PVP - based on COOP maps/adventures

[FDkarma]

I were unable to use the search function for PVP content in the forum, so I'm going to give it a go

PVP doesn't seem very attractive in it's current form, but it's hard to tell because there aren't any statistics available.

As such I was thinking it could be interesting if a different kind of PVP was introduced, a bit like good old capture the flag type, but based on coop maps where players are seperated and interference with each other are limited.

The idea would be to clear the camps fastest to capture the "flag". Now if the same mechanics from Misty Cake were implemented on these PVP-COOP maps then it would somehow balance out the level difference .

The COOP maps are pretty much divided so player interference is limited, so renaming them and replacing the units with pvp units and such should be possible. I am not sure if the mechanics from Misty Cake can similarly just be applied, but that's why you have developers to figure it out.

Developers can do anything as long as you let them.

[Qualan]

Nice idea- for in around 5 years time or so .....

PVP is a dead horse being flogged but there are more important things to deal with. The core of the game needs attention with new content and challenges- most likely a combo of new levels, new lands, new questlines and new adventure/venture lines to work through. I don;t see a PVP rework keeping players interested if the main game is neglected- We chose the game and stayed for that part- PVP and scenarios are all fluff/extra's but on the whole will not keep people in the game

I just wish BB would stop the " we need to solve the bugs in unity first before we do anything new" line as it will end counter productive int he long run- The line has run its course now and keeping to that would mean people will walk away due to lack of new content and then the new BB line would be: it is not worth developing new content due to lack of player base :P

[Axecairne]

Quite agree with the above and PVP is an odd tangent for this game.
I would like to see new conventional maps, new variable maps like Mysty Cake, and more co-op options to keep things interesting.
New landscapes like the old experimental map of Colossal Cave for example would be really nice.

[sparkz]

Developers can do anything as long as you let them.

Developers can do anything as long as they have a green light from stakeholders and an approved budget.

Considering how the game looked like for almost 3 years now, and that there wasnt any actual content added for almost 6, id say its pretty clear noone wants to invest more money into this game other than bare minimum to keep it afloat.

[King_Jarmo]

Developers can do anything as long as they have a green light from stakeholders and an approved budget.

Considering how the game looked like for almost 3 years now, and that there wasnt any actual content added for almost 6, id say its pretty clear noone wants to invest more money into this game other than bare minimum to keep it afloat.

Have u read the news about BB lately? There are no people and there is no money left.. Im surprised they are keeping this game alive at all..

[MissTweak]

To: Appropriate Readers,

It is in my belief that the Player versus Player environment, though many say that it's redundant and not an attractive feature, thus, approval from stakeholders for a budget to either overhaul or refine, can wholly be persuaded otherwise, rather than be declined in request. The following suggestion:
- The monetary payment system for this wonderful online browser simulation, is similar to games within the same genre. I believe this is a detriment for developers, rather than a boon.
- The following recommendation, thus: to have the current Player versus Environment remain as it is, perhaps with a few tweaks to make questline more streamlined; have the Player versus Player in-game environment have a more sophisticated monetary payment system, to void all the misuse and abuse that is rife with other games of the same genre. For example: to join a Player versus Player environment, a fee payment or a fee payment subscription system is required to join in an in-game arena to participate. Prizes would be larger in value compared to prizes in a Player versus Environment arena. As an incentive for players to join a Player versus Player in-game arena.
I don't believe a complete overhaul with the Player versus Player environment is necessary at all. Merely the advertising and marketing of the Player versus Player needs to be worked on, to find usernames attracted. To rely solely on, despite the addictive, Player versus Environment gameplay, would then find complaint of receiving a red light on stakeholders for an approval on a budget.

This, I do believe, would be the next step in ensuring that a wonderful online browser simulation, moves forward to becoming a great online game, that anybody can get themselves into, yet, be distinct in having usernames vie against each other, should the urge for more competitive play be flowing in one's veins.