To the PvP elite

[TUXs]

So, I keep seeing this argument about bads. How long it takes for bads to gear up and how people claim they want a fair fighting ground.

 

So why do the PvP elitist keep complaining about bads getting rewards for being bad? I thought you guys wanted everyone in similar gear. Isn't that the whole reason you are all going to GW2? So the second they increase pvp rewards for losing you get upset because they (bads) are going to gear up faster.

 

I thought the point was that bads will be bads even in good gear? It's that the point of being a "good"? So why does it matter if bads get gear to compete? Is it because you don't actually want competition? I think so.

 

You elitist have this idea that you are good because of skill and not because of gear. Now that bads can gear up faster you are scared that your "skill" will be deminished because you know your "skill" is determined by your gear gap.

 

I'm not a bad or a good. I am just a person that enjoys PvP and I like winning. So i'm curious why the "goods" keep changing their tune. I can perform well in bad gear and I perform even better in good gear. Personally if I am a good ....which I think I am above average, but not a true pvp star like some... then I think bads having gear will end with me still being good.

 

I don't understand this QQ about speeding up the gearing process. In the long run it should create better pvp having people in equal gear. Isn't that the point?

 

FREAKING SPOT ON post! PvP is fun, win or lose...but I ALWAYS try to win! I want skill and strategy to mean more than gear.

[Nmaharg]

Terrible rewards don't encourage people to get better either. As seen, people just quit.

 

And thats just sad and says alot about those people.

[SinnedWill]

FREAKING SPOT ON post! PvP is fun, win or lose...but I ALWAYS try to win! I want skill and strategy to mean more than gear.

 

^^ - and skill/strategy does mean more than gear. There will always be people that blatantly perform better than others who have the same gear/class spec - and even the same stats stacked. Strategy and tactics are what cause such players to become known by name - and I can assure you that many people will spec identically and equip identically but never be able to accomplish what these players do. Albeit, over time (how much time depends on the player), these players will learn and gradually improve to accomplish the same thing the person they're emulating does, but typically these people have made changes of their own and altered their playstyle further.

[DarkDruidSS]

So now the big question is: Why don't MMO developers see things this way? Is it market studies or what? I'm guessing in the SWTOR case it just hasn't been thought about much. I wonder how many of the FPS players would try an MMO with "gearless" pvp? I play both genres, and I feel like the FPS developers know what makes a fun, competitive environment. Maybe BW needs to go hire some CoD guys, hehe.

 

Except the FPS developers have taken MMO lessons and there is both gear progression and rank leveling in FPS games now. COD is a prime example of gear progression and imbalance due to unlocks, but that wasn't what this thread was about.

 

I play FPS games and personally I am looking forward to the BF3 Close Quarters pack so I can get away from SWTOR for a break... and even though I know both games ( MMO/FPS) are similar I still consider FPS games to be more PvP oriented.... not sure why. Now in a PvP for the sake of PvP contest... no genre does it better than RTS and specifically the Starcraft series.

[Timadan]

And thats just sad and says alot about those people.

 

The majority of those could probably spell incentive though.

[knottedbyfear]

Except the FPS developers have taken MMO lessons and there is both gear progression and rank leveling in FPS games now. COD is a prime example of gear progression and imbalance due to unlocks, but that wasn't what this thread was about.

 

I play FPS games and personally I am looking forward to the BF3 Close Quarters pack so I can get away from SWTOR for a break... and even though I know both games ( MMO/FPS) are similar I still consider FPS games to be more PvP oriented.... not sure why. Now in a PvP for the sake of PvP contest... no genre does it better than RTS and specifically the Starcraft series.

 

Yeah, progression in PvP doesn't do anything for the longevity of the game as far as I have seen. There is a reason that Starcraft was still played heavily after 12 years (or whatever it was between games). It sure wasn't progression... How long was the most recent CoD heavily played? 6 mos maybe?

 

I agree with you about FPS games being contaminated (as opposed to improved) by progression of any sorts. I think improved skins and such are as far as it should go in an FPS multiplayer environment. I wonder if the business types see a shorter lifespan of a game's popularity as a good thing. Maybe their math involves selling the next title more than keeping the current player-base engaged.

[JediDuckling]

People who say they don't want the losers to get anything are people who are just lazy to win a fair fight. They are not the elite, but they would like to be. Glad BioWare changed the system today again, to motivate people to stay in warzones, so that those lazy folks have to fight again for their victories.

 

lol people are leaving warzones because they are fed up of the stupid broken OP class's and specs just facerolling each other in 2 shots. i mean what is the point. healers die in like 1 shot which is retarded and the dps now is just far to high.

 

if i see scrubs with OP crap i just leave no point staying.

[DarkDruidSS]

Yeah, progression in PvP doesn't do anything for the longevity of the game as far as I have seen. There is a reason that Starcraft was still played heavily after 12 years (or whatever it was between games). It sure wasn't progression... How long was the most recent CoD heavily played? 6 mos maybe?

 

I agree with you about FPS games being contaminated (as opposed to improved) by progression of any sorts. I think improved skins and such are as far as it should go in an FPS multiplayer environment. I wonder if the business types see a shorter lifespan of a game's popularity as a good thing. Maybe their math involves selling the next title more than keeping the current player-base engaged.

 

Haha man. I skipped the last COD. My friends wanted me to get it. I had just gotten BF3. 3 weeks later my friends that were playing COD quit. I was so glad I didn't get that game. I like the BF series because it is more about teamplay and less about lone wolfing and kill streak perks.

 

And yes, I think their goal is for people to burn out quickly so they buy the next game.