Forums
-
English
-
Developer Tracker (844,840 visits to this link)
-
- 165.7k
- posts
-
- 3.6m
- posts
-
- 791.5k
- posts
-
- 3.8k
- posts
-
- 293.8k
- posts
-
- 168.3k
- posts
-
- 1.2m
- posts
-
- 172.4k
- posts
-
- 137.4k
- posts
-
- 13.4k
- posts
-
- 67.3k
- posts
-
- 153.8k
- posts
-
- 194.8k
- posts
-
- 22.7k
- posts
-
-
Français (French)
-
Fil du développeur (6,787 visits to this link)
-
- 5.1k
- posts
-
- 134.9k
- posts
-
- 31.2k
- posts
-
- 453
- posts
-
- 10.2k
- posts
-
- 2.7k
- posts
-
- 56k
- posts
-
- Records PvP 4.X
- By lras,
-
- 6.5k
- posts
-
- 5.9k
- posts
-
- 1
- post
-
- 1.2k
- posts
-
- 7.2k
- posts
-
- 4.2k
- posts
-
-
Deutsch (German)
-
Entwicklernews (9,907 visits to this link)
-
- 19.7k
- posts
-
- 298.6k
- posts
-
- 53.9k
- posts
-
- 1.9k
- posts
-
- 39.8k
- posts
-
- 90.5k
- posts
-
- Low LVL PVP
- By Fynnlagh,
-
- 19.1k
- posts
-
- 12k
- posts
-
- 3.1k
- posts
-
- 2
- posts
-
- 1.7k
- posts
-
- 19.9k
- posts
-
- 8.4k
- posts
-
-
Who's Online 4 Members, 13 Anonymous, 339 Guests (See full list)
Announcements
-
Posts
-
Did you read the thread's title? If yes, then why are you responding to me? Are you trying to redefine the definitions of PVP and PVE players everyone else is using on this forum? You're PVP player if you play PVP. You're PVE player if you play PVE only. No one is going to waste time on typing "PVE + PVP player" since it's completely unnecessary. -
Play the way you like it - there is a lot Ops can do in PVP. You often won't even be able to stealth away, but you'll adapt. Use your double-roll, as well as leap to friend/enemy (you can jump to both with the same command - very useful in PVP). And, oh you can be annoying like hell on an Op. Also, if you decide to go for high numbers, try Lethality. It's AOE can get massive on a large enemy group. You won't be able to crit as easily though as on Concealment. So, definitely experiment, find what you like, and have fun.
-
Galactic Season does not force anyone to do anything as doing it is optional. The second thing is that there is no such thing as a pvp player, this game simply does not allow such a player model. You are either a pve player or a pve + pvp player. -
We have 11 to pick 7 out of - that's plenty of choices. More choices isn't always better - there are whole usability studies regarding that, but I won't bore you with it. And I reject the argument that PVE players are forced into PVP when they have 9 more options to chose from while only needing 7 which is in the thread's title to begin with. It's not PVP players complaining about PVE objectives - it's PVE players complaining about two, TWO, PVP-focused objectives out of 11 possible offered every once in a while, not even every week. And that, at the very least, is not cool.
-
By captainbladejk · Posted
Which means there needs to be more objectives for folks to pick from. This is an easy fix if they would just do it. Again this is easily fixed by offering more objectives for people to pick from. Just to quantify it lets say they gave a total of 25 objectives of various types and let people pick which ones they wanted to do. Number could be higher or lower but you get the picture. This is an easy fix if the devs would just do it, but I have no hope of them actually listening to players on anything. I don't see anyone demanding every objective be curated to their liking save for one person in here (not you). Now for the line in bold, I reject the argument of pvp players being forced to do pve. I get that they want to do their own thing going against other players and by all means the pvp folks should be able to pvp as much as like they like. Simultaneously though they knowingly joined a game whose main focus has always been pve with the option of pvp gameplay. pvp has never been the main focus of this game and never will be. It's like the folks I used to see during my days of semi-professional MTG that would go to big events with their friends and complain that they couldn't get enough people for side events because too many people were focused on the main event. Like dude most folks are there for the main event, the heck did you think was going to happen. Sorry that you can't get enough folks for the side events you want but you knew that most folks were there for the main event to start with yet want to complain. I'm sorry but no that's not how that works. Doesn't mean folks shouldn't be allowed to partake in side events or that side events aren't valid, it means that they're going to cater (or should rather) to the majority of the people there. Folks there for the main event shouldn't feel pressured to drop just to appease the side event guys. Likewise the side event guys shouldn't be pushed out either. There's no valid reason the event organizers couldn't accommodate both. People who are there for the main event shouldn't feel pressured to partake in side events, and folks there for the side events shouldn't feel like they're being forced to partake in the main event. At the end of the day folks are going to like what they like and it's clear here that there needs to be more objectives for people to pick from. The line of logic being used here can also be applied to the conquest changes that enraged most of the playerbase. If we're going to say it has nothing to do with leaving progress on the table because there are other objectives aside from the pvp ones, one could also say the same thing about the change to heroics. One could say that they didn't need to do much else because you still have other objectives you can do besides heroics. To conclude incase it wasn't already clear to folks, the solution is more variety of objectives to pick from.
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
