The serious itemloot poll

[Billbike]

The concept that nothing is worth killing unless it drops loot is a blubie idea.

Pvp solves disputes, and creates them. Killing is fun, but losing items makes people avoid fights.

Itemloot just makes the server a casters paradise.

Once the great blubie exodus has passed, us red players will be left with the foul enviroment y'all voted to create, through ignorance.

[Galacticus]

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

The concept that nothing is worth killing unless it drops loot is a blubie idea.

Pvp solves disputes, and creates them. Killing is fun, but losing items makes people avoid fights.

Itemloot just makes the server a casters paradise.

Once the great blubie exodus has passed, us red players will be left with the foul enviroment y'all voted to create, through ignorance.

yea

[Macedon]

honestly with the population the server is going to have, i don't think item loot is going to benefit in anyway, and it really isn't necessary for pvp, just have coin loot, and that's it, you still get the shiny pennies from your kill [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] and the satisfaction knowing you face roll'd that bitch.

[Humerox]

The concept that nothing is worth killing unless it drops loot is a blubie idea.

So - in effect - those who prefer a more hardcore style of PvP are blue, and those that want to risk no pixels are red.

Got it.

[Zuranthium]

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

The concept that nothing is worth killing unless it drops loot is a blubie idea.

Except that's not the concept being put forth. The concept is that the game skews too much towards people who PvE grind if you don't have item loot. Once the players who zerg rush to 50 and for the best items achieve that goal, then they start to be able to control everything because, even if they aren't they skilllful, they are far better equipped and that automatically wins much of the time. The players themselves need to have the ability to balance out the grinders/twinkers to create a dynamic PvP environment.

As has been said, the most popular PvP Everquest server back in the day had the 1-item loot rule. I'm proposing a less harsh version of that (you can only loot the same player for an item once per day).

[Bockscar]

The concept is that the game skews too much towards people who PvE grind if you don't have item loot. Once the players who zerg rush to 50 and for the best items achieve that goal, then they start to be able to control everything

This isn't Velious. The people who hit level 50 first won't just gain some huge advantage that can never be overcome. Almost all the resist gear can be traded and a lot of it drops from level 30ish mobs, it's pretty much just Tranix crown and diamond jewellery that you can't get while leveling or from camping a few pretty trivial mobs in lguk.

the most popular PvP Everquest server back in the day had the 1-item loot rule

RZ was only really the most popular PvP server because it was the only one available from the start, so everybody who wanted PvP started there. The next servers only got the rerollers and latecomers, everyone else had already got started on RZ and many didn't want to move to a new server. You'll also notice that itemloot was removed from all of the servers that had it and has never been attempted since in any MMORPG because of how much it fucks up the game.

As has been pointed out by various people, the real PvP is about zone control and the prestige of winning fights. Looting items is not a crucial part of any of it, and it completely skews the PvP environment due to how many people will avoid fighting, how many will play naked casters, how people will behave when the prospect of losing or winning items comes into the picture, and how it screws over the already disadvantaged classes. People act as if there won't be PvP without itemloot. It has been proven time and time again that there'll be more without it, not only because people can PvP more freely when they don't stand to lose their stuff but also because itemloot tends to reduce the potential population size. It shouldn't need to be mentioned again, but VZTZ grew from like 40 to 200 players when they removed itemloot.

Itemloot is just too much for most players. Call them bluebies or whatever, but they'll make up the bulk of the server. The hardcore minority will not sustain red99 alone. As for twinks, the hyperbole is useless because twinks were never a problem that early and has never been a problem on any emu server because we don't have the thousands of players that live servers had. Even if a few twinks do pop up, that'll still be far less discouraging for new players than the constant risk of losing their gear.

Itemloot doesn't work, doubly so for an emu server.

[Billbike]

Elaboration:

On a blue server, players kill MOBs to get loots. That is the concept. They apply the same concept to their theoretical idea of PVP. To them, without itemloot, pvp is pointless. That is why they vote for itemloot.

And if Rallos was so great, why didn't they make the other servers with the same rules?

[nilbog]

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

if Rallos was so great, why didn't they make the other servers with the same rules?

Tears. Player complaints changed a lot of things about EQ.

[Bockscar]

So if many customers doesn't like a product, it's not a bad product, they're just crying bitches who can't handle it?

[returnofahipster]

I dont think item loot would reduce the server population. I do think item loot would make more people roll less gear dependent classes though. At this point lets just take whatever these very kind and selfless developers will give to us without complaint. They are pretty successful when it comes to administrating a server so I'm near certain whatever they put out will appeal to and appease most of us. Thanks again Project 1999 Development TEAM!