|
|
|
|
#1
10-17-2011, 11:53 PM
|
|||
|
RZ wasn't as cut and dried as some are making it seem. Yes, there were hardcore anti-pk's and hardcore pk's, who essentially lived for their chosen art. However, these rules you speak of were optional. I came across many people of ...dubious... motives, who were neither pk nor anti-pk. What's more, it was common knowledge that many of the high end anti-pk's had low level or delevelled alt's for pk'ing fun.
I guess RZ would have been hard for people who seem to innately follow suggestions, or try to 'go with the crowd'. The people who prospered on RZ tended to take a 'fuck you, I'll do what I want' approach. You had to make your own game, because there was no pre-configured, compulsory team of buddies for you to join - if people thought you were a fuckstick, then you were going to die, whether at the hands of pk's, anti-pk's or anyone inbetween. Hell, if you were enough of a fuckstick you could manage to get yourself pretty much kos to everyone. There was never really a friendly group of randoms you could sidle up next to, ask to join their group and have a blue-tastic exp grind for a few hours. You had to use your instincts as to whether these people were worth the risk of grouping with. In the pk guilds it wasn't uncommon for players to gank their own guildmates over loot, personal rivalry or plain lulz. I remember Darkenbane trying to do it's first pk raids in the planes - take a guess what happens when you put 30-40 pk's, half of whom seemed to have ADHD, in one place with nothing to do for an hour whilst the officers and leader tried to organise and start the raid... There is no denying that team-based pvp can be fun. However, the notion that some absolute retard can be untouchable forever because they rolled the same team as me is....unpalatable. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
10-18-2011, 12:37 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#3
10-18-2011, 12:43 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#5
10-18-2011, 01:03 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
RZ is trash because if you play the game like it's supposed to be played, random PK, kill everyone guy, then you will have nobody to group or raid with and get owned by people with raid gear/epics. So the people actually winning on RZ, are the people avoiding PvP entirely, making as many alliances as they can, and doing PvE all the time for loot. Thus, the server and FFA ruleset in EQ is pointless. SZ was much better since everyone on the server had a much easier ability to gear up. It wasn't based around who made the most alliances and being forced to join a guild or you're screwed. I don't like games that basically revolve around kissing people's asses to try and get into a powerful guild for you to be able to do anything. A solo, un-guilded player on SZ could do well. A solo, un-guilded player on RZ will just get zerged to death by guilds of 12 year olds all day. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
10-18-2011, 12:05 AM
|
|||
|
Oh and in my experience, team-based pvp tended to seem quite blue a lot of the time. On RZ, if you were trying to level, anyone who wanted that spot was almost certainly going to be in-range, and thus, a game-legal target. On SZ, I found that the hard-coded teams tended to divide up zones so you would find yourself only ever fighting IF an enemy team happened to come along. Which wasn't as often as I would like, because they were all bunched in their own zones most of the time to do their own levelling. I'm not saying there wasn't fun times to be had, but there were less genuine 'seat of the pants' moments.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
10-18-2011, 12:18 AM
|
|||
|
I liked VZ ruleset, because it really brought about a lot of good roleplaying opportunities. And with the teams being soft-coded, players had a lot of freedom to do what they wanted.
__________________
“Smile, breathe, and go slowly.”
 | ||
|
|
|||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
