Player vs Player, for real.

Online games that have mastered the PvP area have usually had random PvP encounters. In the wild. In the game. This is something that Guild Wars does not have. The only way to PvP is guild battles, HoH, and arenas.

Why not implement PvP districts?

Only one for every area. And even missions would be PvP+, anyone who entered a mission or otherwise instanced area from a PvP district would all be in the same instance (don't know what else to call it, I come from UO, DAoC, and WoW). Anyone would be freely attackable unless they were in your guild or party, and your guildmates/team-mates names would be a different color from everyone else.

Monsters would be on a respawn timer, and bosses would be too. Loot would be increased. You would be able to use a Scalping Kit on a corpse, and get that person's head as an item to decorate your guild hall with (Add a row of spikes that you can put heads on somewhere?). Or, you could hand the head in to a town Bounty Collector, to check if there is a bounty on the person, set by other people at the Bounty Collector, which would only be accessible in PvP districts. Vendors would also have a slightly lower price on items.

Allow a function for guild alliances, so you wouldn't accidentally attack an allied guild in a PvP+ area. Add a rank system, but don't let players directly access it. Show it by hueing people the way bosses are hued in PvP areas. The higher rank on someone, the more definite their "aura", and add a color scale to it as well.

Keep guild halls instanced the way they are.

This wouldn't be too late to fit in the list for the next expansion, would it?

Sounds like fun.

I reeeeeeeeally dont think this would work at all. Your talking about taking an instanced game, and creating some huge mmorpg out of it. Not a small amount of work. I do enjoy random pvp--alot. Nothing like the rush of constantly looking over your shoulder, and then jsut when your not, blamo! But thats just not what GW is about, its about skill, and it requires significantly less skill to jump a group of players already engaged in another fight.

The could add one on one bouts to the arenas though, and have tournaments based on this. If players didn't join they could be npc alternatives. A trophy or gold reward at the end.

i have posted this type of idea multiple times, and am alwasy flamed for it....

i had more of an idea that mixed PVP with the PVE way of map travel and monster spawns...

The name and basis of Guild Wars implies that guild have wars together. Not random passerbyers battling out for no good reason.

because the name of this game is not GANKFEST

This game has a Teambased player versuse player system.

if you'd end up with 1vs1 duels you'll have people crying for nerves because they always lose, while they're only fighting more skilled players and professions which counter their own professions.

Only in a team can everyone have their righteous place, that's what Guildwars is about.

And about implementing it, it doesn't seem possible, only for arena districts perhaps but not in the PVE part just.. no, high lvl players with lots of skills, would just go to ascalon areas to gank and that just sucks big time.

There would be no ganking of newbs, because you would have to choose to play in a PvP district. If you don't want to fight, you don't have to.

Random PvP encounters are what make PvP FUN. Make the max limit on groups in PvP Districts/Instances 4. If people are not in the same group, they cannot heal or buff each other.

If all instances being PvP'd is impossible, why not just towns and missions? Missions are the closest thing this game has to dungeons. In every other game that has let me do it, PvP in dungeons is ALWAYS the most fun. Monsters in the area add a little bit of an unknown factor to it.

And who says people whining about 1 vs 1 balance matter? They can group up. It is called GUILD wars, right?

But another note about designing the game around the title- You can't even fight with your whole guild. You can only go 8 at a time. My guild has a hell of a lot more than that. Just to point that out.

And no, I don't want to make a huge MMORPG out of this game. It would cost money monthly then. I'm talking make every PvP area a seperate instance, the way everything is now, just allow people to attack each other in them.

Instance = one party gets an entire map to themselves. This map has a tailored starting point, encounters, quest statuses and everything depending on this group, especially true for missions. Launching multiple groups into one instance would mean they'd need to start at different locations, would need to wait for eachother to start, and given the huge scope of maps compared to arenas would very likely never see eachother, rather notice that certain portions of the map are entirely devoid of creatures; there would be no way to tell if the other group reached their destination and travelled onwards, and conflicting quests would mean a late-coming group would basically have the quest finished for them by the 'opposing' party. It messes the current design up in many, many ways.

What you are suggesting moves directly away from instancing, and more towards MMORPG. When using instances, different groups will be in different instances, hence no PvP between them is possible - that's quite simply the nature of instances.

Finally, Guild Wars is called Guild Wars because of the background story - the time before the Charr invaded was the era of the Guild Wars. I'd wish people would stop using it as an excuse to try to make this game something it's not.

I always enjoyed going hostle on noobs in D2, lmao! But, being the hunter is always better than being the hunted. So I learned that it's better to have an option were both people have to agree to Pvp first. I like this idea.

Basically, monsters would respawn, and people would all start in one of 5 "safe" starting locations.

Loot would be increased. It also would not drop specifically for one person. Whoever gets to it first would be able to pick it up. People could bring henchmen and scoop all the loot, but it would put them at a disadvantage (AI sucks) if a group of actual people came.

This would add a new style of play to the game, and allow for more robust PvP interaction. You could go to a PvP district, enter the mission, and JUST FIGHT MONSTERS for increased loot or runes to unlock or whatever you want to fight monsters for. And it's good that the instances are big, because you don't want everyone on top of each other if people are going to PvP.

Groups would go out to kill monsters, and possibly encounter other hostile groups vying for the same monster. They could then fight, giving PvP an actual meaning, as opposed to fighting for the honor of imaginary gods.

Right... I want to make it so different groups will be in the same instance, and PvP between them would be possible, but ONLY IN PVP DISTRICTS and PVP DISTRICT MISSIONS. There would only be one "instance", and people could leave and enter at any time.

Read my post. I only responded to other people citing the title Guild Wars. I don't think the game being called "Guild Wars" should define how the game is played in ANY WAY. And I pointed out that it really doesn't. Read thoroughly before responding next time, PLEASE.

It does sound like fun, and I would love to see it. How it would be balanced is a question that nags me... Personally I wouldn't care if it was as perfectly balanced as arenas, but other people would complain and try to make ANet feel crummy for adding it in the first place.

What I would really love to see is some kind of capturable territory that guilds could fight over and carve out their own domains. I don't ever expect to, since that's less GW and more Shadowbane, but since the PvP is so good I still want to see its potential pushed in some new and interesting scenarios.

Sounds like you guys actually want Domination maps, but with Hostile NPC's guarding each control point.
The team who either captures all control points wins, or the team left alive wins.
Each control point would have a summoning horn at its boundary, these horns would actually summon more NPC hostiles, but can only be triggered by opposing teams and are on a 1-2 min timer per use.
If an area is left unattended for 5 mins, then who ever captured it would lose control and NPC would respawn.
Have teams of 8, and each map have 5 dommination points, then teams would have to split up to conqure entire maps.
There could end up being some very tactical battles, dependant on map designs.
You would also have a time limit on the event, 15-30 mins.
You would always have to have 1 more domination point than teams allowed on map.
The maps would also have to be relatively same, perhaps similar in size to Thirsty river or Elona. ( i think them are the maps, the one to collect the crystals and the one you have to kill the enemy teams / priests )
Each team would have to spawn at opposite sides of the maps.

You really should play a MMORPG instead, if you want random encounters. MMORPGs are designed for that kind of thing. Guild Wars is not. Adding it would be an entirely different game.

However, there is nothing to prevent a PvP map with lots of monsters. No spawning would be needed, as the map would be generated from sratch for each match. Different win conditions would be possible, like collecting most mission items, killing most monsters, being the first to kill some special boss monster, getting first through the map to an exit.

Now we all know Guild Wars is an MMORPG. You just don't have to pay monthly for it.

The only thing that makes it not quite an MMORPG in the gameplay sense is you don't have to grind for years to level, and every "quest" is in an instance. Just sounds like a new take on an old genre.

It's an online roleplaying game. It's massive (how many people play it?). And it's multiplayer, because you play with multiple players. Massively Multiplayer Online Roleplaying Game.

Just because it doesn't play like EQ doesn't mean it's not an MMORPG. I mean, look at UO.

I think the only way this method would work is that every instantized zone is allowable for up to 16 players. That way, two parties of 8 could encounter each other and PvP each other. But other than that, there's no real way for a mass of people to go PvP each other in the wilderness, especially not free for all.

I like the idea. It sounds really fun and would make PvP more exciting.

What I would also like (although nobody else might) is the PvP districts in towns. Everyone would start off as "Friendly" Status, but you could choose to attack them (sort of like the random animals that walk around; they are usually passive, but if you attack them they attack back). Eventually, it would be chaos... nice, bloody, chaos. Fun for me but nobody else

A lot of people would enjoy that. I think an improvement on that idea would be some kind of penalty (perhaps greater death penalty) for attacking players.

See, because if someone attacks first, he gets an extra hit in, and this may give him the upperhand. So to counteract that, if the attacker somehow dies, then he has greater death penalty than if he had been the one who got mugged.

And also, maybe if you are jumped and you die, you receive no death penalty?

Good; then it's not just me
Perhaps it would be good if only attackers got DP (less than normal; perhaps like 5% per death when you initiated the fight). That way, there is no penalty per se for getting mugged.

Other things that would have to be thought about are things like ressurrection. How, when, where?

It would also be cool if you got some special item for mugging (no, not worth gold; just eye candy). Perhaps like a decorative skull

Or an ear.

Around 50 in any particular instance. And each person play in his own world, quest he has solved affect how the world looks later for that particular person, but not for anyone else (except possibly if they are in a partry with him).

You are welcome to call Guild Wars a MMORPG, it is after all just a word, it can mean whatever you decide it should mean. But if you think of Guild Wars as "a MMORPG with no monthly fees", people will have the wrong expactations. Such as the possibility of random encounters, which is one property usually associated with MMORPG's.

ArenaNet is doing the smart thing, and inventing a new name for the game category Guild Wars belong to, namely CORPG. Unfortunately, because of its superficial similaritly with traditional MMROPG's, people keep thinking their experience with MMROPG's apply to Guild Wars.

The game industry have had so little renewal for years, that people can't recognize something new. And Guild Wars isn't really that new, it is a hybrid game borrowing from the established FPS, RTS, single player RPG and MMORPG genres.

No, its not. Since it is all instanced it does not fit under MMORPG, you can only play with a small group of people at any time. Cities dont really count, they are more like chat rooms. If GW is an mmorpg so is Starcraft.

Have to agree, In real MMORPG's you go off you explore and you bump into people in combat areas, you simply cannot play them like a single player game which GW can. Some use the same adventure area principles as GW, but this are mission based, and generally not exploration based. With MMORPG's you pick a server, you are stuck on that server with upto 2000 other players at any one time. Yes GW is Online only, yes it is massively multiplayer, and yes it RPG based, but even GW try to steer away from MMORPG as it simply isn't one, they prefer CORPG.

There's game-wide guild chat. There's city-wide local chat. You can whisper anybody who is online. You can trade with anybody. There is a huge world.

Just because it's all instanced doesn't mean it's not an MMOPRG. And just because it doesn't fit the EQ stereotype doesn't mean it's not an MMORPG.
If you only went to towns in WoW to find a group for the nearest instance, and only played the game by going to instances, it would still be an MMORPG.
GW, the point is to explore. In MMO's, the point is to explore. In MMO's, you're supposed to hit the level max, and then PvP. In GW, you hit the level max, beat the missions, and then PvP. C'mon. How can you even argue?

GW is just a different (better) take on MMORPGs. It fits all the requirements of being an MMO.

It is something new. It's a new take on MMOs. I know I'm repeating myself, but think about it. Just because Super Mario 64 was in 3D for the first time, does that make it no longer an adventure game, or an innovation in the genre? I think it would be better for GW and better for MMORPGs in general to call it an MMORPG. Gives them a better name, imo.

PvP District cities would obviously be more than that. They would be arenas or combat+ areas. And towns at the same time.

It's a discussion that's been done to death but GW is more of an online RPG (of the console 'i save the world' sense) than a MMORPG ('i am a woodcutter who kills monsters in my spare time' sense).

I agree that there should be more varied styles of PvP, a last man standing with no monks allowed would be cool IMO, as would negative conditions environments like the dragon's lair mission, PvP missions where you are assigned random skills from your skillset, Battle Royale syle scenarios, where groups are added every couple of minutes. There are quite a few different team based events you could have, I'm hoping that it's one area that aNet will really pull out the stops in future expansions.

Sorry Quantum Cats, but if GW is a really MMORPG, then so was Diablo, I could connect, chat to people using the chat rooms, and form a party and go kick back with said party in my own private online game.
The only thing that is more advanced about it, is that the chat room is a ingame town, rather than just text based chat room and that I can continue to use the chat ingame to speak to people outside my private game world.
MMORPG doesn't mean mega online chat with private game, they are not private games. Go play one, and you will see.
In any one district what is the most players allowed?? 100? 200? definately not 2000+ like real MMORPG's.
The MMORPG gendra isn't going to change due to GW, there if anything may be a few GW clones. Real MMORPG games will continue to charge monthly and always will, those that don't are either end of line products or drumming up new trade, Anarchy online is doing this atm, but if you actually want any newer content from expansions etc you have to pay monthly.

No one can beat World of Warcraft's implementation of the Ganking System

NO! This is the kind of liberal garbage that dilutes language. Words have meanings for a reason. I can't just call my car a cat, because the cat license is cheaper. You can't just "call something" what you want to call it if the words are to have any intrinsic meaning. I agree that MMORPG is poorly defined, but that is because it is a new concept, and I would argue that GW is in no way an MMORPG, any more than online chess is.

After all, there are online chess games in which players meet in lobbies (like GW districts), they are multiplayer, in that each game is more than one player, they are massive by some definitions, with 1000s of players on at a time, they are role-playing, in that you play the role of a king making tactical decisions about how to defend his territory and take the opposing king hostage using your army, and they are most definitely games. But they are not MMORPGS, and neither is GW.

A determining fator in an MMO would be the massive number of people sharing the world. There is no shared world in GW, you share a world with at most 7 people in PvE, and a few more in PvP. Hardly the "massive" numbers seen in other true MMOs. Lobbies aren't really the world, and towns are nothing more than large lobbies with a few neat ways to interact. Sure, they're cute and more graphical than D2 lobbies were, with a few more functions, but a merchant or two and the ability to emote at each other hardly makes it a shared world.

Everything you just described there is nothing to do with guild wars... it sounds like you like the conventional mmorpg too much, and you should seriously just pay monthly if that's the sort of thing you want...

This is a guild wars world, and it's going to stay a guild wars world. You don't pay monthly, so when you get tired of the ganking/repetitive grind of sitting killing the same monster... you can just come back to guild wars, and play a going-to-be-perfect pvp game, and remember that you're not paying for it... perhaps even be amazed at why you play the other game... seeing how there is no enjoyment out of the others, nothing but paying for a place to sit and waste your life away...

I'd like to know how did this thread go from dicussing PvP Districts to a arguement about monthly fees and MMO's?

I played the conventional MMORPGs. They are Everquest clones, and this is not. This is a new kind of game, and I think it would benefit from some of the other elements of MMORPGs. Not all of them, mind you, just a few. And to say that would make this game too much like an MMORPG, then so would having classes, armor dyes, a gold and platinum system, capes, guilds, and communication between people.

This is going to be a perfect PvP game. However, there is no RANDOM PvP, and for this to be a perfect PvP game, it needs random PvP. Not random teams, not random matches, someone attacking you when you are not exactly sure what to expect.