FFA vs Faction PVP

[jbs89]

I think that the PVP rules should be faction based; aka on Classic Rules Good Races vs Bad Races..

This way the races will each be working together pretty hardcore pve as well as more team-oriented pvp...

I think this would be better than just pure FFA style murder everyone

[wehrmacht]

We already had that thread, it's 16 pages long:

http://www.project1999.org/forums/showthread.php?t=31288

[jbs89]

So are they going to do a Race/Deity PvP rules? that would be EPIC; Human SK's would need to team up with Erudites but not ogres etc.... godlike

[wehrmacht]

So are they going to do a Race/Deity PvP rules? that would be EPIC; Human SK's would need to team up with Erudites but not ogres etc.... godlike

Nobody knows the answer to that question but the following teams setup is the only balanced one I can think of that gives each team every class while also maintaining somewhat of an overall good vs evil type deal:



Dark Elf Alliance (evil)
--------------------
Dark Elf
Troll
Iksar
Ogre
Half Elf
Erudite


Human Alliance (good)
---------------------
Human
Dwarf
Gnome
Halfling
High Elf
Barbarian
Wood Elf

[Pokeman]

Should be diety based like SZ, Its funner when the good team are all wood elves named legoloas and the evils team are all SKs with HT hotkeys.

[Pudge]

Should be diety based like SZ, Its funner when the good team are all wood elves named legoloas and the evils team are all SKs with HT hotkeys.

lol

[wehrmacht]

Should be diety based like SZ, Its funner when the good team are all wood elves named legoloas and the evils team are all SKs with HT hotkeys.

Since there were rallos zek halflings on SZ evil team as well as all kinds of bards and other crap, the list I said above is really no different.

[Jon]

Gah, so sick and tired of faction based MMORPGs.

[Dfn]

faction is gay
ffa is tits

/thread

[pasi]

I feel like with teams, you always end up hating your own team more than your enemies. With that said, teams are probably going to be necessary if there is no boxing allowed. Solo players starting on a non-boxing server are pretty screwed. This is only amplified if they are a pure melee class or a class that doesn't solo well.

[Jon]

teams are probably going to be necessary if there is no boxing allowed.

What? People still join parties and group with one another on FFA servers.

Moreover, with a lower population, FFA seems like the way to go.

[jbs89]

Teams solves all problems and is an interesting twist; obviously it would work out very well to include some faction based team play.. pure FFA is like a pirates cove crazy

in original EQ 1999 the real one they had FFA server and quickly introduced faction based as I recall due to many complaints about FFA being "no mans land"

FFA isnt better for less people; PvP server shouldnt be pvp in your face all the time; IMO, reading the linked thread or somewhere I liked the idea of -points for friendly kills... but let team rules ride ontop

[Giddian]

The first few days of TZ most didnt know about being able to heal and buff other teams and it was awesome. Once everyone knew it got all jacked up.

[Xantille]

The first few days of TZ most didnt know about being able to heal and buff other teams and it was awesome. Once everyone knew it got all jacked up.

If by "jacked up" you mean "got really fucking awesome" then yes, I agree. After being a fervent team proponent, I realized how many idiots were on the dark team. (you can replace idiots with foreigners, as well).

I'm pretty sure I disliked more people on the Dark team than on any other. It's a shame I was never able to slay them. Could only trade window them like a boss.

[Jon]

pure FFA is like a pirates cove crazy
in original EQ 1999 the real one they had FFA server and quickly introduced faction based as I recall due to many complaints about FFA being "no mans land"

Rallos Zek was FFA and it stayed that way till the end of its days. I don't know where the whole 'no mans land' thing came from, but it sounds like you or whoever said that hasn't actually played on a FFA server. You've got guilds, some of which are anti-pk (meaning they won't attack you unless you attack them and primarily focus on PvE) and they will serve as your allies. You don't need factions. FFA servers are being painted inaccurately here it seems.

[AffEcT]

Rallos Zek was FFA and it stayed that way till the end of its days. I don't know where the whole 'no mans land' thing came from, but it sounds like you or whoever said that hasn't actually played on a FFA server. You've got guilds, some of which are anti-pk (meaning they won't attack you unless you attack them and primarily focus on PvE) and they will serve as your allies. You don't need factions. FFA servers are being painted inaccurately here it seems.

Agree
In the start there will be groups all over the place looking for seven gram rocks. Winning!

You can pick who you want to play with instead of this pre setup team shit.
Teams will be unbalanced because of possible class differences and lack of population control.
What if the majority of the pop playes dark team for example....?

Free For All! No limitations except for levels ofc =)

[Castle]

Teams is a bad idea... being unable to kill someone for reasons other than level are dumb. If you set up teams you have to stop X-teaming by hardcoding blocks on beneficial spells.. which once again is stupid because sometimes you wanna stay a quick buff on someone you're killing.

Okay.. so now that the teams idea is dead... let's talk levels... 4? 8? 10? 15?

I think 4 is good. It stops people in classic from entering the planes unless they are within range of 50s, but it keeps things relatively balanced as far as resists and what not go. When Kunark goes live I'd be all for bumping it up to 8 levels.

[Jon]

I like +/- 8 level range, but I think that'll depend on server population.

[wehrmacht]

Agree
What if the majority of the pop playes dark team for example....?


Obviously I would play the other team and kill all of you.

[AffEcT]

Epic Winning!

[Heywood]

Teams is a bad idea... being unable to kill someone for reasons other than level are dumb. If you set up teams you have to stop X-teaming by hardcoding blocks on beneficial spells.. which once again is stupid because sometimes you wanna stay a quick buff on someone you're killing.

Okay.. so now that the teams idea is dead... let's talk levels... 4? 8? 10? 15?

I think 4 is good. It stops people in classic from entering the planes unless they are within range of 50s, but it keeps things relatively balanced as far as resists and what not go. When Kunark goes live I'd be all for bumping it up to 8 levels.

I totally agree. it will definitely increase the quality of pvp. It's safe to say that it usually takes more skill to kill someone within 4 levels than someone who is 8 levels below you.


I know some people will oppose to this, they will want at least 8 so they can gank people who are leveling up. But in reality, that's not really pvp. That's just attacking someone whom is preoccupied with a mob and someone who you already have an advantage over with 4+ levels above him/her/it.

[Arillious]

Having played on both a faction based(Vallon zek) and FFA based(multiple emu servers), I can that there are definently pro's and con's to both.

Faction based definently helps people joining the server without a group of friends. There's a natural sense of comradery. This make people more likely to stick with the game at lower levels as they are able to make friends and get groups faster.

The cons are that it creates less targets. There's nothing worse then standing next to someone you want to kill but you can't because of the hard code. Thats usually when you see training and other douchebaggery because there's no in game mechanic to solve your conflict. To counter this on Vallon Zek, cross team guilds were formed so that we could call in guildmates to take care of these types of situations. This introduced other problems such as "Immortal healing" where a member of the same team was healing members of other teams and there was nothing you could do about it.

I'd almost say make it faction based until the level cap and then make it FFA once your hit the cap. I havent thought this all the way through however.

[Pudge]

I'd almost say make it faction based until the level cap and then make it FFA once your hit the cap. I havent thought this all the way through however.

sounds interesting. once you're a big boy and grow up, you get to go off on your own.. kinda like it. then again, that means you will be leveling basically uncontested, no pvp till you get bigger. and ppl may stay 49 to camp shit etc. so i would hope the "teams" only lasted till level 40 or so. but nice idea never considered that before

i have always promoted FFA and an "auto-guild" that everyone started out in when they created a new char., just to give ppl a chance to connect if they're new to the server. could leave the guild at any time so it's no detriment to anyone who doesn't want to be there. some players may even choose to stay in the auto-guild forever, and help newbs out

[jbs89]

So we can all agree Open PVP with -factions for killing team members; EQ justice..

with Light vs Dark teams (sks/necros/bad religions are bad guys)... that way you can do what you need to but it still emphasizes co-operation

[pasi]

If the goal is to have a healthy population, teams (at least at the start) is pretty necessary. Nothing (not even Kringe zonecmd'n) will deter people more than not having people to start with.

[Pokeman]

Since there were rallos zek halflings on SZ evil team as well as all kinds of bards and other crap, the list I said above is really no different.

I forgets but I don't think the evil team had halfings and they def didn't have druids or rangers.

[jbs89]

I forgets but I don't think the evil team had halfings and they def didn't have druids or rangers.

evil team has SKs and Necros... thats more than enough

[Heywood]

If the goal is to have a healthy population, teams (at least at the start) is pretty necessary. Nothing (not even Kringe zonecmd'n) will deter people more than not having people to start with.

that's not true at all. teams will only hinder pvp since it will limit the amount of people whom you can pvp with.

if any of this were true, the Rallos Zek server wouldnt have existed at all. teams will only cause nuisances such as immortal healers and more training.

the misconception that teams promotes more camaraderie than FFA is false.


I'm a product of Rallos Zek and Emu PVP. both instances i started playing not knowing a single person, yet I was able to make friends and join guilds instantly.

what makes you think there wont be guilds recruiting people in an FFA-based server?

hard-coding teams can only limit the potential of the server and will most likely cause lop-sided pvp. It's very unlikely that server would be 50 percent good and 50% bad.

[naez]

I forgets but I don't think the evil team had halfings and they def didn't have druids or rangers.



i think any war can worship rz

[Haul]

RZ item drop was as hardcore as it gets, wouldn't have any complaints from me if they decided to go that way. As for ffa vs faction, ffa is the obvious choice.

[jbs89]

that's not true at all. teams will only hinder pvp since it will limit the amount of people whom you can pvp with.

if any of this were true, the Rallos Zek server wouldnt have existed at all. teams will only cause nuisances such as immortal healers and more training.

the misconception that teams promotes more camaraderie than FFA is false.


I'm a product of Rallos Zek and Emu PVP. both instances i started playing not knowing a single person, yet I was able to make friends and join guilds instantly.

what makes you think there wont be guilds recruiting people in an FFA-based server?

hard-coding teams can only limit the potential of the server and will most likely cause lop-sided pvp. It's very unlikely that server would be 50 percent good and 50% bad.

imo its more inline with the Verant's original vision of eq which you may not have heard of

its a bit like Shamans vs Paladins from classic WoW... it works fine

[pasi]

that's not true at all. teams will only hinder pvp since it will limit the amount of people whom you can pvp with.

Someone proposed the idea of hardcoding teams until a certain level - thats the idea I'm advocating.

if any of this were true, the Rallos Zek server wouldnt have existed at all. teams will only cause nuisances such as immortal healers and more training.

I doubt there will ever be a situation like Rallos again where the majority of people rolling on a PvP server are anti-pks. The Crusaderzogs are gone.

the misconception that teams promotes more camaraderie than FFA is false.

As I said earlier, I usually end up hating my own team more than my enemy, but thats probably because I'm coming in with a guild/group and these are people that I cannot kill who are taking my precious resources.

I'm a product of Rallos Zek and Emu PVP. both instances i started playing not knowing a single person, yet I was able to make friends and join guilds instantly.

Theres gonna be people who will stick around regardless of rule set. The idea is the number of these people in comparison to the number of people who will not.

what makes you think there wont be guilds recruiting people in an FFA-based server?

hard-coding teams can only limit the potential of the server and will most likely cause lop-sided pvp. It's very unlikely that server would be 50 percent good and 50% bad.

This is all personal opinion, but I doubt guilds are going to be recruiting at the low levels where I'm advocating hard-coded teams. The idea is the people who start the server, play up to level 10 solo - get stomped all day by a pre-organized group of players and then proceed to go back to P99 or whatever.

Now, you could argue and say that we don't want players like that on the server, but how do you know that the same player would not have stuck around and loved the server if they had a group to fight back with? Again, this is all for low levels, and it's a retention issue.

I also think the boxxing-limitation will be remarkably different from VZTZ. Non-solo classes will be hell to level without a guild on a no-boxxing PvP server.

[Heywood]

/edit this was towards jbs not pasi.

werent you the one who said original eq started with Rallos zek before vallon or tallon was open? so in theory, if Verant opened a FFA server first, isnt FFA their original vision?

regardless of that, this isnt Verant, this is developers possibly opening a pvp server for us, and they're looking out for the [pvp] community's best interest.

how is Player A not being able to attack Player B, if both are the same lvl, pvp or even promoting pvp?

If team-based pvp is anything remotely to wow, i can show you several servers where horde outnumber alliance 3:1 and vice versa. not to mention make end-game mobs more difficult that they would already be if PVP is present.

[Heywood]

Someone proposed the idea of hardcoding teams until a certain level - thats the idea I'm advocating.

that's feasible, but only until level 10, perhaps 12 max. But even then, it'll take away from pvp at the early stages, especially if the exp is extremely slow like original eq. However, I can see the majority of people choosing this.



I doubt there will ever be a situation like Rallos again where the majority of people rolling on a PvP server are anti-pks. The Crusaderzogs are gone.

Exactly, people nowadays want to pvp, so why deny them pvp'ing certain people? and IIRC, I heard VZTZ started as a team based server, but too many problems occurred where they had to actually turn it RZ-style pvp. the idea of team-based pvp has been tried before, and it didnt work. I can totally see the same problems original VZTZ had happening here. with the extensive training/immortal healers. Not to mention the possibility of a faction not being able to raid end-game bosses because they dont have enough healers/tanks/dps/etc as the opposing faction.


As I said earlier, I usually end up hating my own team more than my enemy, but thats probably because I'm coming in with a guild/group and these are people that I cannot kill who are taking my precious resources.

That's the thing, in a team based server, guilds will be forced to pick players by faction, not entirely by skill. There's also no option for switching from one guild to another, unless of course they're in the same faction. But can you see a scenario where a high elf cleric being frustrated because the guild he's in is not that great or doesnt share the same enthusiasm for pvp'ing or raiding as he does? what if he wants to join a certain guild that does share his enthusiasm but said guild is on the opposite faction?


And also it brings up a good point, lets say two different guilds want to down naggy, but they're in the same faction, how will resolve their differences? im sure they're not going to discuss it like gentlemen. I can see them training each other until the other gives up.

This is all personal opinion, but I doubt guilds are going to be recruiting at the low levels where I'm advocating hard-coded teams. The idea is the people who start the server, play up to level 10 solo - get stomped all day by a pre-organized group of players and then proceed to go back to P99 or whatever.

You say you doubt guilds would recruit at low levels? certainly you must have seen it in eq live, in wow, in any other mmorpg? is it such a crazy idea that it wont happen here?

Now, you could argue and say that we don't want players like that on the server, but how do you know that the same player would not have stuck around and loved the server if they had a group to fight back with? Again, this is all for low levels, and it's a retention issue.

I'm not going to argue that, but while youre looking at the short term effects of a team-based server, I'm looking at both short and long term effects of a FFA server, and i strongly believe that the benefits a team based server brings in the early part of EQ are exactly identical of that of a FFA based server. the big difference however is that I think a FFA based server will greatly benefit the population more in the end game rather than a team based one.

and it's not entirely FFA server, it'll be a guild vs guild server. which is exactly the same as a team vs team server, the difference is a guild can choose whoever they see fit to join their guild, compared to being forced to choose someone due to hardcoding issues.


so Guild vs guild pvp > faction vs faction pvp.

[jbs89]

It was in Verants vision to make a Dark vs Light server... so they did

The dev's decisions are just reflections of the Vision 1999

[Pokeman]

And also it brings up a good point, lets say two different guilds want to down naggy, but they're in the same faction, how will resolve their differences? im sure they're not going to discuss it like gentlemen. I can see them training each other until the other gives up.

and it works v well

teams are fun on a decently populated server

[Heywood]

It was in Verants vision to make a Dark vs Light server... so they did

The dev's decisions are just reflections of the Vision 1999


this is really going off-track. I'm just stating what I think would be best for a pvp server. If you want to say that the devs would rather choose what verant wanted over what is better for the pvp community, then that's you. I can't make such a bold statement like you, because i don't know any of the devs except for null. I'm assuming you have spoken to the devs and they personally told you this?

[jbs89]

this is really going off-track. I'm just stating what I think would be best for a pvp server. If you want to say that the devs would rather choose what verant wanted over what is better for the pvp community, then that's you. I can't make such a bold statement like you, because i don't know any of the devs except for null. I'm assuming you have spoken to the devs and they personally told you this?

its named project 1999 its a recreation... its implied :rolleyes:

[Heywood]

its named project 1999 its a recreation... its implied :rolleyes:

How does this contribute to the guild vs guild server or faction vs faction server discussion? like i said youre straying off-track my friend.

i really dont understand the point of this. what are you trying to say? It's known that PVP was not a priority or a main concern for verant/everquest when it first opened up if ever. Everquest was primarily about pve and being non-linear. The devs did recreate that and have done a good job. However, if everquest had no real concern, interest, or vision for the pvp aspect of the game, how can the devs emulate or recreate that?


So where did you get this "verant wanted a lights vs darks server" argument? you said verant created rallos zek first, now youre contradicting yourself saying they wanted a "light vs dark" server.

once again, what's the point of all this? it's not really contributing to the discussion. I mean, you can continue posting on the matter all you want and actually think you proved a point, but i really cant be bothered with this if it really doesnt pertain to the server.

[jbs89]

How does this contribute to the guild vs guild server or faction vs faction server discussion? like i said youre straying off-track my friend.

i really dont understand the point of this. what are you trying to say? It's known that PVP was not a priority or a main concern for verant/everquest when it first opened up if ever. Everquest was primarily about pve and being non-linear. The devs did recreate that and have done a good job. However, if everquest had no real concern, interest, or vision for the pvp aspect of the game, how can the devs emulate or recreate that?


So where did you get this "verant wanted a lights vs darks server" argument? you said verant created rallos zek first, now youre contradicting yourself saying they wanted a "light vs dark" server.

once again, what's the point of all this? it's not really contributing to the discussion. I mean, you can continue posting on the matter all you want and actually think you proved a point, but i really cant be bothered with this if it really doesnt pertain to the server.


I dont understand how this doesnt "contribute". All your saying is FFA rules only, but Im disagreeing... they made the faction pvp server like 2 months later not 2 years later, its still relevant as a classic server.. what are you actually trying to prove? You sound redundant

The name is Project1999 not Devs-do-it-their-own-way-kids-choice-awards; they are going to follow Verants 1999 Vision Pre Luclin/Sony titanic failures

FFA is not the end all be all or #1 pvp method; its just the simplest; you definitely don't need Clerics Pallies and bards on the same team; and Necros and DK's will easily balance the scales; Shaman are fine healers last I checked

Its another Classic rules set and just because you can't handle it doesnt mean it isnt classic EQ; EQ is a hard game, maybe WoW would be easier for you

[Heywood]

Its another Classic rules set and just because you can't handle it doesnt mean it isnt classic EQ; EQ is a hard game, maybe WoW would be easier for you

the irony is, WoW is a faction-based pvp game, which is what youre proposing. it also sounds like you want nec/sk on one side, and clerics/pal on the other. So once again youre contradicting yourself.


and you totally proved my point, guild vs guild pvp is the simplest and easiest way to run a server and prove to have the least amount of headaches. I'm speaking from experience, VZTZ had a population of a bit over 300+ at times (but in reality it was closer to 175-200 due to 2-boxing). And like Gnar said on another post, VZTZ was on a garage box that lasted 4 years and we had little dev and gm support . now with proper support like this one, I'm sure we can get 300+ again, probably 400+ all 1-boxing.


VZTZ was probably one of the more, if not most, successful pvp servers ive seen for an everquest emulated server and im basing my opinions of the 3 years i played there. I take it you've had some experience with an eq emu pvp server? Please, do tell of your experiences. Hopefully I'll be able to better understand the benefits of a faction-based pvp server, other than "it was like that in 1999".

[wehrmacht]

If the goal is to have a healthy population, teams iss pretty necessary. Nothing (not even Kringe zonecmd'n) will deter people more than not having people to start with.

Yea, this is what I've said about 5 billion times now. Since most TZVZ players are dumb as a hammer, let me explain it in a new way for them. You get two choices:

Would you rather play on a 300 population FFA server or a 500+ population teams server?

[Bombfist]

Would you rather play on a 300 population FFA server or a 500+ population teams server?

You keep saying how even the teams would be, so, I'd rather be able to kill 299 people instead of 250.


DUMn AS A HAMMA YA'LL

[Pudge]

Yea, this is what I've said about 5 billion times now. Since most TZVZ players are dumb as a hammer, let me explain it in a new way for them. You get two choices:

Would you rather play on a 300 population FFA server or a 500+ population teams server?

auto-guild. FFA but whenever you start a new char, be automatically joined to "newb guild" which lets you connect with other players. i understand teams will let you really have more comradery, but teams hurt a server long-term imo. another poster suggested teams up untill a certain level.. i never thought of this and it is a unique idea.. might work but then again detracts from certain aspects of pvp. i would say just leave it at ffa, have an auto-guild to help new players, and leave it at that. as long as ppl have a sense of community, they will likely continue on the server (unless discouraging things happen to them on a daily basis - such as trains, if they are allowed).

[Envious]

Teams is better, there is no real debate. Its only that teams will prolly not work with a pop of 50, 100, 150, 200, maybe not until like 500? The real problem with them, is everyone will end up neut or good for druids and bards. Hard to do some of the later content (Kunark is later for me... Lol) without the resist buffs... and pvp without having the chance at the resist buff is suck.

And I loved all the foreigners... Scarlet Colored Vampires were always up until 10am to pvp with, Skorpy and all the russians showing up "Privet", "Group?". Teams did foster some camaraderie for me.

[Envious]

Bombfist, if you want so many targets, you should be a proponent of teams. Cause this is how it really works out.
500 Total players

200 Goods
100 Neuts
200 Bads

Play the neuts, and you have 400 people that cant even join your guild to get away from you.

Hell, most likely with how everyone knows how fucking godly bards are, it will be like this
225 Lights
225 Neuts
50 Darks


And the dark team had clerics... just no rangers / bards / druids / pallies.

[wehrmacht]

Stop with the TZ bullshit. Three teams is less balanced than two and it's too much of a risk not knowing what the population will be. If you want teams, two is the only viable choice.

[Xantille]

Teams is better, there is no real debate. Its only that teams will prolly not work with a pop of 50, 100, 150, 200, maybe not until like 500? The real problem with them, is everyone will end up neut or good for druids and bards. Hard to do some of the later content (Kunark is later for me... Lol) without the resist buffs... and pvp without having the chance at the resist buff is suck.

And I loved all the foreigners... Scarlet Colored Vampires were always up until 10am to pvp with, Skorpy and all the russians showing up "Privet", "Group?". Teams did foster some camaraderie for me.

I loved SCV, Dark Gothic (was guilded w/ them for a while), and broken-English guildchats everywhere. "Mem blur fuk" on SotG's Nagafen raid was a Xantille-Altis production. I was an honorary dirty communist after that.

With regards to two teams, I'm still concerned that a majority of the server will be on my team in some fashion. Three teams gives me more options, but then you risk one team being completely undermanned. FFA is still the best format, imo.

I would not be averse to hardcoded teams during early levels, since I'm sure people will be grinding their fucking faces off for the first couple weeks of the server. I have no idea how hard this would be to implement.

In before retarded Wehrmacht post below.

[Aerist]

With regards to two teams, I'm still concerned that a majority of the server will be on my team in some fashion. Three teams gives me more options, but then you risk one team being completely undermanned. FFA is still the best format, imo.

I think this pretty much summarizes what a teams server would end up becoming. In an ideal world yes there would be two nice balanced teams and a few top guilds on each team competing. However reality is there will be 1 top guild, and after a few months of not getting loot, the people playing the opposing team will just jump ship to the side getting the loot.

If its going to be teams, 3 teams would be my suggestion, however FFA is your only real chance to not blue it up on the red server.

You say FFA means less population, and you're right, because if you had teams pvp there would be a LOT of bluebies playing on the winning team camping pixels without fear because the top guild can't kill them.


my 2cp

Shody

[wehrmacht]

because if you had teams pvp there would be a LOT of bluebies playing on the winning team camping pixels

Wow, you just described TZVZ down to the letter and it was FFA. How many times did Heresy do Hate and Fear? A million? How many times did Rexx do warrior epic? Like 8?

[Terpuntine]

Its assumed that team based pvp will encourage people on the same team to work together. How about the reality that if the guild cannot pvp others on their team they will simply train etc...

Lets face it we are all born elitists and in no way does sharing pixels sound appealing. Evil team will easily trump good team in numbers for the sole reason that the races are cooler.

Guild vs. Guild pvp is the way to go

[Nug]

FFA is the most obvious and logical answer.

[Icecometus]

FFA is the most obvious and logical answer.

This. Cross teaming is gonna suck. No rules at all and NPC buffing enabled pls ;)

[georgie]

i'm not a fan of faction based pvp, but i think it could be a good idea because having 1 guild being op in pve and the other guilds fighting eachother struggling it makes more of a balance of just 1guild vs 1 guild kinda

[jbs89]

the irony is, WoW is a faction-based pvp game, which is what youre proposing. it also sounds like you want nec/sk on one side, and clerics/pal on the other. So once again youre contradicting yourself.


and you totally proved my point, guild vs guild pvp is the simplest and easiest way to run a server and prove to have the least amount of headaches. I'm speaking from experience, VZTZ had a population of a bit over 300+ at times (but in reality it was closer to 175-200 due to 2-boxing). And like Gnar said on another post, VZTZ was on a garage box that lasted 4 years and we had little dev and gm support . now with proper support like this one, I'm sure we can get 300+ again, probably 400+ all 1-boxing.


VZTZ was probably one of the more, if not most, successful pvp servers ive seen for an everquest emulated server and im basing my opinions of the 3 years i played there. I take it you've had some experience with an eq emu pvp server? Please, do tell of your experiences. Hopefully I'll be able to better understand the benefits of a faction-based pvp server, other than "it was like that in 1999".


then go run with the bluebies; if you want to pvp Faction based PvP promotes diversity where FFA promotes oh 1 or two uber guilds with their drama.. sounds like some blueberry stuff; you can do that already go hand in your Book of Discord ... its simple

[wehrmacht]

If you're voting FFA and you're not already in a guild, you're completely out of your mind. There will be 1-2 guilds in control of every worthwhile xp and loot zone in the game and if you zone into it, you'll be dead after about 2 seconds.

My 60 man UO guild may come to this server when it opens too. Do you really want to have to deal with that anytime you zone into guk? It will make Heresy domination of box 1.0 look tame in comparison. At least with teams, you might be able to put together a force big enough to survive 5 minutes.

If they make a rule set that allows 1 guild on the server to dominate everyone that badly, population will drop faster than you can imagine.

[naez]

we should be able to vote fgts off team

http://i.imgur.com/XcbEK.gif

[Aerist]

My 60 man UO guild may come to this server when it opens too. Do you really want to have to deal with that anytime you zone into guk? It will make Heresy domination of box 1.0 look tame in comparison. At least with teams, you might be able to put together a force big enough to survive 5 minutes.


Yes, it's called pvp

[wehrmacht]

Yes, it's called pvp

It's not PvP. It's automatically winning the server by starting with a guild on day 1 while most other people start solo and helpless.

Having teams mitigates the power of people doing that on day 1 much better than FFA does.

[Pudge]

we should be able to vote fgts off team

http://i.imgur.com/XcbEK.gif

i actually tried thinking about this and coming up with a way to make teams viable. started as a response in either this thread or another, but i never posted it because in the end it seemed not-so-great. but ended up saving it because it was so long i felt like it would be a waste not to keep. here it is (also i wrote when drunk so sorry if it doesnt make perfect sense):


FFA is the way to go. in FFA, guild are still free to team up in a temporary alliance in order to take another opposing guild out.. it happened often on vztz.

in order to help newbs out who dont have a guild, just make an auto-guild that you start out in when you create a char. that way newbs have instant friends and a way to chat and get together.

But, thinking about how to make teams work... like i said before, any race/class/deity should be able to join either team (2 team server). and no starting areas.. BUT, like Tarwine is going to have on his server, you should be allowed to attack your own team, except "there will be consequences" (i dont know what he has in mind). but it would be cool if there was a way you could get booted off your team, into a 3rd "no team" or "exiled" status. like if killing a char on your own team gave you 1 point, and taking a death from someone on your team also gave you .5 of a point, and after getting a total of 20 points, your became "exiled" and have a different color name (maybe.. red? players from either side would have the same color name once exiled)- and maybe you could VERY slowly work back to your own team over time, like -1 point per week, automatically applied by the server.

these "exiled" ppl would still only be able to guild with ppl in their original team (exiled or not).... until perhaps killing -not dying, only killing- 60 DIFFERENT characters, and all on unique IPs, who are on the team they got exiled from. would have to only count at level 50+.. anyway, the idea is after enough slaying of your original 'team' then you could have option to transfer teams, to the opposing side. (maybe killing the same char/IP could count if the kills were at least a week apart or whatever)

o and finally, killing an Exiled player who was on your team would not count as a same-team kill (no risk of becoming an exiled player yourself by killing an exiled) - however, if the Exiled kills his own team he will be at another +1 to his points.. although he will also get +.5 if he DIES to his own team.. this means the Exiled, if he wants to return to his team, should completely avoid them until his points return to below 20.

this way you could have teams, as well as the ability to prevent spies, and make it difficult for ppl to remain teamed if they're purposely acting against other team members (KSing, randomly attacking, etc.) effectively, you allow both "FFA" and "team" playstyle; ppl CAN play FFA, it would just make life more difficult for them, because they are 1) now everyone's official enemy and 2) can still only guild with ppl who started on their original team.. no guilding with other exileds who started on the opposite side.

I imagine the dominant guild on the server would be comprised of mostly Exileds. They will be the enemy of everybody, including their original team.

[Heywood]

then go run with the bluebies; if you want to pvp Faction based PvP promotes diversity where FFA promotes oh 1 or two uber guilds with their drama.. sounds like some blueberry stuff; you can do that already go hand in your Book of Discord ... its simple

Hahah oh my. First your main argument was "verant wanted faction based pvp" and I debunked your theory by letting you know that Rallos Zek was a Guild v Guild pvp server which was just as successful as tz and vz. Not only that but you even admitted that Rallos Zek was the first pvp server.

Then you say that eq is harder and I should play WoW because it's easier. However it's YOU who wants this server to be like wow, with a Good vs Bad server. Eq is too hard for me? I have stated that I played on Rallos Zek, you know, the server with item loot and where ANYBODY in lvl range could attack you? Yea, that's probably "easier" than every other pvp server eq had. What was I thinking.

NOW you're trying to imply that I'm a "bluesbie"? In the 7+ years I've played between eqlive and emu pvp, I have never been called that haha. Goes to show, the more you write, the more it's evident that you're ignorant to the pvp cause. You never did answer the question, where have you pvp'd that you're so adamant that faction pvp is the way to go? People have already exposed the flaws in faction based pvp, but instead of trying to refute the statements, all you do is talk out of your ass and say asinine stuff like "go play wow, you don't belong here. I want a server where there's two factions, where Paladins are on one side and shamans are on the other" and "you're a bluesbie, you want a server where everyone attacks each other. I want a server where half the population can't attack each other."


I am done proving you wrong, time and time again sir.

[Abacab "The REAL truth"]

It's not PvP. It's automatically winning the server by starting with a guild on day 1 while most other people start solo and helpless.

Having teams mitigates the power of people doing that on day 1 much better than FFA does.

Isn't that how the world works?

People surrounding themselves with the most competent people that take and follow orders is the very basics of power and control... Cavemen didn't fight mammoths solo, they recruited the strongest to go out and beat the beast so they could get fat off it's spoils, it was mutual protection and alliances that either made or broke nations.

To say this is any different in a video game where people will contest commodity through force is naive, people will ALWAYS bolster their numbers, purge the bad, keep the good and no matter if it's FFA or teams there will be a small 2% of the population controlling 99% of the content and that is the nature of the machine

[wehrmacht]

You're talking about monopolies and there's no reason to create a rule set that enforces the power of monopolies day 1 of the server.

[Abacab "The REAL truth"]

You're talking about monopolies and there's no reason to create a rule set that enforces the power of monopolies day 1 of the server.

You're such a socialist bro

PvP is about as ultra-capitalist as you get, if you want something then you take it, if you can't take it alone get more people to assist you because chances are they want a piece of the pie too. FFA PvP allows for people to group to reach common goals and smash the inferior with a bigger roster of skilled players, this is how it should be done because the alternative is rather lame.

If you chose to do teams and socialize the aspect of PvP by carebearing them from the harsh reality of "if you're not good enough..." or "you're just not charismatic/popular enough..." by forcing them into teams then there is no real risk, we can all hold hands and do plane of fear with 180+ halflings, dwarfs, and high elfs in some gigantic zerg coalition just to beat some 30 player darkie guild. Then you're on exacerbating the problem of one large force completely dominating all content and what makes it worse is you can't do shit about it unless you roll on the opposing team and make a bigger zerg force and play zone ping pong.

In short what are you going to do about some good team guild that has 90% of the talented player base, that competes and takes 85% of all the content if you're also on the good team? If you don't get in that guild through some major cocksucking (I.E if some officer just doesn't like you) you're never going to get camps because you cannot handle them through PvP by normal means and it becomes just as blue as porject1999 because there is not shit you can do besides roll evil and attempt to dislodge them (and most likely fail due to numbers/skill/gear)

FFA will prevent majordomo guilds that control the entire faction and run the server into the ground from locking out less-abled players from achieving anything past black burrow where they will be picked off by the opposing faction with no reinforcements because they are single, lone straglers

[jbs89]

You're talking about monopolies and there's no reason to create a rule set that enforces the power of monopolies day 1 of the server.

everything this guy said has been 100% true


Hahah oh my. First your main argument was "verant wanted faction based pvp" and I debunked your theory by letting you know that Rallos Zek was a Guild v Guild pvp server which was just as successful as tz and vz. Not only that but you even admitted that Rallos Zek was the first pvp server.

Then you say that eq is harder and I should play WoW because it's easier. However it's YOU who wants this server to be like wow, with a Good vs Bad server. Eq is too hard for me? I have stated that I played on Rallos Zek, you know, the server with item loot and where ANYBODY in lvl range could attack you? Yea, that's probably "easier" than every other pvp server eq had. What was I thinking.

NOW you're trying to imply that I'm a "bluesbie"? In the 7+ years I've played between eqlive and emu pvp, I have never been called that haha. Goes to show, the more you write, the more it's evident that you're ignorant to the pvp cause. You never did answer the question, where have you pvp'd that you're so adamant that faction pvp is the way to go? People have already exposed the flaws in faction based pvp, but instead of trying to refute the statements, all you do is talk out of your ass and say asinine stuff like "go play wow, you don't belong here. I want a server where there's two factions, where Paladins are on one side and shamans are on the other" and "you're a bluesbie, you want a server where everyone attacks each other. I want a server where half the population can't attack each other."


I am done proving you wrong, time and time again sir.

you debunked my theory? They saw what a trainwreck Guild Drama pvp servers were and quickly made a server based off game factions not Drama nerd factions; confirming what Ive been saying this entire time, you keep trying to dance around the fact that "First is the Worst" philosophy; and you keep priding cause the No-Man's Land guild trash server was first

I dont see one flaw exposed??? THERE IS NO FLAW EXCEPT PVE; which should suffer on a PVP server... open hostile No-Man's Land with 1 god guild... thats gonna be lame; thats for egotistical jerks

Faction Based is Story-Orietented and it makes things ALOT more interesting....

that way there is ATLEAST 2 guilds on server...

Id like to see an ACTUAL ISSUE with Dark or Light side not having another class...

Shamans can heal a raid fine right??

Dont Dark Elves get Cleric or something as well?? I cant remember

[Abacab "The REAL truth"]

This is how teams will play out if let's say we have a population of 350 constant in a perfect situation with minimal guilds and low "guildless" pop:


Good guilds composing of 44.27% (155 players) of the server population
---------------

Guild 1 62
Guild 2 37
Guild 3 28
Guild 4 16
Guild 5 12


Evil guilds composing of 53.72% (188 players) of the server population
---------------

Guild 1 71
Guild 2 39
Guild 3 38
Guild 4 22
Guild 5 18


The remaining 2% of the population remains guildless

Essentially guilds 1-3 on both the evil and good team would have the force required to contest raid encounters and rare spawns, each side has one "zerg" guild with two other smaller guilds capable of doing the same feat.

Over time one guild from each side begins to press dominance and smaller guilds pool into the larger ones (guilds 4-5 combine to contribute to the raiding scene) now each side has 4 major guilds and this continue to fracture and pool into the zerg guilds until only 3 guilds remain on each side.

The largest and most powerful guilds compete within their faction to maintain dominance of being majordomo, the guild who calls the shots for their faction, it will be that guild who contests the opposing faction on raid encounters while the lower tier guilds begin to seclude themselves to casual raiding and pvp while the majordomo rakes in all the good and talented members and presses content.

By the end of the run only 1 guild from each faction will have the skill, numbers, and dedication to contest raid encounters and will control their factions economy, raid system, recruitment, camp rules, and rotations within the faction because there is no PvP recourse outside the opposing faction....

This leads to the smaller guilds and unguilded people to be completely stepped on in terms of camps, it allows them to be "ignored" if they breech the majordomo's "rule set" and will be subject to being prey'd upon by the opposing faction with no recourse by over half the server due to internal politics.

This is why FFA is a must, to end internal faction politics and majordomo style management of a faction

[Heywood]

You hit the nail with the guild v guild/capitalism comparison.

What you described in your scenario is exactly what you said, a perfect world situation.


However, this is what I think will be a likelier scenario. Let's say 60 percent of the pop roll evil and 40 percent roll good. As time goes by, the weaker portion of good population reroll an evil character so that the rest of the evil population won't be able to gank them. Over time, it turns 75% evil, 25% good. It creates a snowball effect and will dwindle the lower faction even more. Not to mention that two strong guilds in the same faction won't be able to pvp each other for bosses, so they'll resort to training and other low-ball tactics.

Under a faction v faction server, it doesn't promote Pvp, it promotes nut hugging the stronger faction. A stronger guild in a faction pvp server is offering protection for the entire faction not just the guild. If an evil guild is trying naggy, other non-guilded evils can pve in solb without fear. And in return, if a good guild tries to contest naggy, the non-guilded evils will hold hands with the evil guild to get naggy down.

In a guild v guild server, the stronger guild is only offering protection for those in the guild. If a guild is trying naggy, you can bet your sweet ass they'll pvp until no one else is in zone. And they'll be constantly be looking over their backs.

And who cares about the server being "story oriented"? We are not asking for a lore-focused server. We are asking for a PVP server, not a FV server.

[Giddian]

As long as the server is item loot enough players will stay good to field gank groups and farm the twinks of the nuthuggers. It could be heaven for the real pvp players with soooo many targets.

[wehrmacht]

When people talk about FFA, they always leave out all the downfalls it has which are about 100x more than teams based. On a FFA server, you're basically required to join a guild or you might as well quit because if you don't, you'll rarely find a group for XP, people will just kill you. You'll be forced to solo 99% of the time. Many classes are not only terrible for soloing for XP but terrible for solo PvP as well. With the ridiculous stuff Null wants to do with the resist system, even less classes are viable for solo PvP. So this brings up the first few critical flaws of FFA. You have to find a powerful guild to join or there's no point in playing at all.

Even if you do find a guild to join, if it isn't one of the top two on the server, you'll have access to no useful zones at all which means you'll have no equipment and won't be able to kill anyone other. Just another reason to make tons of people quit. With team based, your team will have zone control of certain areas and you'll actually be able to play the game no matter how shitty of a guild you're in or if you're a casual or solo player so there won't be a mass exodus off the server.

I'm not against FFA, it's just that EQ is a horrible game for that rule set. If you insist on a FFA game, you should be playing UO instead since it's a much better suited game for it. The only PvP that really makes sense at all for EQ is team based.

There's no reason to choose FFA with all the negatives it has that affect population when you should only be choosing options that increase population in order to make sure the server is successful

[notahipster]

http://i3.glitter-graphics.org/pub/708/708353ktyzp004l8.gif

[Heywood]

I like how you use comments like "100x more downfalls" and "you'll be forced to solo 99% of the time" as if it's backed by scientific research.

You and I both know that's simply not true. We were both in fish bait in vztz, obviously not the "strongest" guild on the server at the time, but yet we were able to frequently farm fear, lguk, hate with ease.

You make it sound like joining a guild is bad. That's usually how people make friends. Not to say people won't make friends outside of guilds. Even then, in a faction based server, there's going to be guilds, so what were you trying to prove.

[pasi]

It really comes down to whether or not we want to try something different or just recreate VZTZ. I don't think we can assume that just because this is a Rogean/99 server, that we're going to have a large population (at least after the short term).

Again, I don't think there is going to be anything that will deter people more from the game than not having people to play with on a guild vs guild server. I agree that there is nothing wrong with essentially forcing players to join a guild to progress. For me, the issue is how soon. How soon should you be required to join a guild upon starting on this server? If you expect solo players to find a guild right out of the gate before they know people on the server, you are delusional. Some of the players will stick around, but the majority will quit.

Keep in mind that with no boxes and slow exp, a guild is going to be even more necessary than it was on VZTZ.

There are a lot of issues with teams, but most of these are not that hard to fix. Off the top of my head: Classes not available on both teams? Fuck lore, both teams have all classes. Crossteaming? Hardcode it. Two guilds on the same team going after the same raid target? Make raid zones (plus say, LGuk) FFA.

I don't have an answer to population imbalance, but I know there are people like me who are going to try to be on the underpopulated team. It's not too hard to figure out which team will be underpopulated, you just roll against Mantille.

[Aerist]

There are a lot of issues with teams, but most of these are not that hard to fix. Off the top of my head: Classes not available on both teams? Fuck lore, both teams have all classes. Crossteaming? Hardcode it. Two guilds on the same team going after the same raid target? Make raid zones (plus say, LGuk) FFA.


Actually, to be completely honest this sounds like a pretty damn good compromise to the FFA/Teams set up.

Especially the whole FFA in raid zones.

Would meet wehrmacts desire to have a teams server, and the FFA group of being able to kill same faction people on raid mobs.


ps: probably not that hard to code either.

Shody

[redghosthunter]

Seems like from what is being said, were all screwed either way.

A. Good vs Evil
most people roll up evil chars, 75% evil vis 25% good. Evil wins again and again. Good chars quit. Ya end up with a 85% evil side. The Evil side cant pvp themselves.. so basically ya back at pve.

B. Teams
Dominating 1 or 2 guilds kill everyone, and everything is locked down. New players start up and quit short time later. Sounds like what happened already over at VzTz X 3 . Isnt the rule 3 strikes and ya out?

So the only intelligent option would be... We need a totally new system.

Only thing coming to mind is a system, where death mattered and was permanent. Due to the constant chaos no dominating players could emerge.

~Fast exp would be needed or pvp would be stuck at low lvls.
~Full Loot of dead
~New players encouraged to band together pvp-- to get gear looted from strong players/guilds. Gear is the prob of any new player. Want gear? Go pvp :)
~Big name players--- constantly having to rebuild. Sooner or later everyone dies. Think about it... who ends up with the most of the Pvp kills? A few super tweak, insiders.

Pvp for the LOVE of it! Not to stroke your EGOs.

[Badmartigan]

If you're voting FFA and you're not already in a guild, you're completely out of your mind. There will be 1-2 guilds in control of every worthwhile xp and loot zone in the game and if you zone into it, you'll be dead after about 2 seconds.

My 60 man UO guild may come to this server when it opens too. Do you really want to have to deal with that anytime you zone into guk? It will make Heresy domination of box 1.0 look tame in comparison. At least with teams, you might be able to put together a force big enough to survive 5 minutes.

If they make a rule set that allows 1 guild on the server to dominate everyone that badly, population will drop faster than you can imagine.

it wasnt like that on RZ>.... not everyone that plays PVP is a random PK that kills everyone but their own guild dude.

[Dojii]

http://i3.glitter-graphics.org/pub/708/708353ktyzp004l8.gif

dont go

[wehrmacht]

Actually, to be completely honest this sounds like a pretty damn good compromise to the FFA/Teams set up.

Especially the whole FFA in raid zones.

Would meet wehrmacts desire to have a teams server, and the FFA group of being able to kill same faction people on raid mobs.

Shody

Already thought of this. Sounds good on paper but works out worse than FFA or Teams in practice. Places like Karnors and Sebillis would be considered "raid zones" under this system and those zones are where the majority of dark vs light PvP would have taken place. What you would end up with is a broken FFA system with really no benefits of the team system at all. It's the worst of both systems with none of the benefits.

[Abacab "The REAL truth"]

People choose PvP because they want the option to kill people, it seems like everyone is forgetting this notion and wants "security" in the form of teams so you can collect your pixels without much threat

If you want teams and "contested" zones so badly then just go play WoW and sit around quest zones all day ganking people of the opposing faction then retreating back to a safe zone when you begin to get overwhelmed.

[Icecometus]

That about sums it up.

[wehrmacht]

What examples do we have from a hard coded team server (sullon zek)? Evil team on top forever, 100% of the server history with one team dominating the others.


Probably because the 2 best guilds on the server (Ruin & Hate) were on evil team and there was a bad diety selection system that ensured good team would never be powerful. Change it to two teams instead and there's no reason either team would be lopsided in power.

The difference is that even if one team dominated the server and are the only ones clearing ToV, the other team is at least doing Plane of Growth and other zones. Under a FFA system, the top two guilds will take all those zones while everyone on the server that isn't in one of those guilds quits then the server dies.

[Pudge]

none of you bros like my combination teams/ffa idea? (ability to "vote ppl off" to be exiled, or switch teams via aggression)?

seems pretty viable imo. (also drunk again so this may influence by opinion)

[pasi]

It's definitely a good idea.

Really though - it's not like the server is going to succeed or fail based on whether or not its teams or FFA. We're all going to play it anyways.

It's personal preference at some point and basically boils down to whether or not we want to recreate VZTZ or switch up the dynamics a bit. FFA out of the gates is going to result in the exact same result that VZTZ has seen on every(?) incarnation of the box - a 2 guild system with mostly only the same people playing. Again, thats not a failing server and it's what a good deal of people want.

[redghosthunter]

Seems like from what is being said, were all screwed either way.

A. Good vs Evil
most people roll up evil chars, 75% evil vis 25% good. Evil wins again and again. Good chars quit. Ya end up with a 85% evil side. The Evil side cant pvp themselves.. so basically ya back at pve.

B. Teams
Dominating 1 or 2 guilds kill everyone, and everything is locked down. New players start up and quit short time later. Sounds like what happened already over at VzTz X 3 . Isnt the rule 3 strikes and ya out?

So the only intelligent option would be... We need a totally new system.

Only thing coming to mind is a system, where death mattered and was permanent. Due to the constant chaos no dominating players could emerge.

~Fast exp would be needed or pvp would be stuck at low lvls.
~Full Loot of dead
~New players encouraged to band together pvp-- to get gear looted from strong players/guilds. Gear is the prob of any new player. Want gear? Go pvp :)
~Big name players--- constantly having to rebuild. Sooner or later everyone dies. Think about it... who ends up with the most of the Pvp kills? A few super tweak, insiders.

Pvp for the LOVE of it! Not to stroke your EGOs.

What about this???

[Nug]

When I explain team based / deity based / FFA based EQ PVP servers to people, the biggest interest sparked is from the idea of FFA. You might bring in a lot more non-EQ'ers if you can deliver a good FFA atmosphere. However, I really doubt all this rhetoric really matters at all. Pretty sure the group in charge already has a direction they're going.

[wehrmacht]

Really though - it's not like the server is going to succeed or fail based on whether or not its teams or FFA. We're all going to play it anyways.


Yes it will. All the TZVZ people will play no matter what the rule set is but all the casual players, people that aren't starting with a guild on day 1, and people with little PvP experience will end up quitting under FFA.

[Heywood]

When I explain team based / deity based / FFA based EQ PVP servers to people, the biggest interest sparked is from the idea of FFA. You might bring in a lot more non-EQ'ers if you can deliver a good FFA atmosphere. However, I really doubt all this rhetoric really matters at all. Pretty sure the group in charge already has a direction they're going.


that's pretty much why I stopped posting on the drawbacks of faction vs faction.


The devs know what works, and what doesnt. people might ignorantly suggest what the server should be like, but the devs know better.

[Macken]

@ wormoct

It seems like you and reality go together like oil and water. Ruin isn't even in the top 20 guilds on SZ. One of the top 2? palease.

I had more points on just one of my toons than your whole guild did bro. That's right, I beat your whole guild all by myself. Thats really sad man. I would be embarrased to even mention Ruin and top guild in the same sentence. Only the most veteran players have even heard of Ruin. It was a noobie guild bro, full of 45 day old noobies, who got griefed when the real pvprs showed up a few weeks after server start.

If you want to believe Ruin was anything but a 45 day guild that got griefed off server once everyone else caught up in levels, thats fine for yourself. But, if you have any designs on anyone thinking you have any credibility whatsoever, you should drop the whole " I saw it all go down from the very beginning till the end" crap and the "Ruin is a SZ top guild" junk. Almost any SZ guild you name was better than Ruin. I mean savage wolves had more points than you guys. Come on man.

[Amuk]

I can see the pro's and con's of both rules, hard to say which would be more fun =)

[wehrmacht]

I had more points on just one of my toons than your whole guild did bro.

Probably because you get negative points for killing level 5's with a level 60. Kronar was in the guild and he had the lowest amount of points serverwide for killing thousands of level 5's with a 60 necro. I sat in Misty Thicket for about 3 days straight doing nothing but tstaffing level 5 halflings to death. Killed probably 1000 of them in 3 days back when server population was 3k+.

[Macken]

Thats amazing considering level 5's were immune to pvp.

[Macken]

Your memory is shot bro.

[JayDee]

I sat in Misty Thicket for about 3 days straight doing nothing but tstaffing level 5 halflings to death. Killed probably 1000 of them in 3 days back when server population was 3k+.

Holy Shit bro I wish I had something like that to put on my resume.

[Abacab "The REAL truth"]

Put in that B-side Biggie Smalls tape, Wehrmacht about to drop it hot

[Giovanni]

I forgets but I don't think the evil team had halfings and they def didn't have druids or rangers.

You could roll an evil team halfling warrior initially, but they patched it.

[Macken]

SZ didn't come out until Velious.

Not much of a Marvel, unless you are wanting to debate with wormoct. I'm sure you and he can get together and make up alot of false memories together.

[Heywood]

SZ didn't come out until Velious.

Not much of a Marvel, unless you are wanting to debate with wormoct. I'm sure you and he can get together and make up alot of false memories together.

+3

[wehrmacht]

45-50% Evil
30-35% Newt
20% Good


Your numbers are off. Goods weren't a tiny team, they just had no organized, powerful guilds.

August '02

* Good: 1485 - 33.2%
* Neutral: 1201 - 26.9%
* Evil: 1783 - 39.9%

# January '03

* Good: 2310 - 33.9%
* Neutral: 1675 - 24.6%
* Evil: 2834 - 41.6%

[georgie]

I feel like with teams, you always end up hating your own team more than your enemies. With that said, teams are probably going to be necessary if there is no boxing allowed. Solo players starting on a non-boxing server are pretty screwed. This is only amplified if they are a pure melee class or a class that doesn't solo well.

i agree.:)

[mimixownzall]

Teams is a bad idea... being unable to kill someone for reasons other than level are dumb. If you set up teams you have to stop X-teaming by hardcoding blocks on beneficial spells.. which once again is stupid because sometimes you wanna stay a quick buff on someone you're killing.

Okay.. so now that the teams idea is dead... let's talk levels... 4? 8? 10? 15?

I think 4 is good. It stops people in classic from entering the planes unless they are within range of 50s, but it keeps things relatively balanced as far as resists and what not go. When Kunark goes live I'd be all for bumping it up to 8 levels.

Dead? Clearly more people want teams.

Only those who already have their 100-man Zerg force (Heresy) ready to go on launch want FFA. They want to control the server knowing that the chances of another 100-man Zerg force forming up will be slim. With teams you can have a couple of guilds forming up to even the odds.

Teams is more favorable for mass pvp. And fuck level limits. Only way level limits would work is if there is a way to tag someone for open pvp (no level restriction) if they heal a person who is fighting someone out of the healers level range (invulnerable healer). I don't know if that's possible since there doesn't seem to be an "in combat" tag like in wow.

[Heywood]

Dead? Clearly more people want teams.
Clearly when you say more people, you mean the 10-15 people who regularly troll these forums?

Only those who already have their 100-man Zerg force (Heresy) ready to go on launch want FFA. They want to control the server knowing that the chances of another 100-man Zerg force forming up will be slim. With teams you can have a couple of guilds forming up to even the odds.
Heresy a zerg? that's news to me, and I'm actually one of the few people who would always fight AGAINST heresy for the last 3 years.


Teams is more favorable for mass pvp. And fuck level limits. Only way level limits would work is if there is a way to tag someone for open pvp (no level restriction) if they heal a person who is fighting someone out of the healers level range (invulnerable healer). I don't know if that's possible since there doesn't seem to be an "in combat" tag like in wow.

I kind of have mixed feelings over this. if you have no level limits, you'll have low lifes lvl 50s ganking poor lowbies in mistmoore/sola/paw/etc. But then again, level limits do create those invulnerable healers. I think we would see more 50s ganking 20s than invul healers, but that's just me.

[hostgator116]

It's good video. Thanks for share.

[Salty]

Only those who already have their 100-man Zerg force (Heresy) ready to go on launch want FFA.


Heresy isn't going to zerg day 1, not even day 40. They won't even be the first to 50, and will ding 50 a month after the first guy does.

They don't zerg unless you force them to.


The only people who will be zergin on red99 are the people who will be entering highly inexperienced at PvP; ie. you. It's a pretty obvious and logical system if you have played through 3-4 wipes on the only pvp server EMU-wide.

[Aenor]

We already had that thread, it's 16 pages long

Read it, wasn't much there but alot of peen-gazing. Please do not use the term FFA unless you are referring a server where anybody can attack anybody at any time, i.e. Vanguard PvP.

If by "FFA" you mean "Bluebie PK vs. Anti 4 lvl spread Rallos PvP," please re-title this thread appropriately.

[Heywood]

Heresy isn't going to zerg day 1, not even day 40. They won't even be the first to 50, and will ding 50 a month after the first guy does.

They don't zerg unless you force them to.


The only people who will be zergin on red99 are the people who will be entering highly inexperienced at PvP; ie. you. It's a pretty obvious and logical system if you have played through 3-4 wipes on the only pvp server EMU-wide.

salty, you punching dragons on red99 bru?

[pasi]

The only people who will be zergin on red99 are the people who will be entering highly inexperienced at PvP; ie. you.

Tyene - I like you bud, but this is kind of funny coming from you.

[Haul]

My vote is for ffa, and item loot is sounding better as each day goes by. It's all up to the devs though, not us. If you never played Rallos Zek back in the day I can see why you'd be turned off by its hardcoreness. You'd probably get owned.

[Doors]

It's hard to choose. Both are equally terrible and shitty.

[Macken]

My vote is for ffa, and item loot is sounding better as each day goes by. It's all up to the devs though, not us. If you never played Rallos Zek back in the day I can see why you'd be turned off by its hardcoreness. You'd probably get owned.

So hardcore that you run around naked because you are afraid to wear your gear?

Would they get owned because they were naked or because they weren't hardcore enough?

[Salty]

Tyene - I like you bud, but this is kind of funny coming from you.

vztz was my first pvp server besides 1 month of Vallon Zek somewhere in 1999/2000.

So you're welcome for the funnies?

Inexperienced players at pvp against people who have played the pvp game 5+ years is a high indication of who is going to be zergin whom.


Anyone who thinks Heresy is a "zerg" guild is retarded. I've never seen them zerg unless people force them to zerg. The pvp vet community enjoys having huge amounts of people to kill, not small amounts.

[mimixownzall]

I kind of have mixed feelings over this. if you have no level limits, you'll have low lifes lvl 50s ganking poor lowbies in mistmoore/sola/paw/etc. But then again, level limits do create those invulnerable healers. I think we would see more 50s ganking 20s than invul healers, but that's just me.

Yes, you do have high levels ganking low levels but that creates a lot of pvp.

All it takes is a tell to a couple of high levels in a top notch guild.

It isn't like the selfish douchebags you see on blue servers. People on PVP servers like to PVP. You ask for help against some douche who is killing newbs in, say, Oasis, you get results.

Besides, ganking low levels does get old. The only time I did it was just in passing (to inconvenience them) or if I wanted to draw out some high levels. Even then, going to a dungeon and clearing it out was more fun.

So exciting sitting in a dungeon and hitting / and enter 3 times a minute to see who is in zone. Then if you see someone you don't recognize, doing a /guildstatus name.

Like I've said before, the rules on SZ didn't kill the server, PoP did... /yawn @ douchebags seeing you and immediately running to the book before they decide to fight so they have an out. SoL helped too. Manaburn/Lifeburn was way lame.

[Pudge]

FFA is best

teams till level 40 after that, or the system i described above (imo)

item loot would be fun, but not as good for server pop. i propose a compromise: random chance at item loot. 1 in 7 kills will give ability to loot an item. you dont know till you actually click to loot whether you are able or not!

also, on the note of /who .. there is a thread right now on vztz forums about it. i would prefer to be able to /who from anywhere and see anybody. there will prob be a thread here about it so i will save my reasoning till then. trying not to post too much off topic

[wehrmacht]

Anyone who thinks Heresy is a "zerg" guild is retarded. I've never seen them zerg

First time I logged on TZVZ, population was like 60 people and half the people online were in Heresy. I level up a rogue and zone into guk, I see this giant ogre standing there named Kringe. I run up and attack him, backstab doesn't even work in PvP, he starts warping all over the screen and I take off running.

He starts sending me tells complaining about how it's too hard to hit halflings in PvP even while using /stick. So yea, choices were a) fight heresy zerg 1vs30 or b) fight some guy named kringe in guk. Quitting was the best option at the time.

[Heywood]

First time I logged on TZVZ, population was like 60 people and half the people online were in Heresy. I level up a rogue and zone into guk, I see this giant ogre standing there named Kringe. I run up and attack him, backstab doesn't even work in PvP, he starts warping all over the screen and I take off running.

He starts sending me tells complaining about how it's too hard to hit halflings in PvP even while using /stick. So yea, choices were a) fight heresy zerg 1vs30 or b) fight some guy named kringe in guk. Quitting was the best option at the time.


Haha, Sorry wer, but you're obviously trying too hard here. Did he also zone cmd you and make your computer explode?


I really don't like defending heresy, but I believe the only time i saw a lot of heresy was when they were trying cazic early 3.0. There must have been at the most 42. This was when us fish bait were at 100+. Now remember, most if not all of them were 2 boxing so in reality must be about 20 heresy playing. Hardly call that a Zerg. There's a guy who wants a 35+ guild! And i doubt that all of heresy will come back, and if they do, they all won't come back to heresy.

[lethdar]

Heresy has been dead for a while bros, just an FYI.