PvP Range

[juicedsixfo]

Originally Posted by C5BAMF [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

+/-4 level
+/-4 dynamic
Gives you a classic 8 level potential, with a modern balance of odds.
Also, remove the ability to con players other than Green (lower than current range), White (in range) & Red (higher than current range).
Come server launch, remove the "you are now attackable by levels X through X" notification if not already in stone to do so.

Down with this. Everyone in your level range should con even. And if they're going to do a dynamic this makes way more sense.

[Nirgon]

Part of what is great about EQ is conning things and how they rate against you. Everything in your range being even is very meh.

[Macken]

6-50 or you wear panties.

[Softcore PK]

Why not 2-50?

[Macken]

ok.

You win.

[Null]

Originally Posted by Macken [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No matter what lies are offered up to placate those who already know the dynamic system is crap, all will have to deal with the fallout: delayed launch, exploitation of the dynamic system, bugs weeks, months and years into the future, etc....

6-50 or you wear panties.

Other than assumptions of developer incompetence, why do you dislike the dynamic system?

[rankorr]

can we have FFA in the following zones please?


Permafrost
Sol-b
Lguk
kedge
planes

and later on..

hole
karnor
seb
HS
chardok
VP

[Macken]

Originally Posted by Null [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Other than assumptions of developer incompetence, why do you dislike the dynamic system?

Null,

The answer to that would be obvious to anyone who has pvp'd longer than 12 months. Do you have any pvp experience? What exactly are your credentials?


I know nothing of coding, that is the only reason i haven't launched a full fledged propoganda attack on your ass. The staff has exploded an A-bomb on the community moral.

Why must the staff continue to push non-classic and unwanted changes catered to the exact segment of the population that isn't attracted to pvp, while alienating those who are your exact target population?

Have you suggested to get rid of pve on p99 too? Why would you restrict pve on p99? Why would you restrict pvp on R99?

You coded +/- 7 (or someone did) on VZTZ and you couldn't find any pvp at all. There wasn't anyone in range. You log on. Check /who all. See no one. Log off. Server died. Going to go even faster with no /who all to check---Log on. check zone, check next zone over, check next zone after that, see people, waste time running over to find out they are all green. Get disgusted. Log off. Post on forums i told you so. Server dies.

Do you really need another History lesson?

I told you and your staff on VZTZ that pvp rules where counter productive and a misallocation of resources. Half a year later you quit over it and so did every other GM. Even Sirken finally figured it out and had enough guts to get rid of anti-pvp rules.

This is a pvp server yes? Everyone is expected to be over age 5 yes? On a game where the object is to KILL, we aren't going to coddle those who cry that they are being killed yes?

Is it safe to say if you had left well enough alone and just flipped the pvp switch that we would all be closer to the precious?

[Palemoon]

The objective is not TO KILL, the objective is to play Everquest, with the option of settleing disputes that arise in game through pvp.

If you want TO KILL, try Quake. 1999 rallos was not a 24/7 death match, I was there.

P.S. only persons moral going down is yours, as your posts take on a more and more desperate tone..

[Softcore PK]

Macken said a whole lot, but largely avoided Null's question. Red99 is not going to focus on pvp like VZTZ Macken, it's going to be EQ with pvp added in to it. If you don't enjoy pve, you probably shouldn't be playing EverQuest..