This isn't a good idea. You are suggesting that the devs should cut out a massive chunk of test scope. For example, Issue #0009320 refers to a glitch with player corpses not appearing correctly upon death. If the devs turned off PvP, a huge portion of the testing would be neglected.

The direction idea isn't bad though, it would also be nice to see buffed spawn rates for newly added items so more people can interface with them to find the issues. I can't tell you how many times I've played an experimental build and never found some of the items I'd like to try out.

@swagadordali - That would be the purpose of further testing in a "PVP Environment" IE Stable Server, not the Experimental Server.

The idea with an experimental branch is to curb the amount of issues plaguing the general player-population before it even reaches a server they will play on. What happens when there is a game-breaking bug involving PvP that is missed due to PvP being disabled? I'm not going to argue, we're on the same side here, trying to help the development process and find bugs :-) I'm just trying to share some knowledge and explain why I don't think this should or will become a reality.

All it requires is one PVP Free server per (UK, DE, SE and US)
But if you believe 0009320 is game breaking, I think you have missed the point.

Well one PvE server per locale sounds a lot more reasonable than the original issue report which makes it seem like they all should have PvP disabled. That's something I'd support. I wasn't suggesting 0009320 is game-breaking, that was an example of a PvP bug, and my latter remark about game-breaking PvP bugs wasn't related to that; simply the idea that a game-breaking bug could make it to stable and be a pain point for the players.