PvP, PvE, PvPvE?

[Tool]

I understand the general Planetside community oppose PvE in PS. However with the indication given from one of the recent videos on the future of PS2 about PvE, it may be included. (Sorry I can't link it atm, using my phone.) I want people who respond to this thread really think about the inclusion of PvE and how they feel it could be done.

The general answers of turrets only or no PvE at all aren't what this thread is about. So please don't use that as a cop out instead of a bit creative thinking.

If done properly, what could PvE in future PS2 look like?

[Traak]

Player versus Effete? What is PVE?

[MgFalcon]

I wana shoot some space pigs!! Just like WoW but with laserzzzzzzzz!!

[Tool]

Player versus Effete? What is PVE?
_
Player versus Environment. Environment refers to NPCs or AI controlled characters/objects that are abundant in other MMOs.

[Coreldan]

Hope not. Deployables and wall turrets are the only thing allowed to have AI, IMO.

[Sirisian]

I understand the general Planetside community oppose PvE in PS. However with the indication given from one of the recent videos on the future of PS2 about PvE, it may be included. (Sorry I can't link it atm, using my phone.) I want people who respond to this thread really think about the inclusion of PvE and how they feel it could be done.

The general answers of turrets only or no PvE at all aren't what this thread is about. So please don't use that as a cop out instead of a bit creative thinking.

If done properly, what could PvE in future PS2 look like?
This thread has a lot of thoughts (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36234). More importantly it contains a poll.

PvE is player vs environment basically. I don't think this community has been able to have a serious discussion about this since most people immediately imagine PvE like in the other MMOs they might play. You end up with comments like:
I wana shoot some space pigs!! Just like WoW but with laserzzzzzzzz!!

I made a nice idea about graboid-like worms that push vehicles/players into the air that stand still while shooting on the desert planets. This would use the new physics abilities. I think ideas like that scare most people though and turn them off to the idea of having any PvE.

It's already obvious to me after reading and talking with people that you wouldn't get experience for killing them.

There's probably a middle ground. I noticed passive creatures that don't effect the game seem to cause an indifference other than fear that it would slow the game down. They're imagining a lot of creatures everywhere, even during battles.

[Rbstr]

I'm ok with some AI stuff...as long as it doesn't enable a PvE level grinding type thing and it doesn't have anything to do with the objectives. It's all incidental.

So...perhaps a continent has some dangerous creatures and they can fuck up your march though the jungle...but you shouldn't get exp for killing them. Tanks should not have to fear critters, either.

Basically they'd be like weather.

[Coreldan]

Actually, having some NPCs in the footholds might be nice for "the immersion", but I wouldnt want to have any PVE in the actual combat.

[Aractain]

Having mobs just randomly roam (other than 'wildlife' whos corpses could be used for cover) is kinda boring.

If there is PVE is should be large scale team encounter like a massive worm from dune and when you kill it you get spice... errr resources.

Its only really there to break up action now and then and ofcourse there would be different types a single one popping up in the middile of a battle, a massive one that needs hundreds of players or a continent wide invasion.

Not get quest from command to destroy 15 enemy crates. (This is PVE from global agenda)

[Tool]

I'll mention more specifically about the PvE reference. Smedly made the hint of an invading force against all empires. That mostly inspired me to make this topic.

When you say Graboids I couldn't help but think of the movie Tremors and large slugs snatching players in the middle of firefights lol.

[Bags]

Spitfires and wall turrets are as much PVE as should be in the game.

[Tool]

Spitfires and wall turrets are as much PVE as should be in the game.

We know, been said enough. Not what this thread is for. Just dragging knuckles when people say it.

[Sirisian]

I'll mention more specifically about the PvE reference. Smedly made the hint of an invading force against all empires. That mostly inspired me to make this topic.

When you say Graboids I couldn't help but think of the movie Tremors and large slugs snatching players in the middle of firefights lol.
Yeah, but not one hitting. Also I don't like the idea of grappling firing from a creature. Maybe spitting AOE damage against infantry then burrowing back down. Mines and spitfires would help to defend an area against them pretty easily. We're talking out in the open battles.

Not sure I like the idea about an invading force, unless it's like bugs in umm Starship Troopers.

[Bags]

I don't feel that it could be done in any way that would not piss off a lot of players. Time spent developing PVE is time not developing PVP. When you include both you get a fractured player base, both of which believe the other one is favored by the developers. I will pay $15/mo to play Planetside. If I wanted PVE I'd pay $15/mo for WoW.

[Traak]

How about stuff like having to navigate a tricky river or waterfall splash without getting bowled over and annoying carried downstream?

Wind that will actually knock you on your butt or move your plane way off course? Change your fire aimpoint?

Trees that are destructible. Having to use shade on some worlds because the solar radiation saps health? Swimming without drowning. Going through underground tunnels filled with mildly poisonous gas (eliminates camping in one spot).

Places that take teamwork to ram a vehicle through because it's mucky. Sandpits. Places where if you hit it right, your buggy can skate across the surface instead of doing a nose-dive and plunging to its doom?

Arctic places where being outside takes a certain level of stamina, except for maxes, so you don't freeze? More so for cloakers, less so for RExos?

Low-grav areas have been discussed. How about areas of solar coronal interference or magnetic interference that screw up your HUD, map, or other electronics?

Bermuda Triangle areas over the water where planes will flame-out and plummet, and have to be watched for?

Seasons. So no continent looks the same from one month to the next. Trees can grow, as in, they go up a jump in size once a month.

Trees you can CLIMB! Rocks you can CLIMB! Vehicles you can CLIMB!

[Bags]

What Traak did there; I saw it.

[SKYeXile]

Group PVE raids or missions could be very cool, not many FPS games offer COOP FPS missions, 25 players battling in a scenaro could be rather cool(personally i would rather be fighting the players) but that sort of stuff could be awesome t see, it could offer alternative looking armour, or reseouce bonuses or something, perhaps a way of getting items or crafting items that are avalible in the store or something...i dont know.

PVPVE...arg........After playing WAR, Aion and well basicly every other MMO known to man, my prefence would be to keep pve sepearate from pvp, sure spits and wall turrets are fine, whatever, they're not really AI MOBs. Planetside should be about PVP and promote PVP, iv seen to many "PVP" games evlove into PVE grinders over the years to look at PVPVE possitivly

PVPVE COULD be done right, however most developers reward people when TAKING a base. In Aion and WAR, people just let the other faction/ pve faction take their base, then they would take them back later and get the rewards. since there is no incentive to HOLD the base(sounds like PS2 is working on system that promoted holding though).

I also really dont ever feel that a PVE enhanced any fights, sure its probably another layer a combat you have to master, but its always so often glithcy and broken, the amount of WAR keep lords iv had reset or bugout, or you fight in some spastic position on the side of the keep while you DPS them from outside. Arg its just always been so lame.

then when it comes to fighting other players if there is PVE mobs around they run and hide in them instead of fighting. it always endsup been so lame.

It could IN THOERY be done right, but iv never once seen it implimented well, in every game the players wlays endup avoiding PVP and taking the path of least resistance to PVE GLORY! This was never the case in PS1 because if you took a base with no resistance, you got nothing.

[Headrattle]

I don't feel that it could be done in any way that would not piss off a lot of players. Time spent developing PVE is time not developing PVP. When you include both you get a fractured player base, both of which believe the other one is favored by the developers.

Exactly. Turrets or even some automated supply vehicle is ok. But critters and space aliens? That would take the fun away from the game. We honestly dont need it, and programming resources could be better used elsewhere.

[Sirisian]

[snip]
These are things you want in the game? Could you please make a new thread for them. This is off-topic for this thread.

[Bags]

These are things you want in the game? Could you please make a new thread for them. This is off-topic for this thread.

PVE stands for player versus environment, so technically he was on topic.

[Tool]

I don't feel that it could be done in any way that would not piss off a lot of players. Time spent developing PVE is time not developing PVP. When you include both you get a fractured player base, both of which believe the other one is favored by the developers. I will pay $15/mo to play Planetside. If I wanted PVE I'd pay $15/mo for WoW.

Bags, I understand your stance on the inclusion of PvE but this thread is more for the idea that it would make it in and what form it could be. Purely a fun notion for people to share what they think that PvE could consist of. Even to share info and concepts on AI in games and how that could apply to PS2.

To be clear, I also share the feeling of keeping PS2 PvP only. But I think the idea of PvE in Planetside almost feels like a taboo subject. There's been some pretty remarkable advances in AI software lately that deserve attention. Id link specifics but I'm still using my phone atm unfortunately.

[Bags]

Okie, assuming any PVE elements were put in...

Small critters (that don't fight) away from heavy combat areas. That'd be fun. Squishin' frogs.

[Sirisian]

PVE stands for player versus environment, so technically he was on topic.
ah I guess you're right.

I agree with some of those ideas. Might make the game a lot more interesting. I don't think seasons are needed, but weather related effects for planes/vehicles would be nice. The sandstorms had no effect on airplanes which seemed odd back in the day. I'm with Bags thought about no RNG so things like getting struck by lightning are not cool in my book. A plasma storm where there was a warning before it happened, like dirt particles started lifting up in an area, would be sweet though.

I'd love to be in my liberator and get a warning about an incoming weather system and see it on the map. Would definitely turn the tides of battle as people have to evolve their strategies. :)

Regarding fighting next to rivers they mentioned fighting on the sides of cliff-sides so fighting along rivers sound feasible. Watching a person jump in the water and ride on the rapids over a waterfall would be sweet.

I'm definitely for destructible trees. They could heal over time like bushes quickly and be explained by the NTU revival system. That's actually what I always imagined made trees invulnerable.

[Bags]

How exactly would it turn the tides of a battle? I assume all participants would be affected equally. No preferential treatment from the weather.

[Aractain]

About trees:

Make them destructable (respawn from nanties whatever in 10 minuets) and have the trunk stay around as cover for infantry. Minuet to minuet changing battlefield cover is fun gameplay for ground troops.

Rocks, tree trunks, dead tanks, deployable walls and energy fields please. :)

[Sirisian]

How exactly would it turn the tides of a battle? I assume all participants would be affected equally. No preferential treatment from the weather.
Does it effect everyone equally? Imagine a tower and you can't drop a gal on top of it or drop from a mossy type vehicle because a dust storm is blocking visibility and damaging your engines quickly over time? They said we'll have localized damage so imagine planes could land and turn off their engines and wait until it passes. It could be a large area and move pass quickly, but for that moment tanks would stop moving to keep from damaging their engines.

Or if thunder and lightning is in then anyone in a vehicle would get struck at a periodic interval and take damage unless they got out of their vehicle or turned it off. This would stop say a vanguard from camping a door for a moment possibly.

[Bags]

I guess it depends on the fight then. If it's a big outdoor fight it's equal.

[Azren]

The devs were pretty clear on this one. There will be no PvE in the regular sence. The only PvE we may get (way post launch) is event based. Imagine black ops from current PS played by AI, that's about it.

Anything more would kill this game, period.

[Tool]

The devs were pretty clear on this one. There will be no PvE in the regular sence. The only PvE we may get (way post launch) is event based. Imagine black ops from current PS played by AI, that's about it.

Anything more would kill this game, period.

Do I really need to start linking my OP each time one of these posts come up?

[Sirisian]

The only PvE we may get (way post launch) is event based. Imagine black ops from current PS played by AI, that's about it.
Ugh I'm against stuff like that honestly. I hate the idea of fighting AI humanoids when we have human controlled ones. If it was like creatures with different abilities that swarmed players I'd enjoy it probably. Might break the monotony of PvP. Also working side by side the enemy might be cool.

[artifice]

I am not sure why people can't grasp that AI enemies in a first person shooter is nothing like AI enemies in a role playing game.

[Senyu]

judging from what the game looks like from the trailer, it doesnt need pve and should be plenty fine with pvp. Giving that the pace of combat and it starting seems faster

[artifice]

I say bring on PvE. I want to be able to setup defensive units to defend a base so one loan hacker can't simply come in and jack a base behind enemy lines.

[Bags]

I say bring on PvE. I want to be able to setup defensive units to defend a base so one loan hacker can't simply come in and jack a base behind enemy lines.

They said doing things like that would take 30 minutes for the attacker, and 30 seconds for the defender.

[basti]

Oh god, another bot thread? Cant you guys not just use one of the 32075328907563205 thread that are out there already?

[Tool]

I'll just try to ignore those usless post from now on. It's like I'm trying to ask what the color of a car could be and people turn around and say "I don't want a car, color doesn't matter." :doh:

Now that I'm using my computer again, I wanted to link this in particular. It's a video explaining Autodesks' Kynapse AI software and gives rough demonstrations of it's potential.

http://quietube.com/v.php/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ4Dsra9PQQ

America's Army 3 is going to or currently using this in developing their A.I. There's a few other developers using it as well in future titles.

[basti]

And we hope they never use it for PS2.


LEts face it: Nobody wants bots. Simply because it will take the averange gamer about 2 hours to figure out the patterns and behaviour, making thoes bots just annoying.

[Traak]

Ugh I'm against stuff like that honestly. I hate the idea of fighting AI humanoids when we have human controlled ones. If it was like creatures with different abilities that swarmed players I'd enjoy it probably. Might break the monotony of PvP. Also working side by side the enemy might be cool.

LOL swarms of skin-burrowing Blood Bees or something. We would find out over time that the flamethrowner [sic] was the only defense.

[Traak]

They said doing things like that would take 30 minutes for the attacker, and 30 seconds for the defender.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the present system where EE's can do all that stuff. I'm an EE, and it made for some awfully boring gamepl*snoooore* oops, awake again, it was just so boring hacking up an enemy base.

[Tool]

And we hope they never use it for PS2.


LEts face it: Nobody wants bots. Simply because it will take the averange gamer about 2 hours to figure out the patterns and behaviour, making thoes bots just annoying.

When you say nobody, don't you really mean I? Smedly seems to disagree with your notion anways.

There's been little advancement in AI these past eight years because of this quandry you point out. Many players don't like AI because the AI itself is usually terrible. Developers see the lack of interest in AI thus spend very little resources developing better AI or researching third party groups and offering them contracts, for talented programmers to idependently operate and really pump out some great stuff.

There has to be that breakthrough where a game can crush the idea of Bots and really give the feeling of Artifical Intelligence. But without support and constructive feedback from the general gaming community, the people who need the support and money to work at this, wont get what they need. You think developers don't look at their AI and say to themselves, "good god that's terrible, but there's nothing I can do about it."?

[Vancha]

I think people definitely need to think it terms of L4D/Killing Floor PvE rather than swarms of WoW spiders or something.

[Bags]

Well, I already own both of those games, so thinking like PVE in terms of those games doesn't help the cause in my eyes. :)

[Death2All]

No PvE, no NPCs, none of that crap. One thing I've admired from PS1 was that every you saw was a real player (excluding CE, turrets and VR dummies). So apart from those three things, every person I interact with should be a real person. In a supposed 100% PvP where everyone you encounter is a real player, how would an NPC increase the "immersion" of that game. Kind of contradicts it in my opinion.

[Tool]

No PvE, no NPCs, none of that crap. One thing I've admired from PS1 was that every you saw was a real player (excluding CE, turrets and VR dummies). So apart from those three things, every person I interact with should be a real person. In a supposed 100% PvP where everyone you encounter is a real player, how would an NPC increase the "immersion" of that game. Kind of contradicts it in my opinion.

I understand the general Planetside community oppose PvE in PS. However with the indication given from one of the recent videos on the future of PS2 about PvE, it may be included. (Sorry I can't link it atm, using my phone.) I want people who respond to this thread really think about the inclusion of PvE and how they feel it could be done.

The general answers of turrets only or no PvE at all aren't what this thread is about. So please don't use that as a cop out instead of a bit creative thinking.

If done properly, what could PvE in future PS2 look like?

I really feel like just giving up on these forums.

[Bags]

Haha, sorry people just hate the idea PVE in Planetside too much.

[ShowNoMercy]

Wow, some total PVE bigots in here lol.

The PVE generated events would not be THAT bad guys, just like with black ops in PS1 you can opt out by not participating. The events shouldn't be so frequent and rewarding that they become people's primary means of xp, but should be fun little side battles for people who enjoy that stuff to participate in. It would also make it fun in the respect that you could team up with individuals across empires.

On the other hand, adding situations where SMALL groups of comp controlled animals (or even aliens) get into buildings and hurt resource production would make for fun side missions. Of course people could opt out of that as well just like people didn't HAVE to go get the ANT in PS1, they could just wait for someone else to do it.

Additionally (this wouldn't really be optional), there could be randomly generated computer attacks on bases being capped that have no enemies in the vicinity, which would cut down on the boredom associated with a 15min base cap. They would warn you in advance and would have to make it a smaller force than the one present in the base to ensure it didnt ruin the assault. Since the computer generate players would attack enemies as well as friendlies, any enemies who showed up during this period would have to kill the NPC creatures before attempting to retake the base. Essentially it would reduce the likelihood of enemies capitalizing on the creature attack.

I'm not going to give my opinion on IF PVE should be incorporated since that was not asked for in the OP, but I have presented 3 different ways to incorporate AI creatures into PS2 with varying degrees of opt-out-ability.

[Bags]

You can't say something isn't bad and then compare it to Black Ops to make a point. Black Ops were a worse idea than how BFRs were implemented. lol

I'm sure I wouldn't mind a lot of it if it did not waste developer time that could be spent on PVP content, but it will so that's the deal breaker for me.

[Aractain]

If you kill an AFK avatar, is that PVE?

Having AI "NPCs" as in other humans (in game) is definately a no imo though.

[Infektion]

I wouldn't mind PvE if it referred to random herds of animals and such. If we could use their corpse as shields, that's even BETTER!!!! But NPC's like... to fight, that's a big no.

[Tool]

You can't say something isn't bad and then compare it to Black Ops to make a point. Black Ops were a worse idea than how BFRs were implemented. lol

I'm sure I wouldn't mind a lot of it if it did not waste developer time that could be spent on PVP content, but it will so that's the deal breaker for me.

That's a very understandable gripe and I share similar feelings. In those videos they mentioned they're releasing a core MMOFPS experience then building other elements on top, sandbox. So if they have the PvP nailed down either from the get-go or shortly after release, developer time may be abundant.

It's amazing how difficult it is to simply discuss a concept with people, even one I oppose myself in Planetside lol. Should ask Hamma to purposefully change a bunch of Avatars to mules.

[Manitou]

Should ask Hamma to purposefully change a bunch of Avatars to mules.
:lol:

Classic...

[Rbstr]

I'm OK with incidental critters as I've said.

But there shouldn't every be a reason to shoot them except that they're getting in the way of you shooting real people.

[ShowNoMercy]

You can't say something isn't bad and then compare it to Black Ops to make a point. Black Ops were a worse idea than how BFRs were implemented. lol

I'm sure I wouldn't mind a lot of it if it did not waste developer time that could be spent on PVP content, but it will so that's the deal breaker for me.

I compared the opt out aspect of black ops to an opt out aspect in PVE that could be added to PS2. I am well within the bounds of logic to say that because you can opt out of something it is not bad.

Being shot in the head is bad, being able to opt out of getting shot in the head makes it not bad.

Eating a turd is bad, being able to opt out of eating a turd makes it not bad.

Being molested by a clown in bad.... see where im going with this?

No matter how shitty the feature, if you can get around it by not participating while still having fun then it doesn't matter. Not to mention black ops was an event that happened every so often and only for a few hours. Adding a similar thing to PS2 in the form of PVE events wouldn't be THAT bad.

Also, support your "black ops in worse than BFR in terms of implementation" argument because I'm not seeing it. You could only opt out of fighting BFRs on Oshur, the rest of the time they were bending you over every time you stepped out of a door. Not many options to avoid them and they were not events, they were constantly there.

[Kietharr]

The only AI units I'm OK with are deployables, turrets, and possibly drones/workers depending on how they do resource gathering. Might be kinda fun to kill AI workers, pretend I'm playing Starcraft and we're doing dropship harass with Galaxies :)

But the fun there isn't in "woot xp for killing spacepigs!", it's "Get bent Prot....Vanu, have fun harvesting minerals without workers!"

[Death2All]

Being molested by a clown in bad.... see where im going with this?



Clowns have very delicate hands, I assure you.


I see your point and agree with it. So long as one is able to opt out of an event, it's not quite as bad, although resources could be better spent elsewhere on the game.

Assuming that PvP is perfectly balanced and the game is masterpiece and they could afford to put resources in other places, I wouldn't mind a PvE event element where I fight off space turtles over a continent SO LONG as I can choose to not participate in said event.

What really frustrated me in PS1 was when they chose to do an event on the one and only fight in the game. So I either had to participate in being raped by a shitty game event or just log off entirely. THAT IS STUPID. The worst was when you were on your last leg defending your LAST base on a home cont and they'd thrown down a BO event. I'll never forget the time we were defending Leza and a GM turned the entire NC empire into BO without even asking.

I feel PvE could be well received given that it's implemented under the right circumstances, but by no means should it be their primary focus for the game. A lot of the fear and backlash from PvE simply comes from the fact that most people associate it relating to WoW or possibly GA.

[Tool]

I feel PvE could be well received given that it's implemented under the right circumstances, but by no means should it be their primary focus for the game. A lot of the fear and backlash from PvE simply comes from the fact that most people associate it relating to WoW or possibly GA.

Yes and that's part of my point here, it's never the primary focus because of that. It's strange that developers wont or aren't allowed to focus a large portion of attention on things like AI even though they're going to have it in their games and sometimes in great abundance, wouldn't you agree?

It's that feeling the AI will be crappy or useless that needs to be changed, and the only way to change it is by not making useless or crappy AI lol.

I want innovation in games today and because technology has grown leaps and bounds over the years I fear much of that innovation is lost when profit becomes the driving factor in major game development even though we have the ability. AI is one area that suffers from that.

[Volw]

It's that feeling the AI will be crappy or useless that needs to be changed, and the only way to change it is by not making useless or crappy AI lol.



Mind they're using the same engine for the new Everquest, so SOE will have a AI module for the engine.

[Sirisian]

For the love of God no.. NO PVE, NO PVPVE, i dont want an instance for sure.. I dont want to have to fight off a bot for sure.... I want people.. 100% pure people.... Frail an AI
heh, no one is saying to put in instances. Also I think it's clear that most people don't want humanoid bots. Would you be more open to AI creatures outside in the territory?

I'm with you 100% though about no humanoid bots in the middle of combat. I honestly don't think that part would be necessary since we have real life players for that. I'm more into the idea of adding things that players can't do to spice up the battles.

I've never been imagining this idea as a release feature. It seemed more like an item in the 3 year plan to bring new things to the game. I mentioned this in the creatures thread though.

[Tool]

Mind they're using the same engine for the new Everquest, so SOE will have a AI module for the engine.

Sure but how their AI performs, what systems they use, and what, if any, new additions have been made from previous engines isn't known yet. To think that if they have made some impressive improvments in AI with Forgelight or within Forgelight, they would've used that in their recent presentation and/or/will publish/ed articles on their technology.

That's one thing developers love to do is show off new engine capabilities, usually before there's even a game released using it.

[Sirisian]

:lol: This comes up a lot but I just made a comment in IRC to someone's thought:
<Kwintus5> it's normal that it's such a ginormous war that all animals are extinct :P
<Kwintus5> we just KILLED THEM ALL
<Sirisian|Work> Kwintus5, omg like we killed all the players!
<Sirisian|Work> I guess I'm the only one that assumed trees were invulnerable because of the NTU revival mechanism :P
I also linked him to this (http://planetside.station.sony.com/howto/manual_detail.vm?chapter=0).

[Raymac]

I don't want to see PvE in the game proper, but it wouldn't be a bad idea for an event every once in awhile, like once or twice a year for a weekend. Let's face it, after we've been playing the game for while, we'd likely look forward to some special event to keep things fresh.

Like I said in the other thread about this, any time I watch Starship Troopers, I think about something like that happening in Planetside. I think trying a short term even like that would be pretty cool.

One of my all time favorite moments in Planetside was the first monolith event back in 2005 I think. It was just for a weekend, but it was the most intense weekend I've ever played in this game.

We should be more open minded when it comes to special events.

[DashRev]

The PVE generated events would not be THAT bad guys, just like with black ops in PS1 you can opt out by not participating. The events shouldn't be so frequent and rewarding that they become people's primary means of xp, but should be fun little side battles for people who enjoy that stuff to participate in. It would also make it fun in the respect that you could team up with individuals across empires.

While this makes sense in a vacuum, its complicated by the fact that any development team is working with a finite amount of production time and resources.

It becomes less a matter of "Should we add this to the game?" and more so "What would we have to neglect in order to add this to the game?"

This thread isn't filled with as much vitriol as you and Tool seem to imagine. Its filled with players trying to explain that PlanetSide is an open-world, persistent, strategic, teamwork-based PvP game and anything that doesn't directly add to that then must invariably detract from it.

[Tool]

While this makes sense in a vacuum, its complicated by the fact that any development team is working with a finite amount of production time and resources.

It becomes less a matter of "Should we add this to the game?" and more so "What would we have to neglect in order to add this to the game?"

This thread isn't filled with as much vitriol as you and Tool seem to imagine. Its filled with players trying to explain that PlanetSide is an open-world, persistent, strategic, teamwork-based PvP game and anything that doesn't directly add to that then must invariably detract from it.

I know what Planetside is, I agree on not adding PvE to Planetside 2, the developers said they may included some PvE aspect in the future. The possibility of PvE in Planetside 2 is now a real possibility. This topic was created to discuss ideas on what that PvE could be.

Where is the difficulty in seeing what this topic is for? I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall having to type something like this every page because few people seem to read my original post.

:bang:

[Raymac]

Its filled with players trying to explain that PlanetSide is an open-world, persistent, strategic, teamwork-based PvP game and anything that doesn't directly add to that then must invariably detract from it.

While I certainly agree with you to a point here, I think we really should stay as open minded as possible when it comes to new features in Planetside 2. We can't just automatically write something off simply because it wasn't in Planetside 1. (which I've seen alot of on these forums)

Now, it doesn't appear that anybody is in favor of PvE questing where you have to collect 10 boar tusks, but we should stay open minded about special event type things. Thats the beauty about a special event. If we don't like it, they don't have to do it ever again. It's real simple.

[Death2All]

SPACE TURTLES!!

There! Now we can have a discussion. So guys, if there were PvE in PS2, what would your thoughts on Space Turtles be?



I was going to say Space Kraken, but that's going to be a killstreak.



Ever since I was a child I was fascinated with two things: Reptiles and paintchips. My encounter with paint chips lead me to ponder my thoughts of the possibility of extraterrestrial life in the universe. The idea of Space Turtles was always grand to me and I would love for SOE to include not only a part of my childhood, but a part of my soul to PS2. Space Turtles.



Space Turtles.

[DashRev]

I know what Planetside is, I agree on not adding PvE to Planetside 2, the developers said they may included some PvE aspect in the future. The possibility of PvE in Planetside 2 is now a real possibility. This topic was created to discuss ideas on what that PvE could be.

Where is the difficulty in seeing what this topic is for? I feel like I'm banging my head against a wall having to type something like this every page because few people seem to read my original post.

:bang:

A thread like this seems to lean more toward the idea that PvE is going to be a part of the game and we should focus on making it as good as possible. The response to PvE in PS2 appears to be overwhelmingly negative.

Rather than giving Devs the false impression that PvE is something we think belongs in PS2 by discussing how it could work, the majority of people in this thread are saying, "We don't want it. Don't waste your time working on it."

Its unfortunate if that isn't what you wanted your thread to be, but most people here don't even want to entertain the idea of what PvE could be like in PS2. I count myself among them.

Now, it doesn't appear that anybody is in favor of PvE questing where you have to collect 10 boar tusks, but we should stay open minded about special event type things. Thats the beauty about a special event. If we don't like it, they don't have to do it ever again. It's real simple.

I agree. Special events are a great way to experiment with new ideas without really committing to them. However, the early development phase is not the time to start thinking about abstract ideas that fly in the face of the core game mechanics, of which PvP is the primary pillar. Once the game releases and becomes an established PvP game, I'd be more comfortable with the Devs showing a little interest in other content areas.

Right now, though, my thought (and I think more than a few people in this thread share it) is that SOE should focus exclusively on a quality PvP game, polish it as much as possible, balance it, release it, and balance it more. Then and only then should they start devoting some of their development resources into abstract ideas and alternate focuses.

[The Desert Fox]

This is possibly the most Hard-headed community I have ever seen lol :D. I mean it almost seems like every major change to the game that has been announced has been heavily opposed by such a vocal minority. I feel bad for anyone who seems to have any positive feelings for this game considering you seem to get crucified for it lol.

The more and more I read these forums the more I hope the Devs listen to none of you and design the game they say they will. The arguments against most of these changes is simple minded and pathetic using games such as COD/BF/WOW as an excuse to write off any possible change.

To get back on topic, I play this game to shoot N00b Vanu and Smerfs in the face, I doubt a little immersion or Alien PvE is going to really change that and I for one would love it.

[Tool]

A thread like this seems to lean more toward the idea that PvE is going to be a part of the game and we should focus on making it as good as possible. The response to PvE in PS2 appears to be overwhelmingly negative.

Rather than giving Devs the false impression that PvE is something we think belongs in PS2 by discussing how it could work, the majority of people in this thread are saying, "We don't want it. Don't waste your time working on it."

Its unfortunate if that isn't what you wanted your thread to be, but most people here don't even want to entertain the idea of what PvE could be like in PS2. I count myself among them.

Then they're free to not post in a topic that isn't for the discussion of weither it should or should not be in.

Forgive me for being one of those open minded people in the world who doesn't mind entertaining an idea even though I disagree with it. And if it's the developers intention to add something to a game, since when has it really mattered what the community wanted compared to what they get?

There seems to be this strange conception on these forums that ideas posted here have some bearing on development at this time. The PS2 team know what they're making, have a plan for what they want to include and when they want our opinion, they'll probably ask for it.

Satan forbid anyone try to shed some light on a subject and perhaps spawn a bit of creativity from others as well.

[DashRev]

Then they're free to not post in a topic that isn't for the discussion of weither it should or should not be in.

Forgive me for being one of those open minded people in the world who doesn't mind entertaining an idea even though I disagree with it. And if it's the developers intention to add something to a game, since when has it really mattered what the community wanted compared to what they get?

There seems to be this strange conception on these forums that ideas posted here have some bearing on development at this time. The PS2 team know what they're making, have a plan for what they want to include and when they want our opinion, they'll probably ask for it.

Satan forbid anyone try to shed some light on a subject and perhaps spawn a bit of creativity from others as well.

Please see:
Q: This makes me think of another question: are you taking in the feedback here? Can we actually affect the development of the game at this point, or, how much is set in stone?

Matt: Very little is "set in stone" some things are closer to being finalized than others, but we're very interested in feedback and integrating thoughts and opinions from the community into the game. Some of the things I'm seeing are illuminating and will definitely affect some decisions going forward.

Source (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DAqjmgQptK1zVwhiWa-6prWH0NlKot3NJo_Umvg8n2g/edit?hl=en_US).

[Tool]

Fair enough, I recognize the counter to what I said. I can't imagine that a large feature like AI or other PvE elements would be something they'd see from the forums and change the game drastically to implement, wouldn't you agree? It would seem silly for one and the people in charge of this project have been in the buisness for a while. Assuming they'd do the above mentioned isn't giving them enough credit I think.

And if people simply didn't post ideas out of fear of reprisal from the community, well, that's just absurd. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you have to plaster your preferances all over an idea or concept for fear of it making it in the game.

When things like that happen, it pretty much stops being a community.

[Rbstr]

Then they're free to not post in a topic that isn't for the discussion of weither it should or should not be in.

We're also free to troll the crap out of this one. That's the nature of the beast. If you get scared to post an idea on an anonymous Internet forum because people will bad mouth it...that's your own problem.

This is possibly the most Hard-headed community I have ever seen lol . I mean it almost seems like every major change to the game that has been announced has been heavily opposed by such a vocal minority. I feel bad for anyone who seems to have any positive feelings for this game considering you seem to get crucified for it lol.

I'm typically in favor of major changes to the game mechanics. I like nearly everything the Devs have said.
However, this is not a simple game mechanics change if it goes beyond AI things essentially being weather. Especially if it becomes something that gives rewards in terms of resources or what not.
That is a major game premise change. It goes from a game where the gameplay and world persistence is wholly centred on player interaction to one where it doesn't have to be.

[Bags]

At least we generally have good reasons for disliking the new stuff.

[opticalshadow]

before i continue, for fear of someone from SOE sees this, i do not want pve in any form at any kind in ps, i just dont, there are tons of games devoted to pve, and ill play one of them for that. THAT SAID, in favor of this particular topic here are the things i would suggest if somewhere down the line you make me chose weather or not its worth my sub time.

start it off in small contained area events. ps1 had events that only took place on one cont, announced in advance to get people on or off that cont who wanted or didnt want to particiapate. do it like this, give people a chance to avoid/attend if they wish.

add a threat beyond simple death, and make them tough. do not make the events have creatures that a single soldire could easily fend off, make it something that forces entire squads/plattons to hold an area, have them able to disrupt something, weather its the ability to knock out territories or what not.

if in the events, have multiple types of life forms that remain a threat land air and sea, if we are going to have an enemy, might as well make that enemy as threating as the enemy empires are. this and the last suggestion also go a long way into your wishes to unite enmpires during this time, if the invasion is powerful enough that large groups have to fight, it becomes the enemy of my enemy is my friend. lesser of two evils.

make the rewards worth the time, but in balence. do not offer special gear or adv exp, let the rewards be in enjoyment. by offering rewards that are better or special to that event, you force anyone who wants the same amount of attention to play in a event they do not even want in the game just for an item, this is anti fun and will begin alienation of the playerbase, possibly causeing a schism.

a possible way of ending the event would be one of three ways random each time (or perhaps all three each time) an airbased mothership, sea based rig and land based living base. each would need to be infiltrated and "hacked" or defeated in some other manner, doing so removes that group of units respawn, destroying all three would end the event.

[Tool]

We're also free to troll the crap out of this one. That's the nature of the beast. If you get scared to post an idea on an anonymous Internet forum because people will bad mouth it...that's your own problem.

And if people simply didn't post ideas out of fear of reprisal from the community, well, that's just absurd. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you have to plaster your preferances all over an idea or concept for fear of it making it in the game.

When things like that happen, it pretty much stops being a community.

:bang:

Consider it this way, as much as it's been voiced over the years about not having any PvE in Planetside and SOE was actually considering the communities suggestions here and on the offical forums, why would Smedly even hint at the idea of having PvE in PS2s future plans?

Either they haven't been paying attention to the community all these years, which I doubt, or they are just simply making their own game and we could potentially speculate all we wanted without any of it, changing anything.

If players really wanted to help shape the game into or away from what they feel as far as features go, it may help if people stopped with the same argument regarding PvE over the past 8 years which consists of "I don't like it."

......

Because according to SOE and Smedly, it obviously hasn't worked.

[The Desert Fox]

before i continue, for fear of someone from SOE sees this, i do not want pve in any form at any kind in ps, i just dont, there are tons of games devoted to pve, and ill play one of them for that. THAT SAID, in favor of this particular topic here are the things i would suggest if somewhere down the line you make me chose weather or not its worth my sub time.

start it off in small contained area events. ps1 had events that only took place on one cont, announced in advance to get people on or off that cont who wanted or didnt want to particiapate. do it like this, give people a chance to avoid/attend if they wish.

add a threat beyond simple death, and make them tough. do not make the events have creatures that a single soldire could easily fend off, make it something that forces entire squads/plattons to hold an area, have them able to disrupt something, weather its the ability to knock out territories or what not.

if in the events, have multiple types of life forms that remain a threat land air and sea, if we are going to have an enemy, might as well make that enemy as threating as the enemy empires are. this and the last suggestion also go a long way into your wishes to unite enmpires during this time, if the invasion is powerful enough that large groups have to fight, it becomes the enemy of my enemy is my friend. lesser of two evils.

make the rewards worth the time, but in balence. do not offer special gear or adv exp, let the rewards be in enjoyment. by offering rewards that are better or special to that event, you force anyone who wants the same amount of attention to play in a event they do not even want in the game just for an item, this is anti fun and will begin alienation of the playerbase, possibly causeing a schism.

a possible way of ending the event would be one of three ways random each time (or perhaps all three each time) an airbased mothership, sea based rig and land based living base. each would need to be infiltrated and "hacked" or defeated in some other manner, doing so removes that group of units respawn, destroying all three would end the event.

It is a disappointment you don't want any of your ideas implemented because I for one love almost everything you just sayed! Devs listen to this lol!

[DashRev]

Fair enough, I recognize the counter to what I said. I can't imagine that a large feature like AI or other PvE elements would be something they'd see from the forums and change the game drastically to implement, wouldn't you agree? It would seem silly for one and the people in charge of this project have been in the buisness for a while. Assuming they'd do the above mentioned isn't giving them enough credit I think.

And if people simply didn't post ideas out of fear of reprisal from the community, well, that's just absurd. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you have to plaster your preferances all over an idea or concept for fear of it making it in the game.

When things like that happen, it pretty much stops being a community.

To address your first point, I think the most we've seen so far out of SOE regarding PvE in PS2 (lol acronyms) is that they're considering it. We've seen virtually nothing in terms of details or even what they mean by PvE. So to say that either PvE or an advanced AI amounts to a "large feature" might be grasping at something that isn't there, at least for now.

I'm more inclined to believe, given how little information we've seen, that it is by no means too late to say, "We don't want PvE. Don't invest resources in it."

As for your second point, I think you started this thread with the question: "How would you like to see PvE work?" and the response you got from most people was, "We don't." That may not have been the response you were hoping for or expecting, but its certainly not an invalid one. The community, as it is limited to these forums, is telling both you and SOE that we don't want to invest any time thinking about how to implement PvE and we don't want to see SOE investing the time either. At the very least, not now.

[Tool]

To address your first point, I think the most we've seen so far out of SOE regarding PvE in PS2 (lol acronyms) is that they're considering it. We've seen virtually nothing in terms of details or even what they mean by PvE. So to say that either PvE or an advanced AI amounts to a "large feature" might be grasping at something that isn't there, at least for now.

I'm more inclined to believe, given how little information we've seen, that it is by no means too late to say, "We don't want PvE. Don't invest resources in it."

As for your second point, I think you started this thread with the question: "How would you like to see PvE work?" and the response you got from most people was, "We don't." That may not have been the response you were hoping for or expecting, but its certainly not an invalid one. The community, as it is limited to these forums, is telling both you and SOE that we don't want to invest any time thinking about how to implement PvE and we don't want to see SOE investing the time either. At the very least, not now.

The unfortunate thing is there isn't enough people posting here to actually effectively gauge that idea, that many players don't want it. I've said a few times I don't even want it but with such a lax concern regarding current to future development of, what's the harm in discussion?

It may be that many players didn't play or trial Planetside because it had no PvE element. I don't know.

Why take such offense at a concept or idea if you suspect so strongly that it was merely a fluke suggestion made by Smedly? Is it really that harmful to talk about a non-existant feature then?

I've spent so much time simply defending the concept of just talking about PvE rather than discussing ideas that people probably dont want to post because there's hounds ready to jump all over the notion of potiential or what they might see as fun.

Like I said, if there's such a strong rally against PvE why would they even suggest a potential plan for it? Was he joking when he said it?

[opticalshadow]

It is a disappointment you don't want any of your ideas implemented because I for one love almost everything you just sayed! Devs listen to this lol!

i also love the ideas, but the reason i dont want them implemented is the game isnt being bnuilt for pve, there will be core issues.

for example, how many enemies will we be able to have, with all three empires being maxed on the cont at once?

the game will be balenced between players, and you have to make it fair for non pve'ers, meaning what the actual events could achomplish have to either alienate chunks of players, or have rewards that are lesser then the time it takes to do it.

AI, is rearely decent it will be difficult to keep such large scale enounters from becoming giant bfr esk wars, such as large creatueres who deal tons of dmg adn take ages to kill.

i may change my mind, but i need more info on whats being concidered, cause even with great gameplay features, the actual cretures might just be boring to deal with.

[Lunarchild]

There's actually one type of PvE that I don't mind seeing in Planetside 2 at all: Training Bots that are actually worth something.

I think it would be interesting to train solo / squad / platoon / outfit situations in VR where you can set-up a training situation in advance and then get people in to carry it out. Have it so the initiator can set up some terrain, spawn some bots and give them some basic behaviour, then get the players in and run through the training.

Heck, maybe even give the trainer an option to pause the simulation so he can point stuff out.

All of this should be for the long term though, not for launch ;)

[DashRev]

The unfortunate thing is there isn't enough people posting here to actually effectively gauge that idea, that many players don't want it. I've said a few times I don't even want it but with such a lax concern regarding current to future development of, what's the harm in discussion?

It may be that many players didn't play or trial Planetside because it had no PvE element. I don't know.

Why take such offense at a concept or idea if you suspect so strongly that it was merely a fluke suggestion made by Smedly? Is it really that harmful to talk about a non-existant feature then?

I've spent so much time simply defending the concept of just talking about PvE rather than discussing ideas that people probably dont want to post because there's hounds ready to jump all over the notion of potiential or what they might see as fun.

Like I said, if there's such a strong rally against PvE why would they even suggest a potential plan for it? Was he joking when he said it?

I agree that this is a phenomenally small sample size to make any kind of judgement about the overall feelings of the community. But even acknowledging that, there are maybe one or two people people here who have supported the idea of PvE in PS2. Even you say you're not a fan of the idea. I don't think you need an exhaustive poll to say that the majority of past and current PS1 players would be hesitant if not outright against PvE as a gameplay focus.

I doubt that there is truly an oppressed subset of forum members terrified to express their opinion for fear that they have to defend it. Even if there were, pro-PvE players should have to defend their opinion, given that they are almost certainly in the minority of PS players. In the face of such strong opposition, I think its entirely reasonable for them to have to make the argument for why their iteration of PvE in PS2 should exist at all.

In the sequel to a game whose focus is 100% PvP, why you should implement PvE is more important than the discussion about how you should implement PvE.

[Rbstr]

:bang:
:rolleyes:

Read your statement again. It is impossible to tell if you're saying:
The hypothetical situation of someone not posting an idea because of others is absurd
or
that not posting an idea because of others is absurd.

English works like that. Especially with your second sentence telling people not to say the idea is dumb. As that could invoke the hypothetical.

[CrystalViolet]

I wouldn't be apposed to instances where a large alien ship appears over the battlefield. Let's say this alien race has access to an extremely rare resource that can't be found on the planet. Each faction would then attempt to fight their way to the core of the ship and capture this resource before a set amount of time passes and the ship explodes. Make it very difficult to achieve this goal, and have the ship spawn rate be very low (maybe once a week at random times). The interior of the ship could be randomly generated and maze like, so each instance would require team work and new strategies to hunt down the core. Fighting would be a combination of encounters with other faction's soldiers as well as traps and NPC mobs.

[Sirisian]

At least we generally have good reasons for disliking the new stuff.
Honestly I haven't heard a good reason yet. I've heard a lot of opinions of "I don't like it" and "I don't want it in the game ever!" but no reasons. The people against it have an idea in their head and won't share it. Apparently openly talking about what one would see as a problem is too hard for them. They need to explain what they think will happen so we can address those concerns with solutions.

Saying something along the lines of "I don't want humanoid characters because I foresee the AI not working" isn't a viable complaint either. I can't speak for everyone, but I program for a living, and some of the silliness people spout when it comes to technical problems is absurd. If you don't know what you're talking about then don't make the comment. If anything just assume it's possible since that's 100 times better than assuming everything is impossible and fighting an argument based on it.

But even acknowledging that, there are maybe one or two people people here who have supported the idea of PvE in PS2.
If you want to see how the community feels about creatures in PvE you can view this thread (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36234).

You'll see that while passive creatures are supported, it's the hostile creatures that we've had a problem converting people into liking. Most of the people that are for passive creatures haven't explained why they don't like hostile ones. I imagine it's because they'd detract from the core PvP combat which is understandable. Designing a system where this doesn't happen is important. I think we can all agree on that.

[Tool]

I wouldn't be apposed to instances where a large alien ship appears over the battlefield. Let's say this alien race has access to an extremely rare resource that can't be found on the planet. Each faction would then attempt to fight their way to the core of the ship and capture this resource before a set amount of time passes and the ship explodes. Make it very difficult to achieve this goal, and have the ship spawn rate be very low (maybe once a week at random times). The interior of the ship could be randomly generated and maze like, so each instance would require team work and new strategies to hunt down the core. Fighting would be a combination of encounters with other faction's soldiers as well as traps and NPC mobs.

That's a really cool idea actually, like a beefed up rabbit event lol.

[CrystalViolet]

That's a really cool idea actually, like a beefed up rabbit event lol.

thanks, I think it might offer a nice way to add a little bit of variety to the gameplay, without straying too much from what Planetside is all about. Not sure exactly what the reward should be, but maybbe something along the lines of special insanely rare upgrades/customization options for outfits.

[opticalshadow]

That's a really cool idea actually, like a beefed up rabbit event lol.

the problem with this type of event reward is it makes it mandatory for a group of players to play to gain a resource, this means that players who are wholy oppsed to the idea, are forced to play anyway if they want a resource.

thats hwo you begin to alienate your playerbase, forcing such gameplay features on a player that they do not want. any rewards for an event that is eithe greatly not wanted, or ignored by a playerbase should not be something thats game effecting.

i wouldnt mind gear changes that give you "skins" for your armor or weapons, maybe alternitive weapons all togheter that are just retexture packs (for example, instead of a cycler, the tr could gain a alien based gun with the same dmg, rof, cone and ever other statistic but it looks diffrent and fires diffrent looking ammo)
but once you offer a reward that changes gameplay, you are going to force people who dont want to be there to be there.

[CrystalViolet]

Agree 100%. Any rewards from these raids would be purely prestige based. I like the idea of alien skins.

[Raymac]

I wouldn't be apposed to instances where a large alien ship appears over the battlefield. Let's say this alien race has access to an extremely rare resource that can't be found on the planet. Each faction would then attempt to fight their way to the core of the ship and capture this resource before a set amount of time passes and the ship explodes. Make it very difficult to achieve this goal, and have the ship spawn rate be very low (maybe once a week at random times). The interior of the ship could be randomly generated and maze like, so each instance would require team work and new strategies to hunt down the core. Fighting would be a combination of encounters with other faction's soldiers as well as traps and NPC mobs.

That is a pretty cool idea. The one major hurdle I forsee is that the word "instance" is as vulgar as "PvE" to this community. I'm on the side of fun unique fresh events, so count me in, just so long as they are only occasional events, like once or twice a year tops.

[DashRev]

That is a pretty cool idea. The one major hurdle I forsee is that the word "instance" is as vulgar as "PvE" to this community. I'm on the side of fun unique fresh events, so count me in, just so long as they are only occasional events, like once or twice a year tops.

I may be mistaken, but I read "instances" as "occurrences" rather than individualized zones for small numbers of players.

[Sirisian]

like once or twice a year tops.
:lol: Sucks if they are fun. Trying to tell your friend about it. "But yeah it'll happen again in 6 months, so you don't want to sub, and it only goes on for a day so if you don't log in you'll miss it". :P

I'd much prefer like monthly events so that at least people playing for only a month can enjoy something different.

[CrystalViolet]

I may be mistaken, but I read "instances" as "occurrences" rather than individualized zones for small numbers of players.

yes, this was my intent. The alien ships would still be part of the persistent world, and anyone with a gun and some guts will be able to hop aboard the ship and make a dash for the core, though obviously a well organized squad would stand a better chance of achieving the mission. Depending on how the customization trees work, you'd also need to add conditions that would allow the vehicle specialized players to be on a similar footing as the grunt outfits since most of the fighting would likely be CQB.

[Death2All]

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x251/andalitebandit07/TurtleInSpace.jpg



Nobody likes space turtles :cry: ?

[Hamma]

Ok guys seriously. I missed this thread most of the day because I was rather busy :lol:

Tool I do feel your pain on this topic.

The problem is this is one of those things the community is really passionate about. Some people DO NOT WANT it and cannot be convinced of otherwise. While I can see their POV this point is really a thread to speculate about what AI would look like in a game like PS. Not say NO I DONT WANT IT.

That defeats the purpose of the topic, a discussion of what PVE/AI would look like in PlanetSide.

It's probably to late to save this thread but please folks try to have a discussion about what something like this would look like in the game.

[Volw]

I might post it down in 'ideas' section later on, but for now:

[Warning! Contains unhealthy amount of 'Aliens' references!]

It could be a random monthly event, where one of the continents is taken over by Aliens, potentially overnight 'real time'. Some lovely moments checking forums in the morning only to find out - 'we've got invaded!'.

Rewards/penalties - the invasion could be on a 2 day timer. The faster we get rid of them, the bigger the resource bonus factions involved receive. If the invasion is not defeated, all of the resource nodes on the continent are disabled for, say, another 2-3 days.

Aliens should be somewhat similar to 'Aliens'. Fast, strong and OP. Obviously melee mostly to make them even scarier.

They could set up their nests in gen rooms and have some sort of a queen defend it. Potentially requiring to access the room via some other place within a base.

'They mostly come out at night ... mostly!'

A system which utilises day/night cycle, where it is only possible to advance during the day. At night Aliens get all sort of bonuses and player factions are forced to defend whatever ground they've gained during the day. I'm talking super OP here, encouraging player factions to ally if they don't want to be pushed off the continent.

It should obviously scale with server population.

Also, electromagnetic storms, preventing the usage of air vehicles. I'd be tempted to disable heavy ground vehicles as well and relay on footzerg for extra coolness factor.


Thoughts?

[Tool]

Aliens, that be pretty wicked. Made me think about the movie Pitch Black and having roving bands of dangerous aliens come out at night and attack whoever lol.

Or the remnants of the Vanu return.

[Sirisian]

I really like the idea of nocturnal creatures.

Okay new idea. In the weapons thread someone mentioned smoke grenades. We could have creatures that generate a fog in the forests. Newbs would wander in by themselves and there would be small sounds of gun-fire a v-v-h and dead.

[CrystalViolet]

I like the invasion scenario as well, as long as it's another rare occurrence. Imagine your sitting in a bass and without warning the lights go out, all terminals turn green, and aliens start pouring out of the spawn tubes and wiping the floor with everyone. This would be happening on a continent wide scale, and just escaping and regrouping would make for an interesting challenge. Only problem I can see is after the retake of land, the map of controlled areas would almost certainly be different, which would be unfair to the faction that worked to control specific resources.

[Volw]

I like the invasion scenario as well, as long as it's another rare occurrence. Imagine your sitting in a bass and without warning the lights go out, all terminals turn green, and aliens start pouring out of the spawn tubes and wiping the floor with everyone. This would be happening on a continent wide scale, and just escaping and regrouping would make for an interesting challenge. Only problem I can see is after the retake of land, the map of controlled areas would almost certainly be different, which would be unfair to the faction that worked to control specific resources.

Could be 'balanced' by having the most dominant faction invaded ...

Then everyone else would jump in to get a piece of their cake.

[CrystalViolet]

Could be 'balanced' by having the most dominant faction invaded ...

Then everyone else would jump in to get a piece of their cake.

interesting idea. could also be used as an incentive to fight on continents where there might not be much going on.

[opticalshadow]

Could be 'balanced' by having the most dominant faction invaded ...

Then everyone else would jump in to get a piece of their cake.

the most balenced way of doing it would for it to be random, not take place on locked conts, and effect all sides equally.

if one side gets invaded specifically it effects the entire empire, which again forces this on people who dont want to take part, i still belive the event should be like current events are, a 15-30 minute warning is given out

some kind of warnign message, an unknown ship is approching in the [insert quadrent] of [insert cont] in t-minus [minutes] requesting all troops respond , end transmision.

[Volw]

To add to my previous post:

4 types of aliens:

Firstly, looking at PS2 vanu max, Aliens should look like if 'Alien' had a threesome with Cylon and Predator.

- basic alien - strong, fast, 'Alienish' - melee attacks, can jump up the walls / towers. Also some sort of plasma spit ranged attack.

- infil alien - slightly more 'Predator' style, used to ambush players - medium hp, extreme melee damage, plasma power blades. Potentially some 'pull' ranged attack.

- heavy alien - MAX equivalent, LOTS of hp and frontal damage immunity, slow melee attacks and a ranged high damage cone firing plasma cannon with 2-3 second charge-up before firing.

- flying alien - think Cylon (TNS) raider with more spikes, mainly functions as AV

[Volw]

the most balenced way of doing it would for it to be random, not take place on locked conts, and effect all sides equally.

if one side gets invaded specifically it effects the entire empire, which again forces this on people who dont want to take part, i still belive the event should be like current events are, a 15-30 minute warning is given out

some kind of warnign message, an unknown ship is approching in the [insert quadrent] of [insert cont] in t-minus [minutes] requesting all troops respond , end transmision.

there is no 'affect all sides equally' in planetside.

Say, you have Vanu locked 6/10 continents and NC/TR 2 each and the most fighting is going over one of the TR conts. Aliens land on TR, meaning that for the duration of the event, Vanu will be almost 'locked' with their majority, essentially profiting from it.

Depending on the resource gain from fighting to invasion, they could as well focus on fighting the NC/TR on their continents and ignoring the invasion.

Having the strongest faction being invaded, adds a whole new game-changer to it, because the faction that's lost the most will also be interested in fighting over it.

[SKYeXile]

the most balenced way of doing it would for it to be random, not take place on locked conts, and effect all sides equally.

if one side gets invaded specifically it effects the entire empire, which again forces this on people who dont want to take part, i still belive the event should be like current events are, a 15-30 minute warning is given out

some kind of warnign message, an unknown ship is approching in the [insert quadrent] of [insert cont] in t-minus [minutes] requesting all troops respond , end transmision.

Like i say, this has all been done and tried before, it always ends up failing, IMO Keep the E seperate from the P's.

[opticalshadow]

Like i say, this has all been done and tried before, it always ends up failing, IMO Keep the E seperate from the P's.

ive made it firm and assertive in my first post in this thread my feelings of PvE in PS2, but beyond that first post i dont plan to go on about that opinion, becuase its not the point of the thread.

as for "not effect all sides equally" i agree, it cant be done. However attacking one side is specific forces a small cluster of players into an event either they dont want to do, or punishes other teams for being outplayed assumeing they do. it also takes the random out of it. "tr has half the conts, should be invaded any minute now"


what i suggest that if this is done, a non locked cont is chosen at random, the aliens or whatever are not discriminat to any one side, they attack all three equally, attacking all bases and what not, refering to my post on ideas with that.

the main benifit of this is two fold, first off so far the majority of spoken players are against this, by ensureing that it takes place with all three empires, it gives a larger pool of players to participate allowing for a grander event, and secondly it doesnt punish one empire for doing better.

[CrystalViolet]

Like i say, this has all been done and tried before, it always ends up failing

Statements like this don't have any purpose, and only serve to stifle the ideas of people who are trying to brainstorm.

[Tool]

Ok guys seriously. I missed this thread most of the day because I was rather busy :lol:

Tool I do feel your pain on this topic.

The problem is this is one of those things the community is really passionate about. Some people DO NOT WANT it and cannot be convinced of otherwise. While I can see their POV this point is really a thread to speculate about what AI would look like in a game like PS. Not say NO I DONT WANT IT.

That defeats the purpose of the topic, a discussion of what PVE/AI would look like in PlanetSide.

It's probably to late to save this thread but please folks try to have a discussion about what something like this would look like in the game.

Thanks for the sentiment Hamma, was considering just dragging this topic out back and putting a few rounds into it lol. But thankfully there's a few posters who get it and are participating.

[Coreldan]

On another note, many probably don't want SoE to see this thread and go "Oh, they have nice ideas and nobody seems to be thinking it's a bad one, we should do it", when in fact majority do not want it really in any shape or form :D

I learned from my time in WoW that you have to voice ur opinion or bad stuff happens. Heroic Leap was changed after most thought it was a good implementation, simply cos there were a few odd threads saying the current implementation sucks and the people who liked/didnt mind the current one didn't chime in in any ways. When Blizzard once again change the implementation (to worse), all hell broke loose and the masses came complaining about it getting changed, to which the lead class developer or something just stated "You should've stood up for it back then, we're not changing it back anymore".

[Sirisian]

On another note, many probably don't want SoE to see this thread and go "Oh, they have nice ideas and nobody seems to be thinking it's a bad one, we should do it", when in fact majority do not want it really in any shape or form :D
Cough (http://www.planetside-universe.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36234) (The majority want passive creatures). We're trying to show you that hostile creatures could work in a balanced way that doesn't detract from the PvP centric game.

[Raymac]

So coincidentally Starship Troopers was on tv last night and it gave me an idea. I thought of a possible event or way to make a small amount of PvE work combining various aspects of Planetside.

So imagine the game has been out for about a year now, and SOE announces they will be releasing a new planet in the next patch/expansion. So, for a few days before the new planet "opens", meteors occasionally rain down on Auraxis like before the Bending. Then in-game its annouced the source of the meteors has been located and the empires unite under a shakey truce to defeat the common foe. They travel to this new planet which they find swarming with hostile alien creatures. Then they invade the planet, clear out the aliens, and now the shakey truce crumbles and the 3 empires begin fighting over the resouces of the new planet.

This way, the PvE is temporary and optional. Everybody wins?

[Sirisian]

This way, the PvE is temporary and optional. Everybody wins?
I can't tell if you're trolling. Your "everybody" wins scenario is a one-time event that only happens once in the whole game? I already told you that's not a compromise. If you're against the idea we get it, but stop trying to divert things. It's like saying you don't like snipers, "We'll have sniping events. It'll happen once a year. Everyone wins!"

I thought for a second you were going to just say make a PvE continent, which I'm against. I want PvE to be blended across the continents and is part of the game (even if it's not added at release). Not a super special thing that's an after thought for fun with a poor implementation.

[Raymac]

I can't tell if you're trolling.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression. I definitely wasn't trying to troll. I just thought of a possible example of a way to work PvE into Planetside 2 while I was watching TV last night. I didn't intend to divert the conversation. I was just throwing an idea out there.

[Traak]

To me, PVE in the sense of fighting AI bots or such for Planetside is like offering blow-up dolls to guys married to supermodels. Sure, it's possible. But why?

[Sirisian]

To me, PVE in the sense of fighting AI bots or such for Planetside is like offering blow-up dolls to guys married to supermodels. Sure, it's possible. But why?
Yeah I'm not a fan of the AI humanoid gun wielding bots. I want to the PvE to focus on things that players can't do. (Thus the creatures thread).

The why would be to spice up the combat in area across the map. The maps are hand-crafted to be battled in every territory. I liked my idea of per continent creatures.

I think it would be sweet to walk around on a tundra planet like Esamir and hide behind a tree just to hear something and turn around and see nothing. Then turn on dark light and notice an invisible creature has been slowly following you. Turning on darklight or shooting it by accident would anger it and cause it to attack. You might know it's there from a sound or footsteps but you could ignore it. (Unless of course there's a cloaker hiding next to it... :rofl: )

[opticalshadow]

Yeah I'm not a fan of the AI humanoid gun wielding bots. I want to the PvE to focus on things that players can't do. (Thus the creatures thread).

The why would be to spice up the combat in area across the map. The maps are hand-crafted to be battled in every territory. I liked my idea of per continent creatures.

I think it would be sweet to walk around on a tundra planet like Esamir and hide behind a tree just to hear something and turn around and see nothing. Then turn on dark light and notice an invisible creature has been slowly following you. Turning on darklight or shooting it by accident would anger it and cause it to attack. You might know it's there from a sound or footsteps but you could ignore it. (Unless of course there's a cloaker hiding next to it... :rofl: )

if pve were to be added at all it needs to be an event basis with prior warning, a full time pve element will just be more trouble then its worth. it will take away from a player vs player aspect, it will make some tactics impossible to pull off, and complicate others, it will add an element to the game that doesnt offer any real reward other then taking even more time to get from point a to point b.

[Sirisian]

it will take away from a player vs player aspect, it will make some tactics impossible to pull off, and complicate others, it will add an element to the game that doesnt offer any real reward other then taking even more time to get from point a to point b.
Explain what tactics would be impossible to pull off. What tactics would it complicate?

I'll give you the last part. It might hypothetically delay a player randomly depending on the implementation. (If the swamps of Hossin become dangerous then a solo player running to a fight might find himself preoccupied).

I really want you guys to start explaining your thoughts. I think it'll be better for the community to have well thought out points and counter-points. (Especially if we can solve problems that you see in a hypothetical implementation in your head :) ).


Okay onto more ideas. I mentioned the ability of creatures mutating because of the NTU and having powers a while back. There could be a creature capable of charging an orb similar to the ancient pistol weapon to attack players.

Also more importantly there could be larger creatures capable of generating a flail artillery. During an event (or wandering around randomly) they could spawn at warp gates and you'd see these awesome looking streams of energy flying through the air blowing stuff up after the creature sat and charged them up.

Could also have creatures that charged an NTU based flak and attacked back when provoked by air. (Or shot at by friendlies it would enrage them to attack).

Basically you'd know these creatures were around but they don't bother most players unless provoked. Neutral moving spitfires. >_>