1. Post #41
    PAL

    October 2013
    133 Posts
    First of all I'm not demanding anything. What this game is intended to be is a game about survival and PVP is the major aspect of that. Taking away pvp is taking away the point of the game. What I said is its silly for people to think they are entitled to play the game completely backwards and feel entitled to it. I dont ask for a team deathmatch mode and get up in arms because i cant play it. I play the game that the devs created and enjoy it
    Nothing has to be added or removed, PVP and PVE is in the game, all they need is to setup one PVE server, no one will force you to play on that server, you simply just join a PVP server. However you seems to think we all should be forced to play PVP.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Denmark Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  2. Post #42
    Cyborgt's Avatar
    October 2013
    182 Posts
    But adding PvE servers isn't taking PvP away. You'd still have PvP.
    Why do you guys keep making the argument about removing PvP? It's nothing of the sort. It's just booting up an extra server or two. It really isn't a big deal.
    I guess it doesn't matter much what anybody thinks about it really. The MCM PvE server is up now so anyone wanting to play PvE can do so.

    As to those who think it "goes against the point of the game," that's how you see it and you're entitled to your opinion but apparently someone thought it was a good enough idea to make it a reality so you're just going to have to live with that.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Zing Zing x 1Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  3. Post #43

    October 2013
    17 Posts
    I personally think a PvE/Turtorial server would be a great idea. Just somewhere to mess around in to learn the game, learn the maps, find your future homestead, try out new layouts for buildings.

    I would still play on the normal PvP servers, but i would like to have an account on a PvE server to dick around on when I want to take the edge off.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 2 (list)

  4. Post #44

    October 2013
    32 Posts
    The "PvP players" call it stupid and dumb to have a PvE server. But i find it kinda stupid to say so as it would not affect you guys at all? It would how ever get a larger player base, and even if the odd few PvE players just play abit of PvP it will allow the PvP servers to have more players.

    So what is so stupid about leting the PvE players have their PvE server/s?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 Sweden Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  5. Post #45
    Cyborgt's Avatar
    October 2013
    182 Posts
    The "PvP players" call it stupid and dumb to have a PvE server. But i find it kinda stupid to say so as it would not affect you guys at all? It would how ever get a larger player base, and even if the odd few PvE players just play abit of PvP it will allow the PvP servers to have more players.

    So what is so stupid about leting the PvE players have their PvE server/s?
    They're probably just worried it will mean fewer noobs for them to rob on their pvp servers...

    As for the PvE servers, I haven't played on them yet but to me it just seems like a bad idea if there aren't more changes to the game than just "you can't shoot each other now." All that means is you could no longer shoot people trying to break into or grief your house so it would just become a raider's paradise.

  6. Post #46
    KillaMaaki's Avatar
    August 2013
    999 Posts
    They're probably just worried it will mean fewer noobs for them to rob on their pvp servers...

    As for the PvE servers, I haven't played on them yet but to me it just seems like a bad idea if there aren't more changes to the game than just "you can't shoot each other now." All that means is you could no longer shoot people trying to break into or grief your house so it would just become a raider's paradise.
    Yeah - I would prefer it if in PvE they made it so you couldn't break down other people's structures since you can't possibly defend yourself (doesn't seem fair that I can always raid someone with nothing more than a hatchet because they can't kill me). They also need to fix the sleeper bug - if you log off and leave your sleeping body behind, people can kill your sleeping body (last I heard, anyway).
    Neither of these should be very hard coding-wise, and would make PvE just about perfect.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  7. Post #47
    Cyborgt's Avatar
    October 2013
    182 Posts
    Yeah - I would prefer it if in PvE they made it so you couldn't break down other people's structures since you can't possibly defend yourself (doesn't seem fair that I can always raid someone with nothing more than a hatchet because they can't kill me). They also need to fix the sleeper bug - if you log off and leave your sleeping body behind, people can kill your sleeping body (last I heard, anyway).
    Neither of these should be very hard coding-wise, and would make PvE just about perfect.
    Well, they could always just use the non-sleeper version of the game for PvE servers and that would fix the sleeper killing problem. The only reason for sleepers to begin with was PvP related.

  8. Post #48
    KillaMaaki's Avatar
    August 2013
    999 Posts
    Well, they could always just use the non-sleeper version of the game for PvE servers and that would fix the sleeper killing problem. The only reason for sleepers to begin with was PvP related.
    Yeah, that would solve that problem.
    The only other problem would be structure griefing. If I were to implement it, I would probably add a check when dealing damage to a structure, like "if( mode is PvP OR player owns structure ) deal damage"

  9. Post #49
    Cyborgt's Avatar
    October 2013
    182 Posts
    Yeah, that would solve that problem.
    The only other problem would be structure griefing. If I were to implement it, I would probably add a check when dealing damage to a structure, like "if( mode is PvP OR player owns structure ) deal damage"
    You're forgetting construction griefing with that idea. They could still just block you in your house just to be pests like they do on PvP servers which would be made all the worse by the fact that your PvE rules prevent you from destroying anything they built.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  10. Post #50

    January 2014
    1 Posts
    Care bears? It's called social gaming you twats, also some people like the sand box. Sims doesn't offer a similar experience. Also, who would be in their right mind to advertise anything made by electronic arts...the same company who lets you dump money into their hamster wheel pay to win games and then shuts then down.

  11. Post #51

    December 2013
    52 Posts
    why don't you join a pve server? there are community and mod pve servers. my server is pve with pvp events so people can still enjoy both aspects
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 7 United States Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  12. Post #52

    January 2014
    1 Posts
    As someone that enjoys PVP and PVE (e.g. State of Decay) I think the best solution would be a hybrid environment. Make PVP areas (mapwise) heavy in resources. This would address the biggest issue with PVP servers, namely keeping a steady stream of new players coming. The danger now is this game will sink or swim based on it's community. With a PVP only server you run the risk of a bunch of skill-less players shooting defenseless newbies. This may be fun for the established group on the server, but it spells death to a server's population. There's only so much a newbie is going to tolerate before they move on to a different game. Considering that a good chunk of this game requires crafting a PVE area with just enough resources to make basic weapons would help the newbie crowd and add more challenge than gunning down a guy with a stone (who's probably trying to figure out what he's suppose to do with it).
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Canada Show Events Agree Agree x 1 (list)

  13. Post #53

    January 2014
    1 Posts
    this company would do well to make at leat 1 or 2 PVE servers and however many pvp servers (or like GregR said have PVP and PVE Zones Added). All you trolls out there making fun of this guys post about wanting pve server shouldnt even be adding there 2 cents worth. If you enjoy the fact that this is a PVP game great go take a dump on a PVP post leave this guy alone for wanting somthing that he likes in a game (since you already have pvp you shouldnt be taking a dump on this guys post about this idea others want). i myself hate pvp especially if jerk off/s that are geared like a tank raping a helpless naked guy with a rock (altho it may seem funny the first second and or 3rd time)but it gets to the point where people want to give up and spend money and time on another game. thats a big loss for the creators of Rust. this game seems fun and i been looking for a game like minecraft with better graphics withot all the PVP crap. if they can make a server for PVE i will spend so much money on DLC's its not funny.

    anyway heres hoping we PVE players get what we want

    ps: pvp players with nothing nice to say go troll on your pvp forums and leave us PVE players alone.

  14. Post #54

    January 2014
    2 Posts
    I suspect the people hating on PVE servers are the ones that shoot we when I respawn holding a rock. The thing they don't understand is that a game like this needs significantly more non pvp'ers than pvp'ers to survive. If there is no PVE option at all, then users will quickly get bored and leave. Take a look at a similarly harse pvp game - eve online, they have about 50k users, that's taken several years to build up to, now compare that to wow which is considerably less hardcore - around the 7 million mark. Now I have enjoyed playing both of those games for different reasons over time, but I don't think a pure pvp shooty shooty 24/7 will sustain numbers much above what is currently active. I think that for the game to survive there will have to be a softer option for those like myself who have to work for a living and can only spend a couple of hours a night tops playing a game. Let the market decide - see what the demand is for pve vs pvp servers. You want pvp go duke it out on pvp server, you want pve or to actually learn the game mechanics, do pve. A compromise would be a starter area with low resources where you can learn the mechanics before being shot in the face whilst naked holding a rock. There isn't much of a challenge to those shooting n00bs, wouldn't you as a pvp'er prefer to face someone who could actually give you a fight?

  15. Post #55

    March 2014
    1 Posts
    Yeah, some people like playing the game in a different way to yourself. Is that so hard to get through your thick skull?
    Right back at you champ, yeah you seriously made yourself look stupid while trying to make another person look stupid. Why is it so hard to just let us have (unless we already have) BOTH PVE and PVP servers so we can all play exactly the way we want.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Reply Windows 8 Finland Show Events Dumb Dumb x 1 (list)

  16. Post #56
    Gold Member
    Sievers808's Avatar
    December 2013
    2,322 Posts
    Right back at you champ, yeah you seriously made yourself look stupid while trying to make another person look stupid. Why is it so hard to just let us have (unless we already have) BOTH PVE and PVP servers so we can all play exactly the way we want.
    Now who looks stupid? This thread was opened in October of last year.

    You're about 6 months late to this troll party.