the developers on what is added or not added to the game. This game is F2P, purely and simply put. We, as a fan base, are listened to, thank god, but if what we say/ask/demand isn't feasible, then the dev's aren't going to add it to the game, simply because you want it to be done. So, if they decide to add some PvE elements to MWO, such as AI battle units, a small single player campaign, or hell, a grind fest MMORPG(extremely unlikely), I will not stop playing this game. You are entitled to your opinions, but if you don't like where the game is going, then don't play. You don't have to pay the devs money, they aren't beholden to just yourself, and no one is forcing you to play the game. The dev's are only making this game as a gift to us as a fan base, and as they say, don't look a gift horse in the mouth.

[Rejarial Galatan]

Roaxis Stalomainis, on 21 May 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

Yes, someone who understands what I was thinking. If people want PVP and a storyline at the same time or some interesting combat why not make some "missions" that are both PVE and PVP. Example would be a convoy mission, House Steiner sends in their "Scouting Party" to defend the convoy while a team playing as the Clanners can move in and join the mission as the opposing force and mess things up for the mission runners along side PVE challanges such as scripted airstrikes and other previously mentioned SRM units and various kinds of turrets such as LRM, MRM, SRM, Pulse Laser and etc. This would provide a wide range of tactics and force players to be smart about what they are doing when they are selecting their mission loadout.

that has tremendous potential. it gives us PvE players something more than PvP and makes us ALL think very hard about how we load up.

[FrostPaw]

You know the irony of a pure PvP game....if it does really well, I mean really really well. The devs will pour all those resources into more pvp content, because clearly that's what everyone is wanting because the game is doing really well.

It's a funny ole world...

[Rejarial Galatan]

to say everyone, you must be able to include everyone. I for one, do not want PvP, but, considering I want a new BTU based game, I have no choice, so, i will play, but, what I want, is a PvE game. So, hate to say it, not everyone. Even 1 dissenting opinion makes it so not everyone can be said as everyone. not bein a troll or rude, just being honest.

[Wolfe Ryatt]

You know, I just read the FAQ again. It says little about PvE. It only mentions co-op play. PvE doesn't seem to be ruled out completely. I would like to see a PvE training/trial map, as well as an arena style PvP map that doesn't penalize PvP combat so that players can train against one another.

[Zarax]

The two could live together.
Have the PVP part develop first and start generating cash, after that PVE incremental costs would shrink as most of the artwork and balancing would be in place already.

There is no conflict in reality, just see it this way:

The current F2P PVP setup is the cheapest and easiest way to develop the base structure and bulk of the coding.
After that, for a possible Battletech Online:

- Most mechs are modeled and balanced
- Weapons are mostly balanced
- There is a lot of environmental models and textures already developed
- Server load and balancing is tested

What would be need to be developed

- PVE minded maps
- Vehicles and structures
- A basic AI for the aforementioned
- Code for the new battle mode
- Balancing, Balancing Balancing

Which is not something done at a finger snap but is definitely less work than trying to develop both products at once.

[Drakewolff Kerensky]

mmmm i can of like the pve but if we dont get that all right

[Wolfe Ryatt]

I'm actually reminded of my experience with WWII Online. That MMO has an offline version that updates parallel with the online version. Players use the equipment offline to get familiar with it, test out keybinds, target practice...etc.