Give Tel'Abim(PvP) some love, please

[Kaktus96]

The challenges would just have to be slightly altered, no?
HC? Just make PvP deaths not count.

Slow and Steady? Remove XP loss on death or reduce it.

Vagrant's Endeavor for PvP Server. Only poor, common and CRAFTED items allowd. Want a new weapon? Well equip a gray or white one or have a blacksmith make you one.

There is only war challenge. Can only gain ExP from pvp quests, wpvp, bgs and if possible on honorable kills. This would populate bgs for every single bracket(hopefully). This would probably also require new quests(also repeatable) for pvp purposes but why not?

Pacifist challenge. Get to level 60 without killing a single member of the enemy faction.

All of these should probably also have rewards to incentivize people going for them ofc.

Also wouldn't the PvP Server not be the perfect place to greatly expand the Bounty system?
Wanted! Quests for real players in every single zone. Maybe some alliance dude wreaking havoc in Ashenvale? Boom! Quest to kill that dude. This for every single zone. Wouldn't that be great?

[Jc473]

I think the concept of ‘There is only war’ is fantastic. Although, you’d need to tweak it to protect against exploitation such as repeatedly killing your friend for easy XP or abuse such as endless corpse camping. Perhaps add diminishing returns for repeat kills on the overland (resets after 30mins?) to stop this stuff.

Also, probably shouldn’t completely remove the ability to gain XP via non PvP means. What if the server population dwindles or you are unfortunately in an unpopular time zone or play at unusual hours? I think there just needs to be a big disparity in XP gain. So, just reduce non PvP XP gain by something like 50%?

As for the bounty hunter system, this is a fantastic idea and long overdue for this sort of game/server which thrives when the open world is more alive. No idea about the details of the system but as long as it promotes more WPvP and empowers helpless victims to feel like they can get some sort of revenge!

[Kaktus96]

I think the concept of ‘There is only war’ is fantastic. Although, you’d need to tweak it to protect against exploitation such as repeatedly killing your friend for easy XP or abuse such as endless corpse camping. Perhaps add diminishing returns for repeat kills on the overland (resets after 30mins?) to stop this stuff.

Also, probably shouldn’t completely remove the ability to gain XP via non PvP means. What if the server population dwindles or you are unfortunately in an unpopular time zone or play at unusual hours? I think there just needs to be a big disparity in XP gain. So, just reduce non PvP XP gain by something like 50%?

As for the bounty hunter system, this is a fantastic idea and long overdue for this sort of game/server which thrives when the open world is more alive. No idea about the details of the system but as long as it promotes more WPvP and empowers helpless victims to feel like they can get some sort of revenge!

I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day. Thats why I came up with the "There is only War" and "Pacifist" challenges. Battlegrounds can also be tweaked to NOT close when there are less than 5 players for example and WSG stays open as long as both factions have 3 people.

Ofc the challenges can still be discussed on what they actually include. I understand your worries that PvP only ExP gain could be hard to do for some people and ofc if the population dwindles. But thats why I wanted more quests that are PvP oriented. Lets say repeatable quest that can be done daily that wants you to gain 10 honorable kills doing wpvp and you get both ExP and money rewards scaling with your level ofc. Another daily for 50 honorable kills in battlegrounds. A daily quest to kill all the enemy races once, for example if you are Alliance you have to kill Goblins, Tauren, Orcs, Trolls and Undead once to complete the quest and they also have to give honor to count.

What would also help with BGs to pop would be a cross faction PvP chat where people can announce that they will queue for a specific bracket to encourage others to join aswell. Maybe /pvp could work.

[Dannyp92]

Agreed. I don't see why they got rid of ALL the Challenges. Slow and Steady doesn't give XP loss from PvP on the PvE server either. And creating some PvP-centric Challenges could breathe new life into the server. I believe that PvE is currently more popular partially due to the fun of the Challenges, so I do miss them on Tel'Abim.

[Wafflecrusher]

The Turtle PvP realms in SEA are also significantly less popular, I suspect it's the private server audience rather than the server itself. That being said, I don't see any issues with adding glyphs, but even with them, I suspect the population will continue to drop until it stagnates around 1k. The server is what, less than 2 months old? It's still young and the hype hasn't worn off yet.

[Majestik51]

i dont want to repeat myself, but a new BG with new objectives wuld be a cool thing to this new server.

i enjoy everything about Twow, and i plan to stay here forever, i dont wanna be misunderstood....

PEACE!!

[Elkepwn]

i dont want to repeat myself, but a new BG with new objectives wuld be a cool thing to this new server.

i enjoy everything about Twow, and i plan to stay here forever, i dont wanna be misunderstood....

PEACE!!

[Kaktus96]

i dont want to repeat myself, but a new BG with new objectives wuld be a cool thing to this new server.

i enjoy everything about Twow, and i plan to stay here forever, i dont wanna be misunderstood....

PEACE!!

I mean thats an entirely different kind of topic. They already introduced 2 more ways to join a PvP fight with Blood Ring and Sunnyglade Vale.

This thread is specifically about coming up with and fine tuning new challenges exclusive for the PvP realm in order to not only make it more fun for the PvP playerbase but also to increase player retention so the server stays at a lively population.

[Jc473]

I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day. Thats why I came up with the "There is only War" and "Pacifist" challenges.

The 'Pacifist' idea confuses me. How do you reckon that this will promote bgs popping at every bracket several times a day...?

Ofc the challenges can still be discussed on what they actually include. I understand your worries that PvP only ExP gain could be hard to do for some people and ofc if the population dwindles. But thats why I wanted more quests that are PvP oriented. Lets say repeatable quest that can be done daily that wants you to gain 10 honorable kills doing wpvp and you get both ExP and money rewards scaling with your level ofc. Another daily for 50 honorable kills in battlegrounds. A daily quest to kill all the enemy races once, for example if you are Alliance you have to kill Goblins, Tauren, Orcs, Trolls and Undead once to complete the quest and they also have to give honor to count.

It still doesn't change the fact that it creates a 100% dependency on the server being active enough for people to progress using this mode. Having the PvE content completely ruled out is very binary and could easily lead to frustration where players feel like they are brick walled because of "dead server...." impressions.

[Slashignore]

no, exp from pvp! its silly

[Kaktus96]

I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day. Thats why I came up with the "There is only War" and "Pacifist" challenges.

The 'Pacifist' idea confuses me. How do you reckon that this will promote bgs popping at every bracket several times a day...?

There are several challenges, one that specifically promotes PvP and you pick the one gimmicky challenge that does not encourage PvP but would be by far the least used challenge on the PvP server.
Did you learn to discuss things on Twitter? Lmao.

no, exp from pvp! its silly

Why would that be silly?

[Dracarusggotham]

So, we can admit the PvP Server is a failure?
I mean, as how the made sound before the launch, I believed it will have more pop than the RP-PvE server.
But at this time, the server is with 1k-2k of people (not bad for now, but the Alliance areas are empty) when I enter everytime, and Elwynn Forest is empty...but Durotar is full of Hordes.
So, one or two things, the server is unbalanced in pop now(this thing is bad cause it's a PvP Server, in the PvE is not important) or the server is a failure.

[Jc473]

I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day. Thats why I came up with the "There is only War" and "Pacifist" challenges.

The 'Pacifist' idea confuses me. How do you reckon that this will promote bgs popping at every bracket several times a day...?

There are several challenges, one that specifically promotes PvP and you pick the one gimmicky challenge that does not encourage PvP but would be by far the least used challenge on the PvP server.
Did you learn to discuss things on Twitter? Lmao.

Are you serious? Do you want to reread my initial response to your post again? On the whole, I support your ideas because I think they are interesting. I'm pushing back on 'There is only War' idea because I think there is a slight flaw in it.

As for my last comment, yes, I'm pointing out why you have included a 'Pacifist' challenge, which as you said, "does not encourage PvP" and so it is completely antithetical to the whole bloody nature of the server....

Furthermore, you chose to pair it with the 'There is only War' idea when saying "I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day.". I was being polite when I said "this confuses me". What I actually should have said is, the inclusion of "Pacifist" in your statement completely contradicts your goal of increasing PvP....

So, with all due respect, you said something completely illogical and completely misjudged my enthusiasm for your post, as a whole.

Oh and for the record, I never have or ever will create a Twitter account. Why? Because I prefer to have long form discussions because I find them to be more engaging and productive.

[Wafflecrusher]

I don't think the PvP Server is a failure, though it dramatically underperformed by the standards of most people who were advocating for a PvP server. I think implementing glyphs can help get people engaged, especially pvp specific glyphs. I'll say at this point the decision has been made, and I think it serves as an opportunity for the Turtle Team to figure out how to make Classic PvP engaging and a fun experience long term. It's going to be years I'm sure before it feels fleshed out and a lot of issues have been fixed, but I don't blame the team for caving considering the discord and forums were being flooded by the same 5-10 people all day.

[Kaktus96]

Are you serious? Do you want to reread my initial response to your post again? On the whole, I support your ideas because I think they are interesting. I'm pushing back on 'There is only War' idea because I think there is a slight flaw in it.

As for my last comment, yes, I'm pointing out why you have included a 'Pacifist' challenge, which as you said, "does not encourage PvP" and so it is completely antithetical to the whole bloody nature of the server....

Furthermore, you chose to pair it with the 'There is only War' idea when saying "I actually hoped that the introduction of various PvP Server only challenges would help keep the population high enough for battleground to pop for every bracket several times a day.". I was being polite when I said "this confuses me". What I actually should have said is, the inclusion of "Pacifist" in your statement completely contradicts your goal of increasing PvP....

So, with all due respect, you said something completely illogical and completely misjudged my enthusiasm for your post, as a whole.

Oh and for the record, I never have or ever will create a Twitter account. Why? Because I prefer to have long form discussions because I find them to be more engaging and productive.

I didn't say anything illogical at all. The point of my post is to make it more attractive for new players to join by giving them various possible challenges they can do.
Does the pacifist challenge increase the PvP activity on the server? No. Thats not the point. The post is not about making PvP more active its about making the PVP SERVER more active.
People who would do the "There is only War" challenge would be joining bgs and try to do as much wpvp as possible. That increases the PvP activity on the server yes but the main point is that it will increase OVERALL activity on the server.
Same for the pacifists that will join the Server. They won't make BG queues pop thats for sure but they weren't there to do BGs to begin with. They would still, however, populate the areas they quest in and make it easier for people to find dungeon groups.

So, now tell my where I said something illogical by trying to include a pacifist challenge?

[Jc473]

I didn't say anything illogical at all. The point of my post is to make it more attractive for new players to join by giving them various possible challenges they can do.
Does the pacifist challenge increase the PvP activity on the server? No. Thats not the point. The post is not about making PvP more active its about making the PVP SERVER more active.
People who would do the "There is only War" challenge would be joining bgs and try to do as much wpvp as possible. That increases the PvP activity on the server yes but the main point is that it will increase OVERALL activity on the server.
Same for the pacifists that will join the Server. They won't make BG queues pop thats for sure but they weren't there to do BGs to begin with. They would still, however, populate the areas they quest in and make it easier for people to find dungeon groups.

So, now tell my where I said something illogical by trying to include a pacifist challenge?

If your goal is to increase the overall activity on the server, fair enough, add as many challenge modes as you wish.

However, the hallmark of the PvP server is the fact that is caters to a more PvP driven experience (on top of the normal PvE stuff). It's probably just about the main thing that attracts players to the server (other than a fresh experience). So, to include a challenge which actively discourages all forms of PvP, is to completely go against the main attraction of the server.

It may be entertaining for the individual undertaking the pacifist challenge but why don't you ask the rest of the players? Do you honestly think they would enjoy a bunch of players who just run away in WPvP or just 'afk' and take the death? Obviously, it wouldn't allow for more frequent BR/BG experiences either.

The situation would be somewhat similar to the PvE server where the PvP enjoyers are told that there is PvP to be had via self-flagging or warmode options. Except, it completely relies on the other party to actually engage with it. This was made even worse when the server became more populated because it potentially meant that there were more PvP opportunities but it was just an illusion because the majority of the players never participated in PvP. This is what heavily contributed to people asking for a PvP server in the first place; an environment where all parties are willing (to various degrees) to engage in PvP activities. Can you not see how introducing a pacifist playstyle might seem unsatisfying to those who wouldn't partake in it?

For clarity, I want to remind you that I think the rest of the ideas are great, especially the 'There is only war' mode (albeit, slightly tweaked) and a potential bounty hunter system.

[Xudo]

Aren't there bounty board on turtle? I believe things like this never worked because wanted player might just go offline.

I agree with others about Pacifist being inappropriate challenge for environment where all are supposed to fight.

I also support xp from PvP. Like in WotLK it will lead to high popularity of battlegrounds. You kill there much often than in the world. Just because enemies respawn faster.
I don't think that devs think that more battlegrounds during leveling is good idea. They spend so much work on the world, so it would be a waste if players just level in single location all their way till 60.

I don't think Vagrant is good idea in hostile environement too. It is good for PvE server, but it is not for PvP.

[Jc473]

Aren't there bounty board on turtle? I believe things like this never worked because wanted player might just go offline.

Not sure but I'm sure there are ways to make the system work. For example, when a bounty is placed, it will last for a certain amount of active gametime (i.e. when they are online). So, the bounty would simply just state whether they are online or not and if they are, it would say which zone they're in.

[Xudo]

I found old thread with announcement of adding bounty board ingame. viewtopic.php?t=859
But can't find post about its removal.
Though I am still skeptical about it.

[Kaktus96]

It may be entertaining for the individual undertaking the pacifist challenge but why don't you ask the rest of the players? Do you honestly think they would enjoy a bunch of players who just run away in WPvP or just 'afk' and take the death? Obviously, it wouldn't allow for more frequent BR/BG experiences either.

Do you understand that I wrote this thing in the suggestion channel to make people engage with the topic and maybe bring their own ideas? Or build on things that I already suggested?

What if we say it like this: In the pacifist challenge you are not ever to allowd to KILL an enemy player. If you kill one the challenge fails and you revert back to a normal playthrough. What if the kill means actual killing blow.
Do you think I imagined the pacifists just standing around letting themselves be killed?
They can still heal. They can still immobilize. They can still fear or whatever. They can help their fellow faction members during wpvp just not kill.

Did you see the movie "Hacksaw Ridge" and say "LMao, this medic is stupid for not wanting to kill his enemies. War is meant for people who want to kill each other. What a contradiction!"

And lets not pretend like a big bunch of people on this server already act like pacifists who try to avoid wpvp at all costs anyway.

Aren't there bounty board on turtle? I believe things like this never worked because wanted player might just go offline.

I agree with others about Pacifist being inappropriate challenge for environment where all are supposed to fight.

I also support xp from PvP. Like in WotLK it will lead to high popularity of battlegrounds. You kill there much often than in the world. Just because enemies respawn faster.
I don't think that devs think that more battlegrounds during leveling is good idea. They spend so much work on the world, so it would be a waste if players just level in single location all their way till 60.

I don't think Vagrant is good idea in hostile environement too. It is good for PvE server, but it is not for PvP.

Same thing that I said to the other guy applies here aswell regarding the pacifist challenge.

There are bounty boards but as far as I know they are only in major cities for now.
I want an actual expansion of the bounty system. The bounty quests should be region specific.
They should target players that are actively killing people in the region.
And they should vanish if the bounty person is offline for more than 30 mins because it makes no sense to give out quests for players that are offline.

Lets say Stonetalon is a lvl 15-25 zone. A player in that level range that has achieved multiple kills in that area should then recieve a bounty. If the player leaves the zone OR goes offline for about 30 mins the quest should already be removed. So there won't be a bounty for a level 60 dude in a region like stonetalon.

And again, just because there is a challenge doesn't mean everyone will do them. These challenges are there to bring ADDITIONAL people to the server. By your logic EVERYONE on the PvE Realm plays Hardcore. Thats why I also included wpvp quests to make people go out in the world. And you will still need to do quests to get gear and gold aswell. So even if there was no PvE ExP reward people would still be there. Please read all before responding or are you the type of person that reads the title in a newspaper and then already judges the contents without reading it?

[Jc473]

Do you understand that I wrote this thing in the suggestion channel to make people engage with the topic and maybe bring their own ideas? Or build on things that I already suggested?

Like with any other suggestion post I've responded to, I have engaged and provided feedback. In fact, I was the first one to do it and showered you with praise because I think, overall, the ideas are really good. But for some reason this hasn't been acknowledge and instead, after asking a genuine question about the logic/validity of one particular bit of the proposal, you gave me some provocative comment about 'Twitter'. What's funny is that, in the same response, you seemed to give a level headed response to a user who has very much gave a Twitter-esque response and will probably not contribute again in this thread (see below).

no, exp from pvp! its silly

Why would that be silly?

And you have the gall to say "Did you learn to discuss things on Twitter? Lmao." this to me and not that person!? What an amazing contribution they gave to this thread......

Anyway, like with most proposals, they need fleshing out or further consideration on how they could potentially be exploited. If you reread my initial response, you'll see I have done this and then tried to expand on the bounty system later in the thread. I absolutely do think some of these ideas are great and need to be further explored in this thread.

So, back to the 'pacifist' discussion which seems to been the cause of angst in this thread...

What if we say it like this: In the pacifist challenge you are not ever to allowd to KILL an enemy player. If you kill one the challenge fails and you revert back to a normal playthrough. What if the kill means actual killing blow.
Do you think I imagined the pacifists just standing around letting themselves be killed?
They can still heal. They can still immobilize. They can still fear or whatever. They can help their fellow faction members during wpvp just not kill.

Dress the challenge up however you want, there will still be PvPers who will be irked by teammates (hybrids or non-hybrids) who will be unwilling to deliver a final blow. It's a very odd dynamic which, unless you somehow know you're playing with a pacifist, will create confusion during wPvP. Don't get me wrong, it's still better than not being allowed to harm the enemy faction but it will still create jarring situations.
As for defending themselves, I didn't just say they could accept death, I also said they would probably run away. But, I'm telling you, there will plenty of people who will probably just take the death because it's quicker than potentially going on a merry old chase and dying anyway. Again, this might not be so fulfilling for the aggressor.
This is my feedback on this particular suggestion. I suspect it will cause more harm than good. You may not like it so we may just have to agree to disagree. Perhaps others may continue to chime in.

Did you see the movie "Hacksaw Ridge" and say "LMao, this medic is stupid for not wanting to kill his enemies. War is meant for people who want to kill each other. What a contradiction!"

Yes, I'm fairly familiar with it. It's a good film. There are some major differences though:
1) His story very much represents an extreme edge case that isn't something likely to be repeated.
2) It was a private self imposed constraint.
3) It only became apparent that he was unwilling to use a firearm near the end of the training and, I believe, he got in on based on some technicality.
4) Even after the legendary heroics, the army does not offer this as some sort of regular form of contribution which anyone can sign up for.
5) What do you think the officers/fellow soldiers would have said to him had he been forthcoming on his pacifism when initially enlisting? Do you think they would've been happy to fight alongside him? Do you think the next wannabe Desmond Doss will be welcomed with open arms?
6) Do you think the armed forces will ever openly advertise for this sort of pacificst style of contribution?

And lets not pretend like a big bunch of people on this server already act like pacifists who try to avoid wpvp at all costs anyway.

Yes, there will always be this sort of player. But this is their perogative and is impossible to irradicate. As just mentioned, what PvPers will probably not enjoy is knowing that they are fighting alongside someone who will never land a killing blow. Even worse if this comes to the player as a surprise.

There are bounty boards but as far as I know they are only in major cities for now.
I want an actual expansion of the bounty system. The bounty quests should be region specific.
They should target players that are actively killing people in the region.
And they should vanish if the bounty person is offline for more than 30 mins because it makes no sense to give out quests for players that are offline.

Lets say Stonetalon is a lvl 15-25 zone. A player in that level range that has achieved multiple kills in that area should then recieve a bounty. If the player leaves the zone OR goes offline for about 30 mins the quest should already be removed. So there won't be a bounty for a level 60 dude in a region like stonetalon.

I completely agree with this. These are good ideas.

If I may add, I think that the bounties should be automatically placed after a few kills in a zone. Perhaps if the person reaches a threshold, a global bounty is placed which can be picked up from major cities (or any town?). I'm suggesting an automatic bounty placement because I think if it was left in the hands' of the players, they would grief each other.

And again, just because there is a challenge doesn't mean everyone will do them. These challenges are there to bring ADDITIONAL people to the server.

I don't think the pacifist challenge will bring many people in but I'd argue that the inclusion of them does more harm than good to the ethos of the PvP server. If existing people on the server are attempting it (i.e. levelling an alt), I will say the same thing. Simply put, the more people that embark on this challenge, the more it harms the PvP ethos of the server which is its unique selling point.

[Kaktus96]

Alright Jc473, we obviously didn't quite talk respectfully with each other, especially me with the Twitter comment, however, lets start this over.

What do we think now. HC but PvP deaths do not count sounds good, right?
This also includes people trying to harm you and then get you killed by NPCs to do the rest.
As long as another faction member had anything to do with the death HC challenge will not be seen as failed.

Vagrants Endeavor should also be fine if we allow crafted gear. This includes all crafted gear even if provided by others. This way you at least always have semi decent gear and can compete with a non vagrant. This could also help shine some light on the many new recipes that Twow devs added.

There is only war challenge. You like it, I like it. I think its a great incentive to make people engage in PvP both in BGs and open world pvp. Provided additional repeatable quests will be added to make leveling and obtaining gold/gain fun. I think that both mobs and non pvp related quest should NOT reward EXP but they can still reward you with gear.
This way there is still an incentive to take part in the new areas that the Turtle devs added.

A greatly expanded bounty system with certain parameters. I'd say we both completely agree on this one. A player wreaks havoc in a zone and the enemy faction can then band together to hunt this guy down.
Would you say they should even be shown on the map if they reach a certain kill threshold? What if this dude already killed 15 people in a zone? Like a skull on the map when you press "M".

Now, the only real issue we have here is the Pacifist challenge. I agree its not the best idea but I don't think it would hurt the server as much as you think and the small but still welcome influx of new players who are just there to do a pacifist run would be worth it. They may never land a killing blow but they can still assist their non-pacifist allies and I think thats good enough.

Anyway, I really wish I could come up with a different challenge that could replace pacifist because 2 unique challenges that are only available on the PvP Server would be fantastic and I hope that anyone who participates in this thread can come up with something.

[Jc473]

Alright Jc473, we obviously didn't quite talk respectfully with each other, especially me with the Twitter comment, however, lets start this over.

Happy to!

1) HC but with no PvP deaths - It's a bit contrived/artificial if some deaths don't count but it would certainly bring in a decent amount of people who'd gladly be willing to mix in some PvP. Need some variant on the HC name given that PvP deaths are allowed...

But I do think the normal HC mode should be allowed on the server. I think that is absolutely brutal and probably would only draw in a few people but it would be very memorable if people achieved it.

2) Vagrants Endeavor - Yeah, it's a nice idea but we need different names to capture the variations. So, the original name must be for only using grey/white items. But perhaps a 'Mercantile' option can be there for being able to trade for other crafted or BoE items. Or maybe a 'Self Made' version where you are allowed to use items you craft yourself.

3) There is only war - Assuming the server will always have a somewhat decent BG scene, yes, this is a good design. You always want the player feeling like they want to kill mobs/do normal quests because they need resources (i.e. money or quest items). Having a bunch of dedicated PvP quests is a nice idea but quite a bit of effort to add them throughout the world. Although, they could simply be a generic 'kill X horde/alliance in this area' to reduce the overhead. It would certainly increase the number of BGs happening.

4) Bounty system - I don't think it's a bad idea to make it easier and easier to find the person if 'they deserve it'. I think the whole 'hunt' thing would be incredibly fun for people (and perhaps the person being chased). I would say that the bounty for the person should be claimable by multiple people. So, if there's a bounty on someone, it should stay up for X amount of time so lots of people could 'collect their head'. With this design, lots of people get the chance for some fun and the person who has perhaps mercilessly slaughtered people has to deal with repeated bounty hunter attempts.

5) Pacifist - Well, as I said before, I guess we'll just need to agree to disagree on this one. Better to let other folks chime in on this challenge.

As for other ideas, I'll have to mull that over. I've got PvP ideas but they're far bigger than challenges which would take an age to implement. Honestly, they were probably similar to what Blizzard might do with Ashenvale in SoD.