Arenas, why it's good and dispelling myths.

[daays]

World PvP mirrors real war. Heroes are made in war. Respect is earned in war. There are no clear winners in war. Just a death count.

Arena mirrors sports. The people playing the sport may look cool, but the majority of the viewers who sit on their couches drinking beer and getting fat would get laughed off the field.

I'm pretty sure a Gladiator restored Rome to the people after defying and killing a corrupt emperor.

Who doesn't wanna be Russel Crowe?

[Tenkenlol]

i'm pretty sure a gladiator restored rome to the people after defying and killing a corrupt emperor.

Who doesn't wanna be russel crowe?

are you not entertained?

[kuronese]

are you not entertained?

What part of "I want my 5 minutes back" did you not understand?

Boring thread is boring.

[Chase Payne]

What part of "I want my 5 minutes back" did you not understand?

Boring thread is boring.

He quoted someone else, not you.
You're still in it, so it's not boring for you.

[Tenkenlol]

What part of "I want my 5 minutes back" did you not understand?

Boring thread is boring.

Your post hurt me physically as well as mentally.

I'm not sure what to do now

[lud]

I only want arena if it's 5 games required and 7 maximum games win or lose per week, makes each game more prestigious.
The matchmaking would have to be increased to give more chances of finding someone around your rating.
This would have little effect on other areas of the game and stop people gaming the system.

[Capital]

First before you atuomatically post "OMG DAOC was better" without reading this big block of text, might as well adress a few common missconceptions:

Arena was a mistake, even Blizzard admitted it.
Not exactly, read it again Rob Pardo clearly said that he didn't want the game to verge between competitive PvP and PvE they were nerfing abilities that PvE players wouldn't understand why. He also states that the idea of arenas and esports was so popular, that's why they decided to "tact" it on to WoW rather than effeciently adding it. If they truly thought it was a mistake over all, why did they add rated BGS?

A paltry amount of players play Arena, so it's useless feature.
According to statistics, over 800K+ "active" teams exist in arena just for 2v2 alone in season 8.
Source: http://www.arenajunkies.com/tools/title-calculator/
*By blizzards definition active means, they played at-least 30% and 20 games.
Even if you where to assume that half of them were actually inactive because of the low limitations, that's still over 500k players. Take note this only counting 2v2, 3v3 and 5v5 wasn't counted.

Arena destroys balance.
Wrong, arena just shows which class synergies to well or which class is doing too much burst damage. It doesn't magically make things unbalanced. More often than not... the classes that are overpowered in arena are also overpowered in mass scale PvP too.


Arenas only has over 500k Players because it's required for gear, titles and vanity awards.
This is a common misconception, but in season 8 had limited 2v2 rewards. There were no titles that season, and shoulders and tier weapons were impossible to get. If you wanted those, you had to play 3v3 or 5v5. By this conclussion, either more casual players played 2v2 arena or they enjoyed it overall. Quite often, you could 2v2 with your friend.

Arena promotes FOTM Builds, and impossible counters in equal elo rating.
You're right, which is why it should never award gear or any advantages other than vanity overall. However, it's not completely impossible for you to kill the enemy. The whole point of arena is to kill the people who have won just as much as you. Killing your counter shows how skilled you are.

If you want Arena, go back to World of Warcraft... I heard it's doing well over there.
It also did well in Guild Wars, and SWTOR and Guild Wars 2 both will support arena, Rift and Tera are really the only games without arena in reality. (For the next generation)

But I prefer World PvP, if they make Arena I will never see it again?
Which is why games like Guild Wars 2 will feature both, because they know what they're doing. If Ranked PvP awards no gear, you can have both.

Arena players just want too look like a special snowflake, and gank those who cant get it.
Nope, many arena players in this forum agree they could care less if no gear was awarded. The point of an arena is to face people within the same skill level as you, and PvP progression... not gear.

So if you were told you would get no gear, vanity, and even titles would you still play arena?
Absolutely, I could care less about what the rewards are, it's a progression for me to continually increase in rating and defeat challenging opponents.

I don't like arena.
What's the harm of adding arena if it doesn't harm the game overall?

PvE balance get's destroyed by arena
Scott Hartsman mentioned a feature in Rift to be able to nerf abilities only for PvP without harming PvE, we have yet to see this. But we assume if this ever came, all nerfs for arena would only be in arena... and nowhere else.


In the end, I play arena to progress. My opponents get harder, and I have to overcome difficult challenges consistently. I'm one of those "small" crowd of 500k players worldwide.

thanks for your opinions.

[overtime]

Arenas are lame. Since you cant have balance in MMOs of this type (Rift, WoW) arenas ultimately boil down to team class composition and not skill.

Thats why people that actually played real pvp games in the past (UO, Shadowbane, DAoC) dont like arenas.

Funny thing is if they put some real pvp rules ino the arena (you lose you lose your gear) the majority of these people clamoring for arenas wouldnt play them.

[Chase Payne]

Arenas are lame. Since you cant have balance in MMOs of this type (Rift, WoW) arenas ultimately boil down to team class composition and not skill.

Thats why people that actually played real pvp games in the past (UO, Shadowbane, DAoC) dont like arenas.

Funny thing is if they put some real pvp rules ino the arena (you lose you lose your gear) the majority of these people clamoring for arenas wouldnt play them.

Item Drop PvP promoted zerging and not skill... you were dumb to go in those areas alone.

They don't like arena because they can't win. In ranked PvP someone has to lose... in world PvP nobody loses.

[Crazilycountry]

arenas are for bads that dont like dieing in world/bg pvps...

arenas are bad..

leave the pos arena system out of this game..yes the pvp system needs a few tweaks..

but it does not need arenas...... just...stop....askin people...to hold...ur....hands

[Chase Payne]

arenas are for bads that dont like dieing in world/bg pvps...

arenas are bad..

leave the pos arena system out of this game..yes the pvp system needs a few tweaks..

but it does not need arenas...... just...stop....askin people...to hold...ur....hands

Why does it seem that every single person who supports World PvP is extremely uneducated?

[Scars]

Because they're aren't any traitors in this game that kills it's own faction. It's something so commonly written that I don't even have to check twice to see if anything backs up that statement. If there isn't... well then it explains the uninspiring lore from GameSpot.

Very well then, the PvP should be be FvF and not PvP


World PvP is not PvP, instead it's World FvF.

Yes, in this game it could also be called FvF. However, the term "PvP" pre-dates arena, battlegrounds, and World PvP as we recognize it today. Player vs. Player is a player fighting against an opposing player, thats it. It is a simple, loose term. Faction vs. Faction is just how this game's PvP is set up.

Arena, Battlegrounds, RvR, Open-World, Ganking, Duels, etc. are all categories of PvP. No single one is the sole form of "true" PvP. Now, if you are arguing for the "most competitive" form of PvP that is something else. Just because you like one type more than the others does not mean you get to redefine what PvP is. It's extremely annoying seeing both sides of the argument creating their own definitions for a simple term.

It's like saying: Missionary position is the only way to have sex, if you are not using that position, you are not having sex.


also

I'm pretty sure a Gladiator restored Rome to the people after defying and killing a corrupt emperor.

Who doesn't wanna be Russel Crowe?

[Chase Payne]

Yes, in this game it could also be called FvF. However, the term "PvP" pre-dates arena, battlegrounds, and World PvP as we recognize it today. Player vs. Player is a player fighting against an opposing player, thats it. It is a simple, loose term. Faction vs. Faction is just how this game's PvP is set up.

Arena, Battlegrounds, RvR, Open-World, Ganking, Duels, etc. are all categories of PvP. No single one is the sole form of "true" PvP. Now, if you are arguing for the "most competitive" form of PvP that is something else. Just because you like one type more than the others does not mean you get to redefine what PvP is. It's extremely annoying seeing both sides of the argument creating their own definitions for a simple term.

It's like saying: Missionary position is the only way to have sex, if you are not using that position, you are not having sex.


also

Right, the term PvP predates world PvP entirely. Most old old PvP games are FFA, where anyone can kill each other. Hense why it was called PvP and not FvF. Arenas are an esport, and shares the true elements of original PvP... where everyone is against each other, and extremely competitive.


World PvP is like the PvE version of PvP.

[Tenkenlol]

arenas are for bads that dont like dieing in world/bg pvps...

arenas are bad..

leave the pos arena system out of this game..yes the pvp system needs a few tweaks..

but it does not need arenas...... just...stop....askin people...to hold...ur....hands

With posts like these it becomes more and more likely that neither arenas or RvR will be implemented in Rift simply because of all the QQ that would ensue.

Seeing so many people try to pass their OPINION as a FACT is a little irritating to say the least(yes this obviously happens on both sides). It seems like most of the people that want RvR feel threatened by arena and that it may take away from the precious RvR player base (although RvR is supposed to be "superior" the way they are putting it).

This "real" pvp concept is also hilarious. Saying arena boils down to class composition is ******ed. See the beast cleaves that lost to RMPs at MLG a while back. Skill is clearly a deciding factor in arena play. If they put "real pvp rules" into arena? Wtf? Not sure who made the rulebook on pvp but maybe if you stopped drooling over outdated games you would see how idiotic that sounds.

The only solution would be to release arena and RvR at the same time and I really do not want to think about the strain that would put on the developers. Hopefully if they did release RvR it would at the very least have a ranking system. That way we could at the very least find out who the "real" pvpers are.

[Scars]

Right, the term PvP predates world PvP entirely. Most old old PvP games are FFA, where anyone can kill each other. Hense why it was called PvP and not FvF. Arenas are an esport, and shares the true elements of original PvP... where everyone is against each other, and extremely competitive.


World PvP is like the PvE version of PvP.

Many of those old games did not have multiple factions either. Beyond playing against people on your own faction, there is nothing similar about the FFA PvP and Arena. Get back to me when you are looting player corpses / losing experience / losing all your gear / die permanently from losing in arena. To truly be like the old games Arena would need to be - throw 6 people in an arena and last man standing wins.

"World PvP" Itself is a loose term as well. To use some classic terms since we are bringing up old games...
PKing (Player Killing) - non-consensual PvP
> Ganking
> FFA PvP in some old games
> Vigilante PvP
> Any unorganized, random, and non-optional form of PvP.

Dueling - consensual PvP
> 1v1 Duels
> Battlegrounds
> Arena
> GvG
> Any form of pre-formed PvP with equal team sizes. (so even WoW's Tol Barad falls here)

RvR is in it's own category since it has elements of both. RvR is not World PvP.

Now, I believe Arena and RvR can exist together as long as both provide equal rewards and more importantly, equally difficulty to get rewards. I've said this before, WoW's mistake was not implementing Arena, but that they focused only on Arena and put all other PvP on the shelf.