New VzTz PVP Server

[reebz]

so from what I understand Gustoo you want a 0 risk "pvp arena" for a server? We have had plenty of those in the last 5 years and they have all died within 3 weeks. Sure why not have another one

[Gustoo]

Reebz I want to pvp at level ten, level 20 and other levels also.

I prefer item loot, for risk.

I don’t know how having the time to create multiple toons means no risk. When you log off cuz pvp happened to a different alt your gunna just get wasted again. Yeah a level up only guy can level ten Alts at a time but you’re now able to kill ten junk players and your half decent geared and skill maxed level 10 is going to be cutting through them which is good fun.

Tell me how zero pvp level 1 to 49 (current server arrangement) is better than the possibility of guys logging to Alts when you PK them?

[New_Guy]

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

Reebz I want to pvp at level ten, level 20 and other levels also.

I prefer item loot, for risk.

I don’t know how having the time to create multiple toons means no risk. When you log off cuz pvp happened to a different alt your gunna just get wasted again. Yeah a level up only guy can level ten Alts at a time but you’re now able to kill ten junk players and your half decent geared and skill maxed level 10 is going to be cutting through them which is good fun.

Tell me how zero pvp level 1 to 49 (current server arrangement) is better than the possibility of guys logging to Alts when you PK them?

You can't have item loot when the majority of players here are blue as fuck.

They will just wear all no drop to prevent shekel loss. Same reason everybody left Rallos for Sullon, it became every nerd wearing only no drop gear.

[EatitNerd]

If you think there’s 0 pvp lvls 1-49 then we can’t help you, you’re already lost. The server you’re describing gustoo would be dead in the first level bracket if it was level 10 for a freaking month, big yikes.

[A Knight]

I think level cap would only work if there was only about 3 stages.

15
40
49

[Cwall 146.0]

level caps are only good if your interest is to play the server for 3 weeks before it dies

best long term formula is slow exp and no level caps + incentives to keep progressing 1 character with something like pvp point vendors with decent gear on them (see devnoob/image pvp vendors but without the stupid shit they'd add after like 1 week)

[Tradesonred]

Originally Posted by Cwall 146.0 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

level caps are only good if your interest is to play the server for 3 weeks before it dies

best long term formula is slow exp and no level caps + incentives to keep progressing 1 character with something like pvp point vendors with decent gear on them (see devnoob/image pvp vendors but without the stupid shit they'd add after like 1 week)

Keep in mind this is coming from someone that was in a guild that from day1 on red had people who were doing 8hour shifts on a single character to level faster than everyone else. They also had a cleric parked at the entrance of guk to kill anyone that tried to enter to level by training them with a bunch of mobs. That sort of thing.

Unless he wants to extrapolate more than this i dont see why anyone should take this seriously. I would even be careful if i was a dev not to get baited again by these types.

When red launched, on one side you had holocaust telling devs on forums everything was fine because their fun was to stomp casuals into the ground with xp loss so they quit the server as a form of entertainement. Other side had nihilum chokeholding the PVE stuff by numbers also telling devs everything was fine. Both were akin to chopping your own nuts in the end because it predictably led to a dead server.

Level cap time increments is a good mechanic to stop the no lifers from doing a repeat session of what happened to red during its first weeks. Especially if we are going full retard and doing a teams xp loss server.

[Imago]

I think a level cap would be fantastic for teams. Varying advantages for various teams at different points of the timeline, prevents no lifers from overwhelming one side ...

But would it? There would need to be some kind of code that would prevent toons outside the level range from engaging in and kind of pvp without flagging them for it. 30~ish bard hit your target with a selos? Kill that fucker.

[Tradesonred]

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

I think a level cap would be fantastic for teams. Varying advantages for various teams at different points of the timeline, prevents no lifers from overwhelming one side ...

But would it? There would need to be some kind of code that would prevent toons outside the level range from engaging in and kind of pvp without flagging them for it. 30~ish bard hit your target with a selos? Kill that fucker.

EQ is just too much of an antiquated game that you can just accept any system it had and expect it to work. One thing i remember clearly from live is how i could blow my entire mana bar on a player that was high level buffed and barely dent his health. And this was against a player in the 4 level range on Rallos. Thats why i think a no level range is doomed to fail, once you get past a certain level difference you can just lul-one-shot people. On top of that, that practically illimited HP buff system.

Thats why when i played wow i found it immediately superior as a pvp game because if a level 53 gets cocky and takes on 3 lower level players he might not make it. This will never, ever happen in EQ. Thats something i also remember clearly from wow, taking down a level 53 hunter with 2 other people on my 27 priest.

I'll play that no level range teams server if it ever gets launched. Im pretty confident an FFA server is much better, a limited level (4-8 levels or something) teams pvp server second, but ill play it.

What i wont play because EQ X1 xp is such a sizeable time investment is an xp loss server. I said especially if we go full retard and go with that but i wouldnt play it. I was talking theorethically, if we go that way, level cap will help. But itll be dead in 3-5 months and ill have wasted all this time for what? For not even being able to enjoy the journey of what little pvp there is in a no xp loss server and arriving at the end game finish line to find that the population is already dead. I went with it the first time around for the ok lets eat that PVE cake with a sprinkle of pvp on top but not a second time lol.

[Tradesonred]

Theres also the limited pop, you cant act like this is live EQ. The pop is fragile and has to be nurtured. Theres alot of things i remember clearly from live. Another one of them is the number of players that came up in Eastern Karana when i /who'd it during the halloween event: 205 players.

Thats not what we are working with here. That was the big mistake from the red launch, we had a 600 pop and as soon as it was clear that xp loss was gonna kill the pop (barely a week into it) it should have been taken care of. Instead it was left to rot and when it was fixed (mid-kunark or something) it was already too late, the pop had dried up to single digit at night.

You either do a little brainstorm work before launch to make sure the mechanics are good and check on it after launch, or watch feedback closely during the next weeks after launch. If youre just gonna go with an obviously bad setup, turn a switch on and forget about the server like what seemed to be what went down in 2011 why even bother. I wont.