Originally Posted by Nobodave
Well, many players (inlcuding me) HATE any and all PvP.
And what we hate even more is PvPers trying to force their play-style on everyone else, pressuring devs to make life harder for carebears (badmouthing us sheep in order to make life easier for the wolves. This has been going on in Eve Online and other MMOs)
So I very nearly cancelled my purchase when I read about mandatory PvP.
Especially since for a small game like this, it's more likely someone will find a way to hack it, and *click* eradicate the units you've been training for days.
IMO the decision to force everyone to participate in PvP is a grave design error.
I think you're thinking too much into this. If you don't want to pvp, you don't have to. You can pay off the battle for only a few thousand gold. Even then, only people within 10% of your army strength can attack you, so it's never going to be like shooting fish in a barrel.
On main topic though - I hate the thought of losing units in pvp and that's why as of right now, I will not pvp. I see pvp as something to do for fun. Have your army and pvp. After that match, queue again and fight another player. Again and again. This death system greatly penalizes that approach since you can't exactly queue up again because your army is missing people and then you have to go retrain them.
I would suggest a softcore pvp (No loss of units or even regretably 50% loss of units) queue and a hardcore pvp queue with greater rewards
and your army will die. If after X seconds or 1 minute, there aren't enough people in queue, then you'll attack a random player like the current system.
I would again suggest a queue system because you'll get other players that actually want to pvp. Like it was said in this thread already, sometimes people are doing town management and don't want to pvp so they'll just pay off. Others like the above quote simply hate pvping. If I want to pvp, I'd like to fight like-minded people - not people who are trying to do their main quest and I happen to interrupt them.
"but pomop, if you have both softcore and hardcore, then no one is going to play hardcore!" Well... what does that tell you? The masses want to play softcore? Perhaps.. Then can you /really/ say that the masses want hardcore if they're all playing softcore? Of course this game is probably different, but that's usually the argument against soft / hardcore. Hardcore does add that sense of danger since you can lose your units and everything, but it also should give higher rewards, so people would be more likely to try it out.
"But you'll get more rewards if you just softcore cause you can queue and queue over again"
well.. yeah, I suppose. That's one reason I hate hardcore - having to take an extended break just to make more units and level them up. Also, why are you pvping for the rewards? I thought you'd be pvping because you enjoy pvp.
They would probably have to make a system for hardcore queuing if no one is available - maybe have X player as hardcore and loses units and gains additional rewards and the opponent as softcore who saves units but gets less rewards. That should be a pretty simple way to fix the lack of players queuing.
- to prevent making the reward for hardcore too high per battle, you could probably nerf softcore rewards so they earn less than they do now. Then in comparison, the difference in rewards between the two 'cores' is even greater.
edit - I'm not against a crown revive system. It's better than the alternative. I still am firmly against a permadeath situation. When I pvp, I like to pvp. I don't like doing one game and then spending the next hour making new units and leveling them up just to repeat it. I'd rather have my group of units and learn to use them properly, battle after battle.