PvP Range

[Nirgon]

Again beware requests from no life, item hoarding, poopsocker griefers.

[tmoneynegro]

Too many blue server noobs posting in here that have no clue of the side effects of their "+/- 4 level" suggestions.

When you have groups of 6 people in a dungeon fighting another group of 6 people, the level ranges in those 12 people will be huge. Level range HAS to be large enough so that all of them will be able to attack each other and so there will be no invulnerable healers either.

I think it's pretty clear the dynamic level system has too many problems and will need to be scrapped so don't even mention that thing.

Having all high-end or high level zones flagged as "arena" is also needed to prevent people from walking in with level 1 spies and trainers against raids.

[Nirgon]

From the desk of tmoneynegro.

[georgie]

8+/- is fine been fightings reds and yellows since i hit 42

[Amuk]

+-4 is way too small of a pvp range. Having a group ranging from 26-30 being unable to engage a group of 32-35's due to half your grp being OOR is a game breaker. I can only imagine that the people who want +-4 are more solo players that want a better balanced 1v1 atmosphere because any team/group player will hate this level range. I could write 50 scenarios where half a grp is in range but is left impotent because the guys you're going against will just rape the people in range and be left at a stalemate staring at you. I hope you don't listen to the QQ's of the noobs and understand that most of the griefing going on during beta currently are just dynamic pvp system bugs.

[Wonton]

i love how everybody tries to throw on some new twist to it all, lol....

+/- 8 levels and 1-50 Pvp in Solb, Perma, and Kedge. this is dynamic enough imo

[Evoken]

Yes and no. I think 8 level range is fine, but I remember on live every player in your range conned the same to you. I'd like a system like this so there's some uncertainty and you can't just exclusively "pvp" against people who con blue or green.

[Billbike]

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

Again beware requests from no life, item hoarding, poopsocker griefers.

8+/- Perfect.

If not, PvP will be broken. It will be due to Nirgon and his PvP ignorant friends who have no idea of how what they are voting for will influence R99.

I guess having PvP experience and knowledge makes me a griefer.

[MrSparkle001]

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

+-4 is way too small of a pvp range. Having a group ranging from 26-30 being unable to engage a group of 32-35's due to half your grp being OOR is a game breaker. I can only imagine that the people who want +-4 are more solo players that want a better balanced 1v1 atmosphere because any team/group player will hate this level range. I could write 50 scenarios where half a grp is in range but is left impotent because the guys you're going against will just rape the people in range and be left at a stalemate staring at you. I hope you don't listen to the QQ's of the noobs and understand that most of the griefing going on during beta currently are just dynamic pvp system bugs.

This is why Sullon Zek was the best PvP server. You didn't have a narrow range, and you had dedicated teams that to me made more sense than Tallon and Vallon. If this was going to be a Sullon Zek server I'd play there in a heartbeat; FFA PvP was a mess with the game clearly not designed for it.

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

Yup, you could get level 5's into hate and fear and "Fansy" it up. "It's classic!"

That's why they changed the Sullon Zek rules slightly [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] That guy is legendary but man it was game-breaking, which is why I say no matter what rules they implement here, people will find a way around them.

GO GO GOOD TEAM!

+/-4 is necessary at lower levels, but at high levels it's too narrow. So what about +/-4 and certain high level zones have no range? I don't want to see level 8-12 people running around newbie zones wreaking havoc. 8 levels is an enormous difference at low levels. The difference between level 1 and 9, or 12 and 20, is huge. Too huge.

[Nirgon]

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

8+/- Perfect.

If not, PvP will be broken. It will be due to Nirgon and his PvP ignorant friends who have no idea of how what they are voting for will influence R99.


I guess having PvP experience and knowledge makes me a griefer.

I'd love to hear about your long list of experiences being in the lvl 40 range on some train fest pvp server and your random encounters in East Commons and Dreadlands. Frankly, I don't care. You aren't thinking long term, or maybe for you the little skirmishes that flare up with insta-posted message board responses over meaningless random ganks is as far as you go. Sure, do 8 levels, it creates MORE pvp but not more meaningful pvp. The servers with 8 level range and higher also weren't FFA pvp servers. Who cares about meaningful pvp, let's "go out to Hillsbrad and kill newbies", then be sure to immediately come here and shit up the forums with posts.



The truth is, 8 levels and no item loot are also being voted by the same people who want:

1. Yellow text
2. Global ooc

both of which have been ousted for obvious reasons given half a second of intelligent consideration. A year after launch when people discover this server and make it to lvl 42 to be chain ganked by "you mad" spamming idiots in full resist gear/droppable dragon haste, at no risk to any piece of their gear, it will make more sense. You can certainly grief harder with an 8 level advantage and being able to safely wear anything you want, not like planar isn't enough of an advantage over some poor slob.

You guys seem to want the next big box, but you continue to vote for changes that are detrimental to it lasting more than a year or a few months. Lol pvp is broken if it isn't 8 levels, hit yourself for being stupid.


PS: SZ was really a completely one-sided evil team laugh fest on the raid scene and that's how it ended (personal victories and forum retardation aside).