March 14 - Gamespy Article

Numbers don't add up. 20,000 players max with access everyday is a bit silly. If non-alliance members could group with alliance members, this would help things a bit. With GvG half party limits, this would leave room for puggers or even half teams. The whole thing could be solved by having a one-two member requirement. Anyone can come to a town, find a lonely alliance member and Pug the Elite mission. If that were the case, people would be standing around forming parties much like in ToA without issue.

Other options: Have a fee for elite missions paid to (and perhaps set by) the controlling alliance. If a alliance had the option of charging 0-8k for entry, top locations would make millions for the alliance. Even if Anet took a cut and the rest wast evenly divided between guilds (or guild members), guilds would have a beautiful pay day for winning. (I'm just throwing out ideas here.)

ANet people aren't stupid. Lord here gets it. Thank you.
50/50 sounds a heck of a lot better than the favor system... now you'll only have to wait a day for your faction to gain control, as opposed to now, where you have to wait threeish days to time it right for Korea to defeat Europe to defeat America to defeat Korea to defeat Europe to defeat Korea to defeat America to defeat Europe to defeat America....

Even if the factions system doesn't turn out, Cantha doesn't have devourers.
Good e-freaking-nough.

I think this could work, all there really needs be is a little more lore and a little rpg story. Anet already said they will add more content for rpg.

But i would still have to play the game where anet can improve I think this is a new style. Because eveything is new and ground breaking. people will not under stand it. I think a wait and see is the way to go. After hearing the interview I have hopes for fractions.

On the bad part there will be a lack of land to explore. I am alos hopeing for the ship ride. you get drive the ship or have some sort of quest on the high seas.

I like the fact there will be alot of quest in this game, and mossions. I hope the rpg is more solid, I am keep my figures cross. Just want to have good old rpg fun.

This is exactly what my guild has done on so many occasions already. Plan on Wednesday to go to FoW on Friday evening. Log in, no favor, we log off. We know it's just a maybe thing, but it's still irritating. When you have something in mind to do, and it gets shot down because of a play style your not into, it just really kills the fun of the game. The way we worked it out, we don't bother with FoW or UW. In our opinion, it's "broken" content, much in the way some of the quest laying about the land are... un-doable.

This completely destroys guild grouping. So, this is not a good thing. I'll wait till my whole guild can go so we can enjoy the content as friends and have more fun doing it then with the PuGs.

The winners already have won and have gotten the rewards for doing so. Giving them monetary rewards would further destroy the economy as the more powerful guilds would have more a reason to join together leaving smaller guilds out. Look at the biggest companies today, they merge constantly to hold ground thus soaking up more and more money. Smaller companies are destroyed and bankrupt... they fade away. Monetary payments to the winners is a huge "No No" IMO. Seems we already have to farm faction points (play PvP to get them) to pay to get into the Elite missions pending our faction (not alliance) controls the city.

Thanks for the link. I enjoyed hearing it. I laughed a few times (seriously laughed) at hearing the spin on it. My favorite was hearing "players will compete over resources and skirmishes might pop up once in awhile, but it's not direct PvP..." How can players competing against players in any way shape or form not be PvP? It may not be PK (player kililng) but it is players vs players (PvP).
The amount of pre-ascension content is also of note, since he says 80% of the content is based on territory control and takes place after "ascending"; that leaves 20% of the game to be actual PvE based.
I still think it's funny - RTS play style vs other players is not PvP... Pitting your score on a ladder to compete vs other players is not PvP... I also thought it interesting he puts GW into the E-sports type game style. I mentioned the PvP mini games with points being like a sports game previously before even hearing the interview.
This interview does indeed confirm that Factions has little to offer PvE players. Maybe within a month or so of release, Anet will fix that blunder. Untill they do though, I'll not be buying Factions and I'll wait untill Chapter 3 comes out - which according to the interview is scheduled for November. Good stuff there and Oblivion should keep me busy till at least then.

Thanks again for the link, take care all. See you in GWP and chapter 3 (maybe) if you are still hanging around in there from time to time.

Edit: Before some wise guy assumes I'm quiting, I'm not. I'm just not purchasing Factions till Anet learns (figures out) what makes PvEers enjoy the game. I'm in hopes they figure it out with Chapter 3, cause after hearing that interview, they are so far off target with Factions it literally made me laugh. Playing PvP mini games, ladders, points, score boards, RTS based play, skirmishes... all these things are not what PvEers are looking to play and not what I (and others) consider playble or fun content. I see this as wasted time and effort on Anet's side when there could have been major AI updates, more armor, weapons, henchman and pet commands, new "flashy" spell effects, new animations for core classes and their attack skills. All that time and effort thrown away cause they are so far off what makes PvEers fun.
Even in the interview, Jeff Strain mentioned he used to enjoy "griefing" fellow players in Diablo.

-- still laughing at that as well -- /shakes head

I've gone through and cleaned up this thread. That includes flaming, country bashing, personal insults, etc. And all posts referencing the deleted posts have been removed as well. Please try to keep this civil, there's some really good discussion here and I'd like to see it continue, minus the flaming.

He might not consider it direct PvP, because the main conflict could still be PvE with PvP "skirmishes."

But all this is just conjecture, anyway, who knows what the actual missions will be like?

Yes, and since we're already being extra limited in character slots [see other threads], what are we to do? We can't create new characters to enjoy the PvE game... and at least 50% of the time we won't be able to play any of the high-level content. So what exactly -DO- PvE players have to look forward to in Factions?

Actually, we're pissed because, again, and even more, we're forced to rely-interact with PvP playstyle. We don't want PvE to be important. We want it to be completely unaffected by PvP.

No. We want to be able to get to the content (we paid for being able to play) and play it. We don't want to be told "no, you can't go there and play this mission".

Cooperative mission - PvE content.
Elite Missions - PvP-dependent content.
Competitive Missions - PvP content.
Alliance Battles - PvP content.

Alliances: Require interacting with everyone. Bad for those of us who just play amongst ourselves with our small guild of friends.

Correct.
Assumed - I thought that PvE guilds could also access Elite missions. Could be wrong, though.
Sounds right...

If PvE players can access Elite missions, I assume everyone will be happy?

If we can stay completely out of this "factions" warring, yeah. The way everything seems is we can theoretically access them -- if (a) we're part of an alliance (which is very contrarian to PvE style) (b) our alliance is part of the faction that controls the city when we happen to have time to log on to play.

Thank you. I had to control myself to stop from degenerating to more of the mocking and playstyle bashing introduced here which has no bearing on this situation. We all have a right to play the game that begats the most enjoyment for each of us. If we were all to have the same playstyle, that would make for some very boring gaming indeed.

To get back to the topic at hand. My biggest beef comes from the fact that Anet's fuzzy math equation we should all be familiar with. However, we know because of slot limitations, and the fact that Factions is 20/80 low/high level content that as of this point we cannot in fact play 100% of the content we paid for, whether we merge accounts or keep them separate. Furthermore, by having a lot of the content locked at any one time, that further limits our ability to play the game during the time we have to play it.

Whether it takes 10 months to reach that content or only 10 days is irrelavant. The fact remains, when it comes time for me to reach those areas, I would like to be able to play that content as befits my style. As I have said in other threads, I enjoy some PvP, but I am primarily a PvEer, so to be forced to compete in some form of PvP to access content is a little PIA to me, but I know others who detest it. They are the one's I am speaking up for here.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

PS:
And that is what's so aggravating about the lack and any true details on exactly how Factions will play out. 90% of the debates posted in the Factions area here could be a moot point once we get to see how things will play out. But the fact that the game is just over a month away with no real substantial into on it is the real backbreaker. I was at least able to make an informed decision on purchasing GW long in advance, but I still can't tell whether the $20 I plopped down for two pre-oders (my main account and my sister's account) will actually be a waste of money or not. And in reality, with a whole new dynamic being introduced that will affect the long term play of Factions, how are we really going to get a good basis on the game play with only three days to get through the allowable areas of the world?

And has noone seen the potential opening up of griefing in this game with "competitive missions"? Groups of people who just perfect playing that mission and doing it over and over, preventing anyone else from being able to complete it succcessfully? Sigh. So much for a nearly grief-free game.

Actually, confirmed as follows: If you belong to a faction that controls a city, but not your alliance, you can purchase access to the Elite Missions by spending Faction points. These Faction points are earned through the competitive missions (or PvP mini games). If your alliance has control of the city as well, then you are granted the ability to throw parades and other such eye candy.
The faction point system seems in place to stop "faction zerging" or fast faction switching so players can't gain access to the missions without first playing some part in the PvP battles.
The system works for what it was designed to do - gives players faction choices a deeper meaning and makes you care whether your faction wins or not. It also makes the players wishing to gain access to the elite missions partake in PvP battles... thusly, in Anet's words "bring them closer".
However, as these boards will show, it's creating a greater rift amoung the two, not bringing them closer at all.

Actually yes, but I would like to see it be taken a step further. I would like to see less silliness like scoring and points be added to PvE. In PvE, this "stuff" is absolutely useless and gives us nothing at all to show for the time and effort of play.
I mean really, a ladder for score in PvE? I've stepped in things more useful than that. All the effort put forth into making these PvP mini games could have gone to much better updates to the game.
PvE needs better AI, better Henchman and Pet control, better chat channels, more dungeons and places to adventure, more of a lot of things. But we get a score ladder?
Coop missions and the amount of times they are completed each day could have been counted towards moving the borders. Instead we get to PvP for points rather than kills.
The whole system is borked beyond anything most of us could have imagined... but, it's just as Anet wanted it. So it's nearly perfect in all it's errors.
Like I said earlier, I (since I don't like PvP) am not buying it. There's little or no content in it for me. Chapter 3 (listen to the interview) is on schedule for November and I'll keep up on that one and see if it's better for my play style... not quiting, just not buying Chapter 2.

gamingsteve.com has the interview for those not knowing.

Edit: Didn't want to double post -

Can you also see the future of PuGs in those "missions"? PuG leaders looking for "ladder rank X and above only!" So much for the guildless and casual players...
After saying that, I can see even more how Anet literally "throws" all players together. Your either in an alliance or your on the side lines looking in. I really hope Chapter 3 goes the opposite direction that Factions has gone.

Well, we'll miss you Was - you have posted many good points along these threads, so it would have been nice to have more players like you in C2. But that's one of the points I don't get here. I certainly don't begrudge the PvPers their moment to shine in the sun. The new system is a great boon for those players, but since Anet's income is dependent on selling chapters, why would the limit the potential customer base like it seems they are doing with Factions. You are willing to wait to purchase chapter 3, but how many of us will purchase chapter 2, not like it, have loose interest in any future chapters?

I agree with you that Anet should have put in a lot more effort on the strictly PvE side of Factions as they have with the PvP side of Factions, other than offering a larger world to explore. As I have said before, a dynamic world would be worth the time to replay over and over again, but since GW is a very structured and static game, it doesn't matter how big of an explorable area they make it if there's no depth to that area.

I think GW is in the unique position to be a game that successfully merges a structured storyline (Chapter 1) with an openended explorable world (such as Eve Online). Right now, they look to take GW much closer to the Linage II model, which NCSoft themselves acknowledges is a hard core player game, as the PvP type of play style is. GW's success thus far has been with the casual gamer, which has always leaned towards being more PvE oriented. Alienating them just doesn't make sense.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

Thanks, I'll still be playing in Chapter one now and then, whenever guildies need me. Though, after sharing what I have, there are several other guildies who are now passing on Factions as well. They are rl friends, so I know it's not nonsence to support my way of thinking. They really are not buying Factions. So, I'll be grouping up with them now and then.
Thanks to Oblivion, I'll be playing something else as well till Chapter 3 comes around and...

this brings me to this. Anyone following my posts knows that I was anticipating Factions with high hopes for more content and awesome game play. With the initial release of info from Gamespot and Gamespy I really started digging to prove those articles wrong. What I found in fact, and as we now know, Factions is PvP based no matter the marketing spin in place by the publisher. - Sorry, but PvP isn't just killing other players, it's players vs players in any manner of situations.
What I also found, and the reason I am willing to wait till Chapter 3 is simply the absolute genious behind the Factions system. All angles have been covered and it does exactly what Anet wanted... for those that enjoy both aspects of the game, it brings them closer.
If that same genious is put forth towards PvE in Chapter 3, I'm sure we will be in for a treat. If Chapter 3 is more PvP based "silliness" (ladders?!?! - lol) in place of PvE content, then by that time, I'm sure other options will be on the horizon.
You're right though, I may be the minority of people willing to wait and see on Chapter 3. If PvEers get hosed in the Factions, I feel most will leave for good. PvEers (myself included) are a fickle bunch and our patience is limited - probably why most of us don't enjoy PvP. A loss would feel like a wasted evening and a win for "points" means as much as a pig fart. Can't see it, but it sure does smell.

Makes no sence at all to me either. PvEers will be the long term players. PvPers generally move on to the next "pretty engine" as soon as it's released. I know, I used to do that - another reason I don't PvP... major burn out. So without PvE content (ladders excluded - still makes me laugh) to hold players in place, they may leave. - /silliness "I'm wielding a uber ladder rank 8 sword of warding" /silliness off
Anet has empressed me with their "genious" so I'm sure they are aware of this, so we'll see where it takes them.

Also, everyone that hasn't heard the interview really ought too. It does explain how the system works. Becareful though, I feel it's full of marketing spin and Jeff S even claims players vs players in resource grabbing skirmishes isn't direct PvP. If players fighting for resources against each other isn't players vs players (PvP) I apparently don't know what is. So, listen carefully and you'll get the idea of how the system works. It's good stuff, and Factions will rock for those who enjoy PvP. There's no doubting that, for the rest of us though... meh

-- ladders in PvE? just kills me LMAO -- sorry, I know, I have a dry sence of humor.

Edit: spelling and other fun stuff...

It's a real shame that Anet seems to be driving away players it meant to bring deeper into the game.

But for those who are totally turned off by all this PvP talk, is there any way you can imagine a PvP scenario you would actually enjoy playing?

or is the thought of playing against other humans that repulsive?

The thought of playing against other humans is repulsive. I rarely even play with pugs... Just PvE with my guildies (who are all friends I know around town). I'm not competitive. I'm an explorer/tinkerer. I like to try out builds and skills, and wander around the maps looking at the little pretties the devs put in that surely most people haven't bothered to look at.

I'm sorry, character slot limitation how? You have two new slots if you decide to merge, correct? If you play PvE exclusively, what's the problem? 1 per new profession, if you decide to play both.

I know I'm going to use this weekend to figure out which one I'm going to prefer to play, because I sure as hell haven't been playing all the professions in Chapter 1. I find Elementalist and Monk to be particularly drab in PvE. And look at that. Four slots, four other professions. The slots we have are plenty for anything you want to do.

I've got three well-tuned PvE characters, professions I enjoy playing (Warrior, Ranger, Necro), and those three characters are versatile enough to fill virtually any role required in either PvP or PvE.

That fourth empty slot is my PvP slot, which I usually use to goof off with random Warrior, Ranger, or Necro PvP builds, or utilize my Mesmer where Mesmers truly shine: in PvP. That's not to say they're useless in PvE, far from it. But they truly shine in a PvP environment. Their lockdown potential is really obvious there, because humans can decide not to cast. The A.I. can't.

Because I construct my characters strategically, I have never had a problem with using four slots, and I sure as hell won't have a problem with six. If I were so inclined, I could even play both new professions. But I probably won't be, considering I haven't been feeling Ritualist, just like I never really dug Elementalists or Monks.

Moral of this story is "Play smarter, not harder."

Remember what Hanok's comment was (pity it was deleted). He didn't like PvE getting the shaft when it comes to region control. But PvE (and certainly, any Player vs AI) rarely has ever decided favor, especially in online games, so why expect it now? Wiping out the computer decides which Faction is in control? It's asinine. I enjoy thumping on the A.I. just as much as the next PvEr, but I'm not about to pretend me thumping on the A.I. should affect the game when it comes to region control.

And as it stands now, I don't see this whole "OMG exclusive content! I want it now!!" temper tantrum as being all that realistic. And frankly, if people are offended by me calling it a temper tantrum, that's their problem. I'd love to see lots more content accessible to people. I think the current favor system sucks for the following reasons:

1) Too many regions fighting for control.

2) Not enough content zones.

3) The content zones we do have are based on one requirement.

Now look at what we're seeing for Factions:

1) Two regions fighting for control.

2) An undisclosed number of content zones, but we can reasonably assume there will be plenty.

3) Content zones based on a variety of different requirements.

Based on that...I just don't see accessibility being an issue, unless all of the top guilds in all of the current regions ally together in one Faction. Likelihood of that happening? Slim to none, I think, because the top guilds thrive on competition, like I've said previously.

One, I think the "pure PvErs" are making a much bigger deal out of this than is really necessary, and two, it's unfortunate that the previous posts were deleted, because the "I want to kill Bambi and control favor" was exactly the idea behind the previous posts. "PvErs don't have control. PvErs want control." You may not agree with those sentiments, but others here have certainly expressed those sentiments...sentiments brought on by a lack of rational thought.

Previous posts deleted or not, I stand by my points. Those who have problems with people fighting each other to gain control of regions, to "liberate" cities, need to realize that killing the A.I. (as in, killing Bambi) is inconsequential when at war. People need to realize that humans vs humans (PvP) is what decides who controls what in war.

Factions is two nations at war. That's the bottom line.

Some reply with "But we don't want to be limited" and then they're missing the point, yet again, because they're seemingly ignoring the fact that the Factions favor system is incredibly streamlined compared to what we're running now. See above.

I sound rude and all here, but people aren't thinking things through. I don't know which is more tragic: PvP region control or seemingly non-existent cognitive abilities.

Playing against others is to much of a "rushed" feel to it for me these days. Yea, I'm old, cranky and my bones pop when I move... jk, but seriously, there were other ways to bring the two closer and this wasn't it.

To bring them closer Anet should have kept them apart but with similar goals. How would this work?
An Alliance is made up of PvE and PvP players, good ones anyway (according to Anet). Playing a PvE mission with several teams say, 2 groups of 6 maybe, could take on a mission with various points of interest. For example, attacking a city gate vs AI human enemies. One team could unlock the gate(s) via one path and the other team could complete a second part.
During this, or after (could defer depending on the situation) the PvP team(s) could be attacking or defending the same city against actual players.
Neither side would be reliant on each other during this but the end results could easily be tallied every hour or so for victory or loss conditions.
In this, the goals are the same and in a way they are working together, yet they are still playing their prefered game types.
PvP would never have to wait to play in that city as PvEers are constantly going through missions - almost non-stop. PvEers would not be worried about waiting on PvPers or locked missions as they could actually do a PvE mission (not these silly PvP mini games for score) to make a difference.
I'm sure there are other ways as well, but pushing a play type on a very fickle crowd (PvE'ers like me) was a goof beyond the Titanic.

Neither am I. I don't want PvE to have any bearing on it. I also don't want PvE to be affected by it. Pure neutrality in terms of that lame war I want no part of. As it is set to be, where I can play will be dependant on PvPers. Even WORSE than the current favor system.

It does suck.

Not enough? There are too many. ANY are too many. Plus, it's more than just FOW/UW -- quests affected by it happen as early as the Sanitarium in Ascalon.

PvEers don't want to BE controlled by PvPers. We care not to excert any control.

Streamlined, perhaps. But it still depends on PvP play! I don't care to have to sit around in those "pvp training" missions on the islands or whatever just to be able to play missions, or have to wait until side XYZ controls a city so I can play there. It's rare enough that have time to log in to play, let alone have to worry whether or not I'll be able to play that night.

Siren, it's not about having control, it's about being controlled.

We shouldn't have to plan our PvE play times around what PvP is doing. I think global reactions to player actions are a neat thing to have, but they shouldn't constrict players from actually playing the game.

Right now PvE has to basically ride the "PvP Wind" until they see an opportunity. We don't want our own wind to affect PvP... we just prefer there was no wind at all. I know that sounds boring, but to us it's less aggrovating and more fun.

I'd post more to backup my point, but it's time to head home.

Thanks for the reply mqstout - can't say it any better myself. Never in my posts did I say that I wanted PvE to have an effect on either Favor in C1 nor on Faction in C2. I, like many other PvEers, want our playable content to have no limitations based on a part of the game that 1) many have no desire to play at all or 2) many, like me, who don't see it as a major part of their playstyle.

The slot issue is being debated on another thread, but it all relates to how much content we can access. I'm not rehashing that here, but suffice it to say, without one slot per prime, we cannot play 100% of the content of either game. That's all the PvEers are asking for - to be able to play 100% of the content of the games we pay for without having to participate in a playstyle that either does not suit us, or is completely boring to us.

Again, I actually like what they have done for the PvP portion of Factions. I am anticipating watching the war with interest, as much as I enjoyed hearing about the now infamous Rebel/Empire battle that occurried in Galaxies not to long ago from some players who participated in it. That kind of player control and interaction is quite interesting to me. However, I do not want it to have any bearing whatsoever on what kind of content I can access in a game, nor when I am "permitted" to access it.

And in answer to one point. No, I do not always have a few minutes to log in to see who has favor - that's why I am classified as a casual player. Even if I did, it takes more than a few mintues to accomplish anything of value in the game. So I log on when I have enough time set aside to be able to do some serious playing.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

PS: in reply to Mordy above,
I think the Faction war is an interesting way to participate in PvP. Like I said above, I got a kick out of how players in Galaxies (and in Eve Online) can affect territory and the game play with large scale wars. That's just me, I don't detest PvP, but it's not my favorite thing to do either. However, I would like to see a PvP option where players can create a character that would participate strictly in battles like these examples. The difference is, once that character is killed, he's dead - none of this meaningless DP kind of stuff. That's one of the things I miss in the new games. In the classic RPG's death tended to have more permanent penalties, including the complete loss of a character. Kinda made trying to stay alive a lot more important than it is now.

PPS:
A dynamic gaming enviroment is a good thing - as long as it has a basic structure. The Old Galaxies, and Eve Online are two examples of more openended games that appeal more to the hard core crowd than the casual crowd. I think a better way to have made GW more dynamic, rather than having to choose a Faction and having PvP decide what kind of content is accessable, is by having how an individual player explores the game impact the game world for that player. If I were to play the Frost Gate mission where Rurik is killed, I should be able to go back to Ascalon and see how his death affects that part of the game world. But that affect would only apply to me - other players who have not yet reached that mission would not see the change until they do.

Pure neutrality in general sucks. That's been proven throughout history, which is why neutrality is completely irrelevant when discussing anything relating to war.

Regarding Factions...how could you even say it'd be worse? See below. lol

So then it's not as if I'm some cranky hardcore PvPer looking to screw the PvErs over in Factions, eh? And perhaps there's actually some logic behind what I'm saying? Perhaps there's logic to seeing Factions as an improved Favor system, where the likelihood of running into the present Favor problems is going to decrease dramatically, for the reasons I've listed previously?

On the contrary. Your options are limited because there aren't enough content zones with varied enough accessibility conditions. From what I've read, I anticipate Factions to change that.

As the current favor system is? Yes, PvErs are entirely dependent on PvP. If America hasn't won HoH, you guys don't get FoW access. Or UW. Or dinky little incidental quests in Sardelac that net you a measly 500 xp.

In Factions, however, that PvP control is going to be diffused (I think diffused to the point of not being an issue, honestly); there are going to be multiple zones that will either be controlled by A or B. There's no longer A, B, C, D, or E. It's just A and B. You choose A or B, and I expect A and B to be pretty well balanced.

And like I've been saying time and time again, I think too many people here are trumping up this Factions system to be something far worse than it will turn out to be. You won't have to wait weeks on end for America to get favor. That's why I think that anti-Factions argument is so incredibly silly. It's based on a situation that is solely Prophecies-exclusive. It's based on a situation that involves A, B, C, D, and E, quite unlike the A and B of Factions.

I mean, just think about it. You already obviously see what I mean when I say Factions is streamlining the process. Just take that thought process a few steps further and realize that Factions' Favor system sounds a hell of a lot more varied than the Prophecies one. It's streamlined in the sense we only have A and B, but it's more varied in the sense that we have a lot more content that's dependent on many different variables.

I don't think people should be as worried about it, honestly, and if you really think about it, I think you'd come to the same conclusion, mate.

TimeCatalyst, same thing. These anti-Factions arguments I'm seeing are trying to make it a total black-and-white thing: "There is still Favor, therefore it sucks." But it isn't Favor like Prophecies. It may function in a similar manner, sure, but it's not a singular battle deciding everything (like HoH). In Factions, it's going to be a whole lot of battles deciding different things.

More character slots are not going to solve the problem of your playstyle limiting you, or PvP mildly determining what cities you can access at a given moment. Character slots and favor are completely unrelated. And provided my earlier reply didn't get deleted (lol), you can see that for an explanation of how the current number of character slots is all you'd ever need if you play things intelligently.

It takes me all of three minutes to log-in and check who currently as favor. Just because I'm able to do that doesn't mean I'm not a casual player. I'm very much a casual player. I don't consider myself "hardcore." I don't view logging in at night every so often as "hardcore." Most times, if there's nothing going on (and I don't plan my activities in-game ahead of time, by the way), I log off.

I play this game in my spare time. I don't devote hours to it when hours aren't necessary. I don't even map out my week to insert a few hours of GW into my schedule.

If you only log-in when you set aside enough time to do some "serious playing," that's your problem right there. You don't treat it like a casual thing. You plan time for it. You set a schedule for it. I log-in whenever I feel like it (and when I don't have pressing matters to attend to, obviously). But does a casual player block out time to play?

I don't define casual and hardcore in terms of hours played, because I think that's a complete joke of a definition. I definte casual and hardcore by how people play, and you don't sound like a casual player, no offense.

And that is a logistical nightmare best left for console RPGs. In fact, I can't even think of how that'd work in a MMORPG (or COORPG), even with your last sentence there. I mean, hell, this game doesn't even function in a linear fashion to begin with. Plus, it would effectively ruin the gaming experience. You could never ever help guildies with previous missions. And I don't think people would like that.

That dinky little quest that happens to be fun and have a really cool story behind and during it, you mean.

Things read as if the extra missions are available based on ALLIANCE and not which of the two factions are around. There will be uncountable alliances around, and most PvE players will be in none of them, thus making the high end content completely not available to the people it's designed for.

I've done that quest before. It's dinky and little, and nothing more than an escort mission for two NPCs.

Check the map screenshots. I'm seeing two lines, one red, the other blue. Outposts are colored red or blue, correct? Seems to me to indicate that players of different alliances won't be locked out of elite missions and whathaveyou, provided they're of the same Faction. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, and countless PvErs are going to leave because they can't stay locked into one gameplay type, lol. If I'm right, though, Factions is going to be a lot easier than some are saying, eh?

"I've done that quest before. It's dinky and little, and nothing more than an escort mission for two NPCs."

Did you even read the moving dialog between the children and their parents?

People are really stretching for arguments here and I really am holding back the flames.

Factions solves many of the shortcomings of prophecy. There will be more difficult areas (20 elite missions) which is 5 times what the game currently has. That alone should be enough for any PvEer to pick up the game. If you want to experience new and challenging areas and AIs, this may be the game for you. Quests will be denser, things generally will be denser and you'll have new henchies if you totally hate the real people (some non-human models). Each of your existing characters will have access to 50+ more skills and you can replay prophecies with two new character types.

Prophecies PvPers have suffered with the same game types and a general lack of reward mechanic beyond a ladder, HoH winner posts and rank. Guild Wars is fulfilling more of its potential with competitve missions and world altering mechanics. With more arenas and indirect competition, some faction PvP will be less intense. The pace will be different and the objectives will be different. I suggest trying it before you tear it apart.

The RPG structure in guild wars wasn't ever meant to be a strictly PvE structure. Sure you have a hero, but your hero was never "the one" as in other games, he was a loyal soldier fighting with comrades. Factions will bring this to a new level. As well as you changing the world, you are fight for a common cause with other role-players. Roleplayers as crying because they can't enter an enemy city (anyone see the irony here). Sure you can choose neutrality or jump from side to side, but some restrictions add to interesting roleplaying, they don't subtract from it. Uncertainty is interesting, scarcity is interesting, decisions with consequences are interesting. What is boring is not having anything to look forward to tomorrow except farming or HoH.

This game is for the casual player, more interesting areas, more open feeling (not that blank feeling you get after "beating the game"), pvp which is less "leet" and more varied. More mission types that you can jump in and have fun for a short spurt OR day long objectives.

I dont feel many people are stretching for arguments tbh, they read many many interviews that say the same thing, reach a conclusion which may or may not be correct and yet hear nothing from an official source to correct those conclusions.

Lots of people are concerned, as rightly or wrongly they face the prospect of having to leave friends and Guilds they care about behind just to stand a chance of accessing missions in which the most money/prestige are to be made.

It's these issues that are I believe at the heart of peoples posts, and it's the lack of clarity in them that is at it's root. Wait and see is easy to say when you know what mechanics are, but is a lot harder in the real world of the 5 person Guild of friends..

Trying to avoid getting into another flame war with you, but I never said that the character slot issue has anything to do with the subject in this thread. It does have something to do with the amount of overall profession specific content we can access in either game - whether merged or not. I am not going to rehash the arguments here. If you want to debate this topic post in the slot limitation thread, and we can go from there.


First of all, I'm glad that you have a real world life that lets you log on whenever you feel like it. Unfortunately, my real world responsibilities only allow me to log on only during certain points of the week in my spare time. So I certainly do look forward to getting some gaming action in during those times. Upon checking my total game time in over the last 10 months, I at most have an opportunity to play about 12 hours a week, which turns out to be about 4 hours over the course of the 3 days I have.


Not necessarily. We already have a small snippit of something like this in regards to Gwen in Pre-Searing. If you party with someone who has already given her the cape and flute, even if you have not, she will always appear with the cape and flute in hand. At least that was the way it was the last time I visited Pre-Sear. Games like Eve Online have already accomplished much with openended and dynamic worlds. Oblivion and Gothic 3 promise to raise the bar on more human like AI which can be fully applied to online games as well. At the very least, we can begin by having the GW monsters react to all their dead allies as we go through the world and missions instead of not having any interaction at all, as we have now aside from some "heal other" abilities.

I imagine that the type of dynamic I am talking about can be handled similar to the district and instancing system we have now. Upon reaching certain milestones in the game, such as going from Ascalon to the Shiverpeaks, and from the Shiverpeaks to Kryta, New districts open up that contain updated instances relating to the quests and missions that presumably have been completed with the character in question. This would also affect only the character who has travelled to those areas on the map, therefore using another character, you can still aid friends and guildies with the "older" areas. After all, even if you have one character on an account complete the game, a new character on your account doesn't automatically have access to all areas, nor has a cleared map.

Actually, GW is a very linear game if you play it as such - the storyline never changes no matter where you go or when, you just don't have to follow it in the order the devs made it. The good thing about it is that it was designed with a lot of freedom in mind allowing for any type of playstyle without too many restrictions (aside from the favor). By making the storyline more dynamic, it would actually reduce the staticness of the game. You still wouldn't have to complete the storyline in chrono order, and by not doing so, create an entirely new playing experience for yourself. You conceivably could actually play four different versions of the game just by taking your four characters through the world by doing completely different things. After all, who here hasn't wondered what kind of play experience we would have if killing all the Charr in the Northlands in Pre-Searing would actually have an effect on the Searing and Post-Searing world itself?

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

I love this thread; here's why:

Pure PvEer's really hate PvP games to a point of quiting when forced into it. I've seen several online games fail because of this (Asheron's Call 2 anyone?).
Stating an opinion about PvP or the PvP mini games is a wonderful way to have others see your point of view - but lets face it. Pure PvE and pure PvP are way to different to be forced into either's play style. Now those that enjoy both types of play will absolutely love Factions. Pure PvP may also love it as there is more for them to do. Pure PvE though are really getting the shaft... seriously we are. And that's cool with me, cause hopefully, Anet will put as much effort into PvE as they did into PvP with Factions.
How are PvEers getting the shaft? Just look at the content. It's either held or gained by PvP. It's unlocked by PvP. PvP mini games give the points required to open the end game missions. PvP simply gains the most out of Factions.
All one needs to do is listen to the interview that is online now and haer from themselves. Factions is a PvP stand alone game with really lite PvE content thrown on top in an effort to make more sales. After the Faction version of Ascention, the interview tells that players will then be placed into the competitive missions (PvP) and begin working on their faction points. The interview also says becoming ascended in Factions will take considerable (the ratio is given in the interview) less time. So what PvE content there is, it's rushed and pushed through to get the players into the conflict.
PvEers wishing to play elite content with their current level 20's will find themselves not able to do the new elite missions prior to spending time in the PvP mini games.
So again, Factions is PvP based.
I'm a pure PvE player and I'm passing on purchasing Factions. I'll still be playing Chapter one as I still find it fun. In November I'll check out Chapter 3 (interview states Chapter 3 is on schedule for Nov release). If it actually has some real PvE content (not the silly ladder and points based content) then I'll be grabbing it up. I suggest pure PvEers all do the same so that Anet will know it will lose some sales due to such a game mechanic. I would also (I have) emailed Anet and let them know why I am passing up Factions. I have not quit out of rage, I have just opted out of the game as it is not enough content for me to enjoy for $50.

A ray of hope for Chapter 3: In the interview, Jeff S says that each chapter will have a different game mechanic to it. So, again, I hope we see some real PvE content come our way. If Anet puts the same genious behind the build of factions, we'll have a real treat come Chapter 3. Till then, those that play Factions can wield their uber ladder point of sundering sword. - ladders in PvE still cracks me up -

Flame war? Please. I say a few things without trying to be mind-numbingly polite and it's suddenly called a flame war? As far as I'm concerned, people are too sensitive. Political correctness is quickly becoming social paralysis. Everyone's afraid of offending somebody. That is no way to live. I think it's much better to call a spade a spade than to pretend to be all nicey-nicey, to explain that Special Ed students are in Special Ed for a reason and not try to dance around it. Don't you agree? Society doesn't get anywhere when people are afraid to speak their minds.

By the way, you never mentioned anything about profession specific content:

I think it's about time to stop trying to re-define your posts after the fact, don't you? There was no reason at all to bring up character slots. It has and had absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, simple as that. Elite missions in Factions do not change depending on if you play a Ritualist or a Mesmer, a Warrior or an Assassin. The availability of those Elite missions doesn't change if you, a PvEr, decide to play your Necro over your Monk.

Come on. Don't try to convince me that character slots is relevant at all. Your rantings and ramblings about "content accessibility" here have always been focused on some perceived inequality when it comes to the PvP/PvE dichotomy...not having to choose between 4 or 6 character slots.

Logging-in isn't the same as playing. I can log-in virtually at any time of the day when I'm not working or in class. But just logging-in doesn't mean I'm going to devote a few hours to game-time. It could be something as simple as keeping up with who's logged in lately in my guild. Or checking favor.

I still don't see how someone is completely unable to even type in a password, hit Enter, then select one of their characters when they have a few minutes to themselves. You've posted throughout the day, correct? That indicates to me you have time on your hands during the day, correct? How is it completely out of your control, then, to take a few spare minutes of your day to just log-in? Not even to do anything major. Just to log-in.

Finally, regarding the "I can't get on frequently enough while we have Favor" argument, *quotes one of his own previous posts*

Again, I keep repeating myself, but it seems like it just isn't getting through...people need to think about what they're saying, because they'll find that what they're saying is completely asinine in the context of Factions, because most of their concerns is focusing on what will become a completely outdated Favor system--the Favor system of Prophecies.

One tiny bit from the tiniest bit in the game. You don't have as strong a case as you think you do. I don't know what you're trying to get at with "monsters [reacting] to all their dead allies," but I don't think those monsters would ever give two shits about their dead allies in an emotional sense. Pack-strength, yeah, because we see Resurrect and such, but even then, those monsters are just programmed to do that, so...I don't think we're really going to see "emotive" Charr in GW, and I certainly don't think it's a worthwhile pursuit.

Again, mild "special" instancing already occurs, but there's one instance like that in Pre-Searing, then another Post-Sear, a little outside Piken Square. That's it. There's nothing else. And really, I think that's all there needs to be of that. Two little tiny bits of the game don't exactly set any type of precedent of "Hey, that's possible game-wide!"

Storyline is linear, yeah, but who follows the storyline, except on their first playthrough?

And as much as your idea sounds interesting, I can tell you right now it'd be a trainwreck. The work involved in doing that would be absurd. Every single scenario would have to be worked out. Everything. Every possible mission combination. Every possible plot point combination. The problem with your idea is...grouping with people would be impossible. It hurts my brain to even consider the consequences of a group of people trying to play D'Alessio Seaboard, for example, and some of them being able to target friendlies, while others aren't able to target the Undead. It'd be complete chaos. A complete trainwreck of a game.

In console RPGs, it's possible. Stuff like KotOR, Fable, etc. Not here.

I'm going to let Christopher Lloyd field this one.

PvP is almost totally unrelated to gaining access to Elite missions. If you listen to Jeff's interview, he makes it clear that the Aliiance Battles (3x4v4 PvP, only available to PvE toonz) will set the borders, which determine how many cities are available for your faction to control. Control of those cities (and subsequent access to Elite Missions) is entirely determined by both Challenge Missions (pure PvE), and Competition Missions, which is touted as being a hybrid but learning heavily towards being PvE orientated. If you want access to Elite Missions, you never have to touch PvP. You don't even need a single PvPer in your entire alliance.

Competitive != PvP. Saying that factions is PvP based is a rediculous statement. They're introducting one new pure PvP gametype (which is accesable to only PvE toonz anyway), while they're introducting a bunch of new PvE focussed stuff (Competition Missions, Challenge Missions, Elite Missions, Outpost Control), as well as an entirely new campaign. What's PvP getting? A few new guild halls from what I've heard, Alliance Battles, and that's about the sum of it. That's all I've seen announced anyway (in no way complaining about this, new skills and classes is more than enough to keep PvP fresh for a while).

The entire Faction system is a PvE reward system, gained by playing a lot of PvE maps better than other PvEers.

Complaining that you can't access a reward solely due to self imposed limitations seems highly illogical. Saying you can't acces Elite missions because you don't like guilding, and therefore the system sucks, is equivalent to saying you can't get to the Forgemaster for FoW armor because you don't like making groups of 8, therefore you're unfairly being locked out of content. The best rewards are exclusive, and the better a reward is, the more people want it, the more they'll play to try and get it, and the more satisfaction they'll feel when they actually get it. That's going to get more people into those areas and missions. It'll keep them fresh. It'll make the game a great deal of fun for those who choose to get involved. It keeps both the game world and the community at large vibrant and dynamic. That's the whole point.

Currently there is no reward system in place for PvE guilds. Nothing. You can go out an farm together, but that's about it. There's a lack on incentive for those people to log on each and every day. It's being introduced for the same reasons that the HoH and cash Tournaments are there for PvPers. So they've put in a PvE reward system that gives PvEers what they want: extremely difficult missions, gameworld RP recognition and power, and big loot. Seems perfect to me. The only issue I could see is if 10-20 alliances dominate control, but I'm sure they'll put in mechanisms to makes even smaller guilds have some, if somewhat less regular, access to those rewards. As long as it doesn't become a zerg-fest, i can't see anything wrong.

Our friend here is ignoring the fact that PvE may be more interesting in Factions. Guest's argument is that since the game is more enjoyable for PvP and mixed players, then it MUST be less enjoyable for the PvE crowd. This doesn't follow logically.

The other thing Guest alludes to is that all games that force PvP have failed. Two reasons this is plain silly. Guild Wars doesn't force PvP and there are no negative consequences of in game PvP. FPS are incredibly popular online and they are exclusively PvP oriented. There is clearly a market for a game like guild wars and factions will be a game like guild wars with some richer cross genre content included as well as more top level PvP areas.

Based on this lack of information and logic, Guest claims he won't buy the game. People who value intellegence over baseless passion should really go try out the event this weekend.

All right Siren, here we go again. First, please reread the quote you inclued in your own post. I myself said that the slot issue has no bearing on the topic on hand in this thread. I never said that the lack of character slots has anyting to do with being able to access the Factions specific content on Chapter 2. It seems to me that your the one trying to redefine my points after the fact. If you want to debate character slots, lets take it to that thread, I'm done with the issue here.

In regards to time, that is again OT here, but I'll answer just so we can let it die. Sure, I have time to log in right now, while I am typing this post (AMoF I frequently am playing the game while perusing this forum - saves a lot of time), 15 mintues before I have to leave for work. But please tell me what can I do in the UW in the next 15 minutes (if America has favor, and I am able to get a group together to go there?). The time problem is a factor when there is a favor/Faction locked mission I want to do when I have enough time to dedicate to doing it. Being able to log in 5, 10, or even 20 minutes a day does not change the fact that I cannot complete a 30 minute quest or hour long mission in that time. So yes, it is true that I can log on every day America has favor, but that doesn't mean I can do anything with it.

And as I have said in previous posts, I look forward to seeing how the Faction war plays out. Whether it is better or worse than this aggravating Favor still remains to be seen. For all we know, it could end up being worse - a lot of ideas look great on paper, but suck when actually applied. We'll know a lot better after this weekend. So, yes, those who are bashing the system here are doing it without just cause, but so are you when by defending it. I certainly hope I am wrong and the Faction elements will have no bearing on one's time to play it.

So you think its useless effort to make AI and NPC characters more dynamic? Isn't that a part of advancing the gaming genre? Or are the developers of Elder Scrolls and Gothic just wasting their time because no one really appreciates an NPC that you can truly interact with and that acts as a human does. To me, improving AI is just as great an improvment in the technology as is increasing the graphics rendering of games.


You answer yourself with that last sentence here. Certainly, to change the dynamics of GW at this point is slightly beyond impossible, but that's not to say that it cannot be built into a game from the ground up. You said that those two instances is all there needs to be, but then who wants to follow the storyline more than once? Well, with a dynamic gaming enviroment, you wouldn't have to. And not only that, by not doing so you get an entirely different experience, than you would with GW now. It doesn't matter what you do in the game or when, the storyline never changes, Rurik still dies in Frost Gate. A dynamic gaming environment allows the player to replay the game and get an entirely new experience by doing so. I don't know of one developer that created a game saying, "I hope people only play this game once" or "I hope they only find enough interest in the plot to follow it once." The simple fact is that players want a more dynamic environment in their game - that's why there is a whole modding industry devoted to just that.

Well, I don't think you are the one thinking this through completely, and just jumping to conclusions. Again, the majority of the modding community would have to disagree with you. Certainly, it cannot be done in GW at this point in time, but there is no reason why it can't be done in a game being built from the ground up. The technology is already in place to do, it just needs a team of dedicated individuals to put the time in to code it. Fortunately those individuals do exist and thank God they don't see challenges such as this as a trainwreck, otherwise we would still be playing green lined dungeon crawlers.

But in the end, this is an off topic persuit that was just thrown out there in response to another poster, therefore I will leave this subject for another thread and actually get back to the topic at hand.

I think Anet has done a good job at increasing the PvP portion of the game, but trying to mix two completely different play styles is like trying to mix oil and water - it just ain't gonna happen. I think the problem that most people are concerned with here is the fact that Factions looks like it might not have the freedom of play that Prophecies offered. The first game was ingenious in that aside from the Favor issue, players had complete freedom to play the game as they saw fit, aside from having PvP slightly dependant on PvE. This of course was corrected by introducing the arena faction, making PvP less dependant on unlocking items through PvE. The beauty of it is that PvPers never have to touch the PvE portion to be successful and PvEers never have to PvP to enjoy the game (we can even log out before the PvP portion of the Pre-Sear mission begins, and log back in to skip over it and just do the PvE portion of the mission). However, it looks like Factions will actually force players to participate in one or the other in order to access specific content. While that may not be a big issue for those of us who don't detest one or the other, the pure PvPers probably don't like that they will have to PvE to accomplish some of their goals, just as the pure PvEers will have to PvP for the same reason.

While I admire Anet for trying to introduce each side to the joys of the other, in the end, the hard core of each prefers their playstyle for a reason, and not matter how its done, neither will like the other. That's why pure PvP games like Linage II and Eve Online while not complete commercial successes still have a strong following and are successful in their own ways. This is also why Prophecies and Diablo II have been such great successes.

At any rate, I am looking forward to the upcoming weekend to see just how this will play out. I hope that the fears of most people here will be unfounded, and Anet's genious will shine through once again.

Hanok Odbrook
Real Millennium Group Guild
Truth * Knowledge * Peace

"PvP is almost totally unrelated to gaining access to Elite missions. If you listen to Jeff's interview, he makes it clear that the Aliiance Battles (3x4v4 PvP, only available to PvE toonz) will set the borders, which determine how many cities are available for your faction to control."
Alliance sets borders. Alliance is PvP. PvP determines borders. Borders determine where we can play.

"The entire Faction system is a PvE reward system, gained by playing a lot of PvE maps better than other PvEers."

We don't need/want a PvE reward system. We don't want to be judged "plays better than other PvE players". We don't want to play competitively at all. We just want to be able to play and enjoy the game. PvE play is intrinsically non-competitive and independent.

Who is "We"? I know not all PvE players share your views, in fact, there was a thread started here awhile a go actually asking for PvE rewards...

Who was most against it? PvPers.

I'm primarily a PvE player, and I'm really excited about these new missions and dynamics.

RPg's are not competive by nature, it is not about proving who si better. Once you start to compete it no longer becomes a rpg but a pvp

Content accessibility never had anything to do with character slots, correct? So why ever bring it up in the first place? You never answered that question.

Simple: so you can get an idea for the time pattern when America has favor, so you can plan for it better.

I'm defending the system because it makes a hell of a lot more sense than some people here are saying. Maybe it's me just playing Devil's Advocate. Or maybe I see the logic in such a system, even when it's just a description on paper. See, that's why I'm able to defend it. Because I've taken the time to actually read the information provided, think about it, figure out how it'll work. What I'm not doing is seeing a few minor similarities to the current Favor system and throwing my arms up in disgust.

Did you see me re-iterating how this is an idea best left to...oh, I don't know...console RPGs like KotOR or Fable?

And it would be a trainwreck. You're just not thinking it through. For an online game where people are interacting with each other, those people need to interact on the same stage of action. The game needs to be the same for everyone--from a structural point of view--for the game to work.

Your idea runs counter to that reality. The minute you have an online game being altered by the player experiences--alterations that change the plot of the game, even just for the player--you run the risk of making Christopher Lloyd angry. What I mean by that is, say in a plot similar to GW's, but in an online MMORPG built from scratch, you have a few plot twists. MMORPGs thrive on player-to-player interaction.

But how can you have player-to-player interaction when everyone can't do the same thing, because they've done the plot order differently? This brings me back to my example about D'Alessio Seaboard. It'd be complete and utter chaos, and no mission would ever be possible with a group, ever again. If the changes are visible only to the inviduals, well, then what's even the point of playing online?

That's why I've been repeating that the dynamic plot design you're talking about is best left to console RPGs. There is nothing more to it than that.

Yes, and that's why the total hardcore "I am SOOOO PvP" or "I am SOOOOO PvE" people suck. Because they're never satisfied it seems. Which is why I really don't give two shats about whatever it is that's gotten their panties in a twist this week.

Once people actually get their hands on Factions, I think a lot of them are going to see a need to make a few retractions, honestly. We may have to wait till full retail, depending on what we are able to do this weekend, but even then, people are going to find out that their fears have been completely irrational, because they haven't been thinking about things logically. They've been seeing a Favor system and automatically thinking "It's Prophecies all over again." And that, while a logical thought process, is absolutely absurd.

I see your point, but come on.

What do you think FoW armor is? Is that not a type of competition?

If all PUGs are created equal, then how come some are better than others?

There's obviously some inherent competition in all computer games, whether you recognize it or not. Else, the level grind persistant in other games would not exist, as people wouldn't care what level they are, because everyone is equal, right?

In any case, unless the PvE ranking has more effect on the game than what armor you're wearing, it shouldn't make a difference to you.

I think fow armor replaces or tries to replace the lendary armors of rpg. In midevil rpg there has to be armors to buy. In must rpg's not all there is some type markets or trading going on like selling weapons and armor.

In Rpg's it about making a world, it is about adventure. First things that come to mind is lord of the rings, the hobbit. People want to go questing and explore. This means you have to have a real world of some type.

You really can't have a lendary weapon or armor for pvp, Pvp needs to be balance.

I also think that rpg can work as group game just not consoles, In fact must paper and pen need large groups of people to play. I think it can be done. You just need to have someone who is good at writing rpgs for a group setting.

As rpg player I would have say I do love the fow and UW idea. I am such rpg player that I have to play every quest and mossion that anet puts out. Heck I have even done the titain quest. I can honestly say I don't like farming. Making armors have different cost makes the game fun. I can see why some people don't like the idea of having quest locked out,but at the same time I really don't know faction is going to work. what dispoints me is pvp players trying to change the rpg of game. I would like o see depth in the game. Why should rpg be about fighting another player? Take just takes the magic out of rpg. It becomes a fight with another player. Where is the snice of adventure. In the real wordl your not going to meet tuff bossies all the time. It sould be mixed. you not always going to be stronger even have a weapon to beat you fow in the real world.

There is other ways on beating your foe other than picking up a weapon and beat him. Not only do you fight but you out smart your the fow. That is the rpg way.

In Rpg it is not just about mindless killing, but also using your skills to out smart your fow. It is about making the right choices to get to the place you want to be. It is like being one with your charactor in a different world. It is bout seeing other views not just your own.

the pvp mind set is kill, kill, kill

make monsters harder kill, kill, kill

more skills kill, kill, kill

Rpg players have a term for that it is called hank and slash. Rpg player you can say detest that. they want things to have meaning. They like to use their minds in an adenture.
where is the adventure in that