Play Nice Policy/LNS/RvR needs overhaul before Velious

[Swish]

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

While I think you could revamp the PNP policy to protect newer players and exclude the high end player, I personally don't think anyone on a pvp server should have an inherent right to safety. Many of the big guilds already have systems in place to power level and protect low level characters while they get set up on red and actively recruit anyone they can to replace the churn of the endgame raid scenes.

Being a new player on Rallos Zek, you had no inherent right to safety and the ability to be killed multiple times and harassed with item loss. The players formed communities and anti-pk alliances where they protected themselves in vigilante anti-pk groups that would protect new players as well as punish and ostracize undesirable players.

With current policy there is little reason for player interaction as you simply LNS without risk to the next zone and continue on your leveling process with no risk to yourself and no real way to punish a PK player as he can simply do the same. This creates a game play system where building fellowships with other players is unnecessary as you can solve all your problems yourself, which is against the very nature of a community driven game like Everquest.

good post, 5*

[HalflingWarrior]

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

While I think you could revamp the PNP policy to protect newer players and exclude the high end player, I personally don't think anyone on a pvp server should have an inherent right to safety. Many of the big guilds already have systems in place to power level and protect low level characters while they get set up on red and actively recruit anyone they can to replace the churn of the endgame raid scenes.

Being a new player on Rallos Zek, you had no inherent right to safety and the ability to be killed multiple times and harassed with item loss. The players formed communities and anti-pk alliances where they protected themselves in vigilante anti-pk groups that would protect new players as well as punish and ostracize undesirable players.

With current policy there is little reason for player interaction as you simply LNS without risk to the next zone and continue on your leveling process with no risk to yourself and no real way to punish a PK player as he can simply do the same. This creates a game play system where building fellowships with other players is unnecessary as you can solve all your problems yourself, which is against the very nature of a community driven game like Everquest.

Problem is that reputation means NOTHING here. There is no ostracizing a players poor behavior. In fact being the smelliest douche you can while remaining within the "ruleset" is openly encouraged.

Its the same thing on blue. People on live didn't act this way because your characters reputation meant something; and you didn't have 6 or 7 level 60 toons to fall back on

[red99playing]

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

While I think you could revamp the PNP policy to protect newer players and exclude the high end player, I personally don't think anyone on a pvp server should have an inherent right to safety. Many of the big guilds already have systems in place to power level and protect low level characters while they get set up on red and actively recruit anyone they can to replace the churn of the endgame raid scenes.

Being a new player on Rallos Zek, you had no inherent right to safety and the ability to be killed multiple times and harassed with item loss. The players formed communities and anti-pk alliances where they protected themselves in vigilante anti-pk groups that would protect new players as well as punish and ostracize undesirable players.

With current policy there is little reason for player interaction as you simply LNS without risk to the next zone and continue on your leveling process with no risk to yourself and no real way to punish a PK player as he can simply do the same. This creates a game play system where building fellowships with other players is unnecessary as you can solve all your problems yourself, which is against the very nature of a community driven game like Everquest.

Rallos Zek had a good risk mechanic to help deter grieving, Red99 Doesn't allow noobs to raid boss a twink down for two reasons most times.

1. No Item loot
2. Low server Pop
secret #3. YT Seekers with 60 oors and gear made of rmt bait

the risks that comes with pvp on this server is a loss of carried cash and PvE/ PVP potential in that zone for the next hour.

Players do need to interact with each other to progress for a multitude of reasons. PVP contest is definitely one of them.

[Clark]

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

While I think you could revamp the PNP policy to protect newer players and exclude the high end player, I personally don't think anyone on a pvp server should have an inherent right to safety. Many of the big guilds already have systems in place to power level and protect low level characters while they get set up on red and actively recruit anyone they can to replace the churn of the endgame raid scenes.

Being a new player on Rallos Zek, you had no inherent right to safety and the ability to be killed multiple times and harassed with item loss. The players formed communities and anti-pk alliances where they protected themselves in vigilante anti-pk groups that would protect new players as well as punish and ostracize undesirable players.

With current policy there is little reason for player interaction as you simply LNS without risk to the next zone and continue on your leveling process with no risk to yourself and no real way to punish a PK player as he can simply do the same. This creates a game play system where building fellowships with other players is unnecessary as you can solve all your problems yourself, which is against the very nature of a community driven game like Everquest.

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

good post, 5*

[krazyGlue]

Remove the pnp and put back exp loss

[Buhbuh]

I'm gonna assume Lime said something like,

There's 0 risk/ reward in mass PvP.

The whole point of the GMs implementing this current fast/ easy LNS policy for all parties involved was because they had a theory it would create more PvP fights over all of the targets in Norrath. It was a theory, and it didn't work. All it did was disenfranchise the winning side of any battle, letting people who came at the more organized side have free reign over Norrath mobs.

Right now on Red, if a losing side isn't doing well in mass PvP, they plug their buffs before everyone in the guild dies, call Force LNS, and leave unscathed to go get other targets.

It takes one engage on another guild for people to realize they are out-classed, out-manned and out-gunned. This means they avoid that guild at all costs.

It's generally blue as fuck, because what the winning side is rewarded with is having their mobs sniped around Norrath by a clearly lesser force.

If Azrael and all their allied guilds stomped us into the ground at KC last week, I would've wanted to be corpse camped. I would've expected it.

That was half the excitement in EQ - if you came at a massive force in PvP, you better fucking win.

The only way this will get changed without GMs involved is if all leaders of all guilds on the raid scene come together and agree to something, then present it to GMs unanimously.

Right now it's a real terrible rule set.

I don't agree that it should be wild-west shit, because LNS is something that should be able to be utilized.

But when it comes to mass PvP, there has to be a change. A good middle ground between what the rules are now and sitting on corpses all day even with LNS called is a lockout period for guilds who call LNS.

Currently, a losing guild is able to recover their bodies before the winning guild recuperates and kills the mob they were fighting over. A 30 minute lockout period from the contested areas before being able to LNS is ideal in Kunark.

Velious presents a whole new problem. Raids last far longer. Lockout for thirty minutes isn't really that big of a deal. I don't like not being able to sit on corpses after demolishing a raid force in Velious. I feel like if you made the decision to come at a raid force, it better have been the right one. That's the main point. If you die in ToV, you can immediately scoot and go kill Tormax. Sorry, but that's bullshit. You deserve to be fucked for losing. And yet that's the Norrath we live in right now.

2-3 hour lockouts in Velious raid zones after losing/ calling LNS is more of a middle ground.

We can clear all of Kunark in five hours if well organized, so 30 minute lockouts there isn't that strange of a request.

Velious raid zones can take hours and hours to clear. Regardless, there needs to be repercussions for thinking you can take on a raid force and losing, and there needs to be some benefit to winning.

[Luniz]

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

The whole point of a pvp server is for players to settle issues in game through player vs player combat not the petition quest afterwards. The pvp here is reminiscent of tattling children crying to mommy, and I have to wonder how the staff can look at what any of the tattling children have to say with any merit.

The pvp here comes without any risk of penalty, corpse camping, or bind camping. It is the lowest risk and lowest reward game-play seen on any eq pvp server to date, and it is pretty obvious why most of the pvp players have moved on and the server is mostly blue refugees. The sad state of affairs that even pvping on one of the new WoW emulators you have the ability to corpse camp people that deserve it where as here you cannot even yellow text someone twice in 30 minutes without people screaming for your account to be banned.

Velious release will further show the ridiculous nature of current policies as you will be unable to deny access to zones like Temple of Veeshan by holding Western Wastes as people can simply call LNS for a force of 7 or more after 1 death and waltz past your blockade and into ToV to collect pixels with friends without even a scratch under your current policy.

This is made worse by the fact that a defending force in ToV and an offensive force in Western Wastes is a stalemate that is very common in Velious and the offensive force can continually engage the defensive force with no risk to themselves as they can call LNS at any time for their raid, take a 1 hour time out outside while they rebuff and reinforce, and engage you again further into your NTOV clear.

On a live server the first time a guild lost in pvp they would get corpse camped all night while taking screenshots for the forum unless the guild leaders came to terms. Here you are going to be forced to let the enemy waltz out of your zone after 1 death to take other raid targets, or to reinforce in the next zone. When you zone into a raid zone to fight over dragons the threat of body to pixel separation should be a concern, but here people are more concerned if they got the enemy rogue accidentally agroing a mob on video so they can petition it.

The high risk high reward pvp is what made games like UO, EQ Rallos Zek, Shadowbane, and Eve great games. Everyone remembers times in games like this where they took great pixel losses or gains that actually mattered. Or that time someone was so angry they corpse camped someone for a week straight. Here the policy is to eliminate the amount of loss someone can take through LNS/PNP policies, instead of actually having the player responsible for not putting himself in the situation in the first place.

In conclusion, I hope the staff and community takes a look at their current policies, and the future of Red as a PVP server, because I feel it is on a path to mediocrity.

lol

you and your 4 man crew not playing here are "most of the pvpers that moved on"?

also you don't understand the LNS on this server

[HippoNipple]

OP is trying to make changes to a policy he doesn't even understand.

You can't use LNS as a means to progress. If GMs are present they would ban someone for trying to do this. Even if the ones calling LnS somehow found a loop hole Sirken has made it clear that he doesn't give a shit and will still throw out bans if the spirit of the rules are fucked with.

People that read the rules in detail and base their play on what scum bag tactics they think they can get away with don't get it and the server is lucky Sirken doesn't' give a shit about loop holes and will just ban these people.

[rollin5k]

The fact that the giant zerg and a few fungi griefing sickos that have been here since day one are the only ones complaining does theyre on the right track. Although the rules are a little complicated and subjective.

Since yellow text was introduced the most PvP I've seen had been in the last month or so.

[Buhbuh]

Originally Posted by rollin5k [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The fact that the giant zerg and a few fungi griefing sickos that have been here since day one are the only ones complaining does theyre on the right track. Although the rules are a little complicated and subjective.

Since yellow text was introduced the most PvP I've seen had been in the last month or so.

LNS in a non raid context is fine the way it is.

In a raid context, it's terrible.