Watching that made me nauseous. I would try to play that for about 5 mins, then just log out and play something else that doesn’t go 5 FPS in PVP.
the team battle league provides exp cards.
and team battle league > grinding, questing, dungeoning, missioning, PVEing imo
This is a RPG game, not a pvp game. There are other games labeled as “mmorpg” who have pvp as the main part of the game, i don’t see them as real rpgs but as gankfest. If you are looking for that, this isn’t it.
It’s interesting how some people see having a 5 in a scale of “pvpness” from 0 to 10, is the same as having just 0. And how they call carebears those who want both sides of the game not just go lvl cap and pvp :S. You got many games for that not necessarily rpgs…
But, i agree arena is one of the best pvp features in games. They should add arena but i think they will do that even if no body asks for it.
For those who still peak “carebear” in your language anyone who plays this game is a carebear so you are too. If you weren’t, you would be playing some pvp server of random game or BDO in russia…at least.
looks dumb and boring. glad it probably never get to itos.
uhm, after reading most of the postings are right, this is not a game for me, this is a game for people who like to kill mobs every day, do 3 dungeons and then waste time on a forum.
Goodbye tree of savior
another lvl 280 bored of this game. 
2 Likes
Looks like some people need to be reminded that IMC advertises this as a PVP game on Steam. When people started their characters it had lively, unrestricted world GvG.
PVP was the main endgame because everyone could participate and it gave players a reason to team up and coordinate. PVE is 5-man and requires being around the same level, so it doesn’t deliver a massively multiplayer experience.
Killing GvG without adding arena or the planned guild battles caused people to quit in droves. However, arena won’t be enough. Balance in this game gets better the more players you have. In zerg vs. zerg there’s counters for everything, PVE builds can do OK, pure support builds are good, and lower levels can blend into the crowd. That’s not the case in 5v5. In 1v1, it’s such a mess of hard class counters there’s no point.
This game needs massively multiplayer action, and the fastest way to get that is to scrap the nonsensical 3 war limit and provide an incentive to not just stay neutral forever (there’s guilds that call themselves hardcore PVP guilds but stay perma-neutral today). The harder part is improving framerates, but they’re already working on that.
5 Likes
agree with everything,arena would be good for balance and neutrality was poorly thought out
bcos before start there was mostly bosses and pvp videos.
And after still was gw available until stupid neutrality.
And finally. Half of the skills and classes in game are pvp oriented, so why the fk they disable pvp itself?
1 Like
I’ve played other MMORPGs where everyone was forced into open world pvp. I didn’t really call that experience fun, unless i was actually in the mood for pvp. But when i was in the mood for pveing/grinding/leveling it was a horrible experience.
[quote=“trielav, post:27, topic:298230”]
Looks like some people need to be reminded that IMC advertises this as a PVP game on Steam[/quote]
While the feature list includes pvp features having such pvp features on the features does not automatically make it a pvp game. Otherwise pretty much every game with multiplayer aspects would be considered a “pvp game”.
Heck, the game has not even “pvp game” as a tag in the games tag list.
And the games short description does not even mention pvp in any way:
"Tree of Savior(abbreviated as TOS thereafter) is an MMORPG in which you embark on a journey to search for the goddesses in the world of chaos. Fairy-tale like colors accompanied with beautiful graphics in TOS will have you reminiscing about precious moments all throughout the game."
It only mentions a journey (aka story quests).
If this truly was intended to be a pvp game, don’t you think the short description and the tags would mention that?
That is your interpretation. Could you please show any quote from IMC that this game is supposed to be a pvp-focussed game and pvp was supposed to be the main endgame? Any interview quotes? Videos?
[quote=“trielav, post:27, topic:298230”]
PVE is 5-man and requires being around the same level, so it doesn’t deliver a massively multiplayer experience.[/quote]
That’s a very subjective aspect and depends greatly on what your playstyle is, what you’re doing pve-wise and with what people you’re playing.
“Fastest way” hardly ever means “best way”.
We had a fastest way where every guild could declare war on any other guilds. Guess what? it backfired and many people hated it. Hence the neutrality option.
[quote=“blackout_kx, post:30, topic:298230”]
And finally. Half of the skills and classes in game are pvp oriented?[/quote]
How did you come to that conclusion?
Could you list all these skills/classes that are supposedly pvp oriented? Because as far as i have read skills descriptions the majority of skills/classes has no special pvp features at all.
1 Like
Take a rest and come back later?
GG for level 280 ! Welcome to Overwatch.
1 Like
I just posted a screenshot of that. There’s no PVE tag either. Many games with multiplayer aspects don’t explicitly advertise PVP features, so you’re not making any sense. Games which say they’re about PVP are PVP games.
Neutrality was an example of a fastest possible knee jerk move which wasn’t the best. Many people enjoyed the old system, where you could avoid PVP by not leaving a tower exposed. They did neutrality because of the in-game culture of Korean players, who already had the arena and had a weird honor system regarding towers. Of course, Korea’s playerbase declined to the point of server mergers, so their system didn’t cut it. We’re past release with lots of players quitting, so there’s no time to spend a year redesigning the game. Especially when their announced plans are about instanced PVP with limited numbers, which doesn’t properly replace the old system.
1 Like
You are not forced into it, you can always have neutrality by not putting up the tower. The tower is the benefit if you had gone none neutral, or at least that’s what we think before, but that’s okay.
That aside, what I don’t like about the neutrality patch is not the neutrality itself, it’s the 3 war limit, the 1 week war cooldown, and how the war cooldown is counted in the 3 war limit. It literally killed the war aspect by not allowing those that want to war, to war.
1 Like
You posted a screenshot with a feature list that shows that pvp is part of the game. That however does not make it a pvp game. “PvP game” would require that the game is only about pvp, nothing else (or the other aspects have such minor parts that they’re not worth mentioning).
You’re right, many titles with multiplayer aspects don’t explicitly say that they’re pvp. However, that does not mean that all multiplayer titles that don’t explicitly say they’re pvp titles are pvp titles.
Games that are about pvp only are pvp games.
Games that have pvp aspects but also pve aspects are not neccessarily pvp games.
Ragnarok Online, Pokemon or Super Mario Allstars for example have pvp aspects, but i’d hardly call them pvp games, despite their games mentioning “pvp” aspects in their feature list, because most people only play them for their “pve” aspects…
0/10, you tricked me into replying with the last one, but this is some terrible trolling here.
I’m not trolling.
I just don’t see how “this game has pvp arenas” in a feature list automatically means “therefore it’s a pvp game”. It could be that we have different understandings about what “pvp game” means. To me “pvp game” means that the game is only about pvp or 90% only about pvp with only minor other things shoved in.
“Has pvp aspects” certainly does not mean “pvp game” in this context.
If you have a different understanding what “pvp game” is then please say it.
I’m quite skeptical. If a game has to be only or almost only X to be an X game, then a game with a variety of characteristics wouldn’t be any type of game at all. That makes no sense. An adjective describes a characteristic it has or is officially supposed to have.
^ this
ToS is meant for PvP. War declarations and duels are boring. We need arena and guild battle badly.
1 Like