With the sheer number of people who still talk so fondly of Div1's DZ, they must have done something right there. I mean, things evlove and change, and obviously they missed the mark on the current one, but I don't think that means there's no room for it in a Div 3 (whatever that ends up looking like).Originally Posted by RichardOshea Go to original post
I don't expect that to be a part of Heartlands, so no.Originally Posted by Kanaima Go to original post
That's pretty much me. Strictly conflict. No ganking, no talking sh1t on voip channels, just straight up 4v4 PvP. This game should improve & expand on that.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
There's no other game close to that on the market that has a similar theme and cover mechanics.
No one is forcing PvE players in to the DZ. The only DZ exclusive item that would be considered "best" is Perfect Vigilance, which offers a 1 second difference from it's normal version of the talent, not a game changer, and not what I would say is a "more powerful" gear piece. The 1886 Boomerang rifle I guess you could also group in there, but even people who have it don't use it.Originally Posted by Sircowdog1 Go to original post
I know it needs some more refining, but I'm not a rogue-y DZ player, and still enjoy the hell out of it. I end up playing as rogue police more than I do as a rogue. The farming is fun, and the added "danger" of knowing someone could flag up gives it even more of an edge.
I hate that you have had such negitive experiences in there, and I get why, I did and still do sometimes. But that doesn't mean I think it should go bye bye.
I think that's a matter of perspective. Can't we say, based on their own perspective on things, any of the rogues we faced in the manhunts made a choice to go rogue? The story / world only establishes itself after those choices were made. Especially when we look at someone like Faye Lou.Originally Posted by Kanaima Go to original post
The DZ establishes itself as the ground zero, or the place where the virus hit the hardest. If it was so severe that prevented SHD from trying to do something about it, then it makes sense as to why the dark zone is what it is.
The original dark zone says "hey, communication with SHD is jammed." That is one part to why it is "dark." The other is I have the option to play either side while in there and no one will ever know, with the "clearing rogue" mechanic in Division 2 giving me the option to stay rogue forever or not. And of course, dying clears one's rogue status.
Would the DZ rogue mechanics for the player work outside of the DZ for the player?
Division 2's DZ doesn't really establish the jammed communications rule for the player, and it brought the concept of rogue into the PVE, which could persuade one to believe the DZ / PVP isn't needed.
But I think we have to look at rogueing from two different contexts: in the context of a PVE experience and in the context of the DZ / PVP. Does it make sense how it is implemented for PVE / AI (manhunts)? And in reference to an earlier post of mine: is the DZ implemented logically in Division 2 compared to Division 1?
Since the DZ is not exclusively PVP or PVE, compared to Conflict and the LZ respectfully, I always say you don't have to actively PVP in the DZ, you just have to be ready to defend yourself.Originally Posted by TxDieselKid Go to original post
Then why haven't the DZ exclusives been released into the general loot pool if it's so unimportant?Originally Posted by TxDieselKid Go to original post
Call it whatever you want. Withholding certain items in specific game modes is nothing BUT an attempt to get players who aren't interested in that game mode to play it. That doesn't make the game mode good. And it's a weak attempt to boost participation numbers for a game mode that otherwise would have failed on its own "merits" a long time ago.
Very few people interested in PVE actually want that. And the absolute number of people who do want it is very small. And this is the second iteration of the game, and countless patches and balancing of the DZ. If they haven't been able to "refine" it by this point, maybe it's time to admit that it's as fundamentally flawed as I first stated.Originally Posted by TxDieselKid Go to original post
You're making a wrong assumption here. I did not personally have "negative" experiences. I just recognize the design for what it is, and see that the failures massively outweigh the positives. I get colorful in my descriptions of those problems because that sticks in people's brains better, and gets the message across more succinctly.Originally Posted by TxDieselKid Go to original post
And no, it should NOT be repeated. Mixing PVP and PVE is an attempt to force that game mode onto people that have no interest in it. The ONLY successful version of this concept I've ever seen is EVE online. And even as popular of a game as that is, it still has massive gaping issues.
Either make a PVE game, or make a PVP game. As I said before: PVP players are getting Heartland. They should not begrudge or attempt to impose on whatever PVE game that follows. Those efforts would be better spent trying to improve the Heartlands experience.
Don't personally care about PvP, but I think there is zero chance the DZ will be removed from any future Division game - it's one of the games defining features. Despite the whining against it, PvP attracts a set of highly-engaged players. That's why it's in the game.
I think they missed a trick with that in Div 2. Jamming SHD Tech might make have made it easier to balance PvP in there. Rogue NPC's in the LZ that have access to their tech would be consistent with this.Originally Posted by Merphee Go to original post
That's pretty much how I treat the DZ.Originally Posted by Merphee Go to original post
I wonder how accepting Conflict players would be if raid encounters randomly spawned into their conflic matches and halted all PVP until it was cleared. And then were told "Well it's not PVE but you have to be prepared to do it."Originally Posted by Merphee Go to original post