Jump to content

Ark pvp is dumb. It's just offline wiping all the time.


Zoopshab

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, scenestr said:

i see people arguing that raiding offline is not pvp, well let me tell you right now that is it PVP. an online player is attacking something that you set up while you were online at some point. Meaning everything you own and your structures are player involved and player made, someone attacking said base is PLAYER VS PLAYER. this guy is not attacking some stone ruins. he is attacking a base that was put there intentionally by another online player in the hopes this base would not be found/well defended with turrets.

This is the same kind of logic that says most mobile games are "PVP" even though you mostly just attack pre-made bases like in Clash of Clans, except in those games since bases are content they don't get wiped they remain for the next person to try their luck at. Also by this logic pretty much every game is PvP because someone hand crafted it. That RTS campaign your playing, well a person laid out that base your assaulting so must be PvP. Playing an RPG like Fallout someone created that cave system and hand crafted those monster locations so it's PvP. And so on.

 

PvP means there is another person on the other side able to react and counter you in a way only another Human can. AI and preset up bases are often easy to exploit because they behave in a very predictable manner that can be countered with little to no effort. A good example of this since we are talking about PvP is Planetside 2. You fight back and forth over bases and territory. When there is another team it's fun pitched back and forth battle fighting for ground. When it's one side cause there are not enough on the other team or you are just trying to flank one of their rear bases it because an easy exercise in abusing stealth and sniping tactics. Since you just need to take out curtain defenses to clear you path then go capture the point and move on. It's a bit boring when you know no one is around to stop you from taking a base down single handed. But knowing most of the time a few people could jump in and wipe you out easily adds tension. But in ark the odds of someone loginning in while their base is being hit are so low it's not even a real concern since tribes are really small.

The gaming studio's love of muddling the waters with terms to add buzzwords to their Marketing Campaigns and the Mobile Market's Misuse of the PvP term is probably to blame. But since the Early days of PC gaming PvP has always meant that you are playing against another live human player. Not what someone, be they player or developer, created and left for you to face off against. But rather the point and counter point that comes with facing another player in combat as the battle unfolds.

 

EDIT: To clarify, Facing off against someone else's creation to see who built best creation is still competitive and while something can be competitive that doesn't mean that it is also PvP. As all PvP is competitive but not all competitive things are PvP. For example competing for best score or time run in a single player game would be competitive but not PvP even though you are trying to best another player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply
11 hours ago, ForzaProiettile said:

The issue could be partly solved as I've said many times by implementing a partial Offline Raid Protection system. By partial I mean that your base can be still be attacked and damaged when you are not online but that the incentives for doing so are far far less then they would normally be. I would recommend that for instance when offline turrets do 2-3x more damage output and structures have 3x the HP. This would at least create some incentive for most tribes to wait till your online or else result in a rather expensive raid.

That said none of this would mean much to ARK's 70+ mega tribes that run around on servers doing what they do. Even the best raid protection can't make up for broken mechanics and poor design decisions by the developers. How on earth they can conclude that 70 players in 1 tribe is "fair and balanced" is quite remarkable. I have to honestly question how long they have actually spent playing on Official PVP servers since it definitely seems they are well out of touch with reality.

 

Being safe when offline should NOT be the norm. That completely defeats the purpose of a persistent pvp world. That is why the ORP servers are there.. they are specialized servers to cater to the crowd that wants them, but they are by no means the norm for what this game was built on. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with offline raiding. In fact if they were to get rid of offline raiding entirely these same threads would pop up by the same people complaining about a new element in pvp that is now "broken." People die, people get wiped... that is life on a pvp server. The problem is people get upset and come to these forums to cry/vent about it when they knew full well that was a risk when they chose a pvp server. It is working as intended and is the main focus of a pvp survival game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, if they made an ark with several hundred claimable, instanced, non-raidable base locations (allowing for expanding buildings without turning the ARK into a PvE mega-structure-fest) I'd be there in a heartbeat.

If people could no longer destroy your stuff, nor block/ruin spawns or key areas of the map, but competition & fighting over resources in the wild was emphasized - that would be my ideal server type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Zoopshab said:

Its not that any of those things are happening. Its that theyre happening offline and thus this is effectively player made PVE. Consider if you had 2 tribes of equally skilled people, who had the same gear, same tames, etc. If one plays in a different time zone and raids the other while they are offline it has nothing to do with them being stronger or better players. 

Precisely. This is why it's good to open up your network to folks in other time zones. One of my favorite PvP tribes was a fairly strong alpha tribe I was in that had tribe members from what felt like every time zone. It was nice because there were always people around, but more importantly it was nice to be able to hang out and talk to people from around the world. The added benefit is that there were less times where the whole tribe was offline...someone was pretty much always on and would blast a notification out if there was trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Deathwaits said:

Being safe when offline should NOT be the norm. That completely defeats the purpose of a persistent pvp world. That is why the ORP servers are there.. they are specialized servers to cater to the crowd that wants them, but they are by no means the norm for what this game was built on. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with offline raiding. In fact if they were to get rid of offline raiding entirely these same threads would pop up by the same people complaining about a new element in pvp that is now "broken." People die, people get wiped... that is life on a pvp server. The problem is people get upset and come to these forums to cry/vent about it when they knew full well that was a risk when they chose a pvp server. It is working as intended and is the main focus of a pvp survival game.

Its possible that if they were to get rid of offline raiding some threads would pop up about a new element in pvp that is broken. That doesn't mean the game isn't progressing to a more engaging state. 

Yes people die, people get wiped... that's life on a pvp server. But that's not the argument. The argument is that its happening while people are offline and that is, in general, less engaging than it would be otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LouSpowells said:

Precisely. This is why it's good to open up your network to folks in other time zones. One of my favorite PvP tribes was a fairly strong alpha tribe I was in that had tribe members from what felt like every time zone. It was nice because there were always people around, but more importantly it was nice to be able to hang out and talk to people from around the world. The added benefit is that there were less times where the whole tribe was offline...someone was pretty much always on and would blast a notification out if there was trouble.

It would still be nice to hang out and talk to people from around the world even in an ORP system. And with members from every time zone your base would always be vulnerable and thus people would be still be sending out notifications. 

There would be less incentive to recruit people from other time zones perhaps? But does Ark have built in features to encourage cross-time-zone recruiting? It doesn't seem built with that intention. We cant even type or see foreign characters and there are OC and Asia dedicated servers with lower ping. But perhaps they should go in that direction?

Also, what if a tribe were to comes from another server with 70 member and lock your members from any time zone off the server, and then proceed to "offline" raid your base?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Zoopshab said:

It would still be nice to hang out and talk to people from around the world even in an ORP system. And with members from every time zone your base would always be vulnerable and thus people would be still be sending out notifications. 

There would be less incentive to recruit people from other time zones perhaps? But does Ark have built in features to encourage cross-time-zone recruiting? It doesn't seem built with that intention. We cant even type or see foreign characters and there are OC and Asia dedicated servers with lower ping. But perhaps they should go in that direction?

Also, what if a tribe were to comes from another server with 70 member and lock your members from any time zone off the server, and then proceed to "offline" raid your base?

I've never played on ORP for any extended period of time. Many of the PvP servers I've played on don't have a whole lot of offline raiding. Usually the players unanimously recognized that there's no point in offline raiding because the fun is in actually fighting each other. ORP was never really necessary...even if everyone snuck in the occasional offline smash-and-grab. (Usually just for a blueprint or two though...not to steal everything and ruin the base) 

As for the rest of the post, here's always the potential for many of those things to happen...but it's typically a exception to the rule. I've played with people from all around the world, and pretty much all of them spoke English at least well enough to conduct a raid, many better than some of the American players I've tribed with. Keep in mind though, this is all on unofficial...but I truly believe that if you want the best PvP experience in this game, you have to find a good PvP community on unofficial servers. It's not a server full of fluffy bunny happy times...you'll still get KOS'd, raided, wiped...but after that happens you all get back into the same VoIP channel and laugh it off before rebuilding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Zoopshab said:

Its possible that if they were to get rid of offline raiding some threads would pop up about a new element in pvp that is broken. That doesn't mean the game isn't progressing to a more engaging state. 

Yes people die, people get wiped... that's life on a pvp server. But that's not the argument. The argument is that its happening while people are offline and that is, in general, less engaging than it would be otherwise.

But that is a side effect of having a persistent state game. That is the whole point of it... YOU ARE NEVER SAFE. You are not safe from that alpha rex chewing down your base or that tribe with c4 blowing down your walls.

So if you make it where you are magically safe when offline you take away a huge part of how this game was made. They DO have servers for that so it isn't that you don't have that option.. it is just that the normal pvp servers are not setup that way and I doubt they ever will be.

There is nothing wrong with being in danger while offline.. it just means you need to plan out your defenses better to make raiding much less likely during that time. If you do not want the risk of being raided offline then go to an ORP server or even a pve server. There are servers that cater to that crowd.

My point was this btw... no matter what they change people will die and they will come to the forums and complain. Those people will never be happy and will always find something else to blame for their deaths. So the fact that those same people are what are pushing for no offline raiding means that this change is only to quiet the vocal few and it will only work temporarily until they find something else to cry about... there is 100% nothing wrong with the current system. There are even servers that make this a moot point. So this whole thread is rather pointless when you can literally select a server that makes offline raiding a non-issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never expect an honourable fight. We are in a world of thieves, keep that in mind when building. 

This is an open world PvP sandbox treat it as such. 

Do some raiding of your own, have fun steal from your foes because one day you'll spawn in to red letters saying you were killed by....  and that's it. 

I play both PVE and PvP because some days i just want to go fishing on my beach front property and some days i want to collect specimen implants 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Deathwaits said:

My point was this btw... no matter what they change people will die and they will come to the forums and complain. Those people will never be happy and will always find something else to blame for their deaths.

Nobody is complaining about dying or finding other people to blame for their deaths. The specific complains here is that offline raiding is disengaging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Teddansen said:

Never expect an honourable fight. We are in a world of thieves, keep that in mind when building. 

This is an open world PvP sandbox treat it as such. 

Do some raiding of your own, have fun steal from your foes because one day you'll spawn in to red letters saying you were killed by....  and that's it. 

I play both PVE and PvP because some days i just want to go fishing on my beach front property and some days i want to collect specimen implants 

 

DDOSing is dishonorable. Should we accept that?

It would still be an open world PVP sandbox with better offline raid defense.

In order to collect specimen implants, don't you have to kill players? How many players are you killing when you offline raid? Zero.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, johnm81 said:

Can we just eventually accept a single truth? 

--- Official Ark is NOT a pvp game. Official Ark IS a open world sandbox Free For All. ---

The sooner we accept this the sooner we can play the game with maximum effectiveness.

A good rule of wrist is that if there are at least 2 players in the game that can fight each other, it's a PvP game. Free-for-all is a type of PvP. This isn't a debatable topic...if a game pits players against other players, it is a PvP game. End of story dude. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont play official? smh.... too many peope complain about pvp when official pvp servers arent even half the available options.

The people crying about official pvp are the ones who dont want to try orp because "there is nobody to raid" or "its too hard to raid".... well my friends, you have to choose one or the other, simple as that. Or play pve, or some other game that caters to your every petty demand.

 

Tired of seeing these stupid threads...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, LouSpowells said:

A good rule of wrist is that if there are at least 2 players in the game that can fight each other, it's a PvP game. Free-for-all is a type of PvP. This isn't a debatable topic...if a game pits players against other players, it is a PvP game. End of story dude. 

Free For All Sandbox is not a subset of PvP. There is much overlap between the two, yes, but also a lot of activities belong to FFA that aren't in PvP.

IE: P-v-Automated Defense. And P-v-Tamed Dino AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, johnm81 said:

Free For All Sandbox is not a subset of PvP. There is much overlap between the two, yes, but also a lot of activities belong to FFA that aren't in PvP.

IE: P-v-Automated Defense. And P-v-Tamed Dino AI.

I guess underpants gnomes build and place the turrets while the Easter Bunny tames the dinos. 

Next you're going to tell me that Counter Strike isn't PvP because the guns do the shooting and the knives do the stabbing?
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

I guess underpants gnomes build and place the turrets while the Easter Bunny tames the dinos. 

Next you're going to tell me that Counter Strike isn't PvP because the guns do the shooting and the knives do the stabbing?
 

....

Its not the knife that stabs nor the gun that shoots that makes it pvp, its the human mind controlling them pitted vs another human mind controlling a knife and a gun that is pvp. Its in the name PLAYER vs PLAYER. Automated turrets and NPC AI is not controlled by a player even if it was placed by the player. Thus its is Player vs Server or Player vs Turret/dino AI. You are not AI, you are a human. ....Or so I think but with that last post I am not sure....

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Zoopshab said:

DDOSing is dishonorable. Should we accept that?

It would still be an open world PVP sandbox with better offline raid defense.

In order to collect specimen implants, don't you have to kill players? How many players are you killing when you offline raid? Zero.

 

You don't really have a choice but to accept ddos'ing do you?  Even if WC fixes the current methods some hack already has another up their sleeve. I know nothing about programming and or coding but I'm confident there will not be a fix for overloading the servers into a rollback . 

There is plenty of offline defenses provided but they will never stand up against an actual person/s,

the best you can hope for is that they give up or run out of their own supplies before getting to your goodies . 

I play pvp solo so on the off chance I can actually get into a base without killing anything you better believe I'm going to keep it that way , just like everyone who's done the same to me.  

Don't try to act all high and mighty like you've never played the villian here amongst a world of thieves and crooks.  

We all know exactly what we're getting ourselves into when we join a PvP server. The problem is some of us can't accept the inevitable when it does happen. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, johnm81 said:

....

Its not the knife that stabs nor the gun that shoots that makes it pvp, its the human mind controlling them pitted vs another human mind controlling a knife and a gun that is pvp. Its in the name PLAYER vs PLAYER. Automated turrets and NPC AI is not controlled by a player even if it was placed by the player. Thus its is Player vs Server or Player vs Turret/dino AI. You are not AI, you are a human. ....Or so I think but with that last post I am not sure....

I'm curious to know more about your new definition of Player versus Player. Is Starcraft no longer a player versus player game because AI controls zerg attack actions? Is Battlefield no longer a player versus player game because you can drop proximity mines? Is Call of Duty no longer a player versus player game because you can call in an airstrike?

Honestly, it's an interesting theory...but you're only still subscribing to it because your argument would disintegrate if you didn't. Ark multiplayer on a PvP server is a player versus player game. You have players assembling an arsenal to defeat or defend from other players. If you sat around and did nothing and the animals tamed themselves, and the turrets put themselves together, and the dinos and turrets set themselves to attack target you might have a point...but they don't, so neither do you. There's no way to dance around it or put it diplomatically, you're just wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

I'm curious to know more about your new definition of Player versus Player. Is Starcraft no longer a player versus player game because AI controls zerg attack actions?

Starcraft 2 has many elements of pvp and some elements that aren't pvp. If a player gives direction to to a unit to attack another players units that is giving directions to counter such attack it is pvp. It is a player vs a player. However, if a player has given up and walks away from his computer and the other player cleans up then it is no longer pvp even though the units were made and placed by a human. They are no longer taking direction from a human just the AI.

 

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

Is Battlefield no longer a player versus player game because you can drop proximity mines? Is Call of Duty no longer a player versus player game because you can call in an airstrike?

Those games have many elements of PvP and some that aren't PvP. You seem to be stuck under this thought process that a game is all of one type or all of another type. Most games has aspects of many types. Ark is no different. It has some PvP aspects and some PvAI aspects which imo makes it more of a sandbox FFA. You seem to hold on to this idea that games can only be one type, to use our own words:

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

There's no way to dance around it or put it diplomatically, you're just wrong.

Well said...lol.

 

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

Honestly, it's an interesting theory...but you're only still subscribing to it because your argument would disintegrate if you didn't.

I am only subscribing to my argument because if I didn't my argument would disintegrate? What? ... Was that your attempt at being witty?

 

1 hour ago, LouSpowells said:

Ark multiplayer on a PvP server is a player versus player game. You have players assembling an arsenal to defeat or defend from other players. If you sat around and did nothing and the animals tamed themselves, and the turrets put themselves together, and the dinos and turrets set themselves to attack target you might have a point...but they don't, so neither do you.

Yawn... Just reiterating your position doesn't make it any stronger...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 1:38 AM, Deathwaits said:

Being safe when offline should NOT be the norm. That completely defeats the purpose of a persistent pvp world. That is why the ORP servers are there.. they are specialized servers to cater to the crowd that wants them, but they are by no means the norm for what this game was built on. 

There is absolutely nothing wrong with offline raiding. In fact if they were to get rid of offline raiding entirely these same threads would pop up by the same people complaining about a new element in pvp that is now "broken." People die, people get wiped... that is life on a pvp server. The problem is people get upset and come to these forums to cry/vent about it when they knew full well that was a risk when they chose a pvp server. It is working as intended and is the main focus of a pvp survival game.

I'm not proposing or supporting removing the ability to offline raid at all. What I am suggesting is that if you don't offer incentives to players to raid while players are online you end up with the current situation where everyone raids while offline. My suggestion was to allow players to still raid while offline but at the same time offer good incentives to raid when they are online such as less building health and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...