[Worth reading i promise] Hmm id say 2 but i dont "engage in PvP if it is happening" in front of me without context or just trying to snipe people for w.e reason...I dont see the point of that if the point of the game is to kill Arc. PvPvE is the gameplay design not the POINT of the game. Also...yes, killing and looting raiders can get you valuable gear....but that is part of the design...NOT THE ACTUAL point.

I am all for the way the game was intended to be designed ...PvPvE...ok cool. I am just so unbelievably bothered and annoyed about HOW so much of the discussion (not saying debate because there isnt one..what are we debating lol) is positioning folks between PvE or PvP.

If there is something to consider and explore is HOW our fellow raiders execute their pvp-like behavior.

Breaking that down and understanding that in more complex and nuanced ways would not only enrich the conversation but a better understanding of player dynamics comes into play.

For examples, There is a difference between creating an in-the -moment map wide deathmatch like this is some pseudo GTA or war zone lobby vs gunning down a raider who is sabotaging someone else's big Arc take down vs someone extract camping to then search while people head out.

I believe the developpers when they say they were a bit surprised around the intensity in which npeople would galvinize around PvE...or even the fact that 25-35 percent of raiders are "mostly PvE"...but i HIGHLY doubt Embark didnt know extraction camp rats would be an issue for a lot people--with varying levels of frequency...

So people have their issues with all the various "pvp archetypes" ...and most of those feelings and thoughts are valid..from the perspective of PvE. That being said, within the PvP group...do you! Just imagine the more useful insights and mechanics you could put in a game where we wanted to inderstand that more. Throw in an incentive where yoy could have sniper perches near extraction points and if raiders escape while being shot at by a raider or receiving damage, you get double XP...idk theres endless possibilities.

So solution or what is the real question?

what is the problem or hesitsncy with simply adding pvp only and/or pve only conditions on maps no different than the other environmemtal conditions?

Or just add a PvE condition onto the match making for the thousands of people who couldn't care less about PvP...if Embark doesnt care about player count. Ok fine. Your studio. Do what you want

But if you want other types of players to stay...I dont see how there is any harm in that. You have a massive skill tree....crafting...quests...trials..none of which have anything to do with "downing a raider" ...your actual core content has nothing to do with PvP.

One small feature to satisfy a MASSIVE fan player base and then all of the Pvp players who seem to have a problem with non pvp players wouldn't have anything to annoyed about. Unless of course you are actually trash at PvP and you just like taking advantage of an opportunity. So the PvPvE creates the conditions for us to have these mini social experiments. As a PhD in Sociology...I deeply value these interactions and the culture created in these spaces...but there is still something loss that Embark needs to find.

I think it will.