PVP and LU24, anyone else questioning the real motives behind the patch?

[tralin]

<DIV>One of the biggest frustrations in PVP is getting stunned, especially by the longer duration stuns then getting down right owned in those few seconds, making the immunity timer a joke.  Right now its a race to get the first big stun off so you can set yourself up to do the damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now... with LU24 its lowering every stuns duration, sometimes by more than half and sometimes removing it completely.  This makes NO SENSE for a PVE environment, all they need to do is copy their model with the immunity timer in some fashion into PVE.  I've read other's with this same idea and it makes perfect sense, its a logical change, it affects everybody and nerfs nobody.  It also would not affect soloing as the current patch idea most definitely does.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So why, with thousands of development dollars could SOE not come up with the same idea?  I'm quite sure they have, in fact I have no doubt they have because the same people that made the PVP immunity timers probably suggested it.  But at the core, the problem is not with PVE, if it was they would have fixed it well before LU24 (this problem has been known since LU 13 or 16).  Isn't it just a bit convenient that there's a problem in PVP with being stunned long enough to get killed before you can do anything and now SOE is reducing ALL stuns?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It makes no sense, I just get the feeling the whole Enchanter fix to raid capability is a "smokescreen" to cover their real intent of this patch.  Everyone knows how popular the PVP servers are and that SOE needs to cater to them in some fashion.  But we were also told they wouldn't make changes to the game just to accommodate PVP.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If stun locking a mob truly is a big issue at hand here I'd like to know why: </DIV> <DIV>A. It wasn't fixed sometime in the last... what... year now? and </DIV> <DIV>B.  Why not add a PVE immunity timer instead of this ridiculous nerf to all classes that makes no logical sense?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[WreckageT]

How many times do you have to tell people that skills have different effects in PvE/PvP.... These are PvE changes to the skills!  Changing them for PvE has no bearing on PvP as the ruleset is set up to allow for each spell to have different effects in PvE/PvP.Again, these PvE changes have nothing to do with PvP.Once more because people arent that literate, these PvE changes have nothing to do with PvP.THESE PVE CHANGES HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH PVP.Are we clear on that now?<div></div>

[tralin]

<P>So lets take a Berserkers big stun for example, its being changed from a 7 second stun to a root/stifle.  Your telling me that in PVP it's still going to work as a 3.5 second stun?</P> <P> </P> <P>Or how about  a warlocks stuns that are being completely removed from its spell description, your saying that in PVP that spell will still stun?</P> <P> </P> <P>Please correct me if I'm wrong.</P><p>Message Edited by tralin on <span class=date_text>05-21-2006</span> <span class=time_text>08:54 AM</span>

[Despak]

Face it WreckageTAO, there's a few PvPers that think the world revolves around them and their playstyle. The whole forum could repeat what you said and they'd still not catch on.<p>Message Edited by Despak on <span class=date_text>05-21-2006</span> <span class=time_text>05:00 PM</span>

[tralin]

<DIV>I don't play on the PVP server, I read the PVP forums and have a few friends that play it, I tried it for awhile on Nagafen but didnt care for it.  I enjoy the PVE aspect of the game more than PVP.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That said, what's your argument then that these changes are needed for PVE and that an immunity timer wouldn't suffice?</DIV>

[Toskrin]

<P>Agree or disagree, the devs have clearly explained the motives behind this patch.  They want to prevent stun-locking and reduce control of multimob encounters.  The changes they have made are consisent with that.  There is no hidden agenda.</P> <P>The changes are NOT for PvP, and will affect PvP little if any.  Let's look at the 3 main types of nerf:</P> <P>1. Shortening effect duration - Effects already have a separate duration in PvP.  Makes no difference if the PvE duration is shortened.</P> <P>2. Lengthening reuse timers - Also irrelevant for PvP, as almost every PvP battle is over before the reuse timer cycles.  In any event, immunity is more important in limiting PvP stuns than reuse timers are.</P> <P>3. Changing stuns to stifle/root, etc - May make a small difference, but stifles almost just as good as stuns in PvP, simply because the melee autoattack damage is meaningless in PvP.  Most stifles are longer than stuns and in fact more useful in PvP.</P><p>Message Edited by Toskrin on <span class=date_text>05-21-2006</span> <span class=time_text>12:33 PM</span>

[tralin]

<P>I'm still completely unconvinced this has anything to do with PVE, it just doesnt make sense.  As a berserker why the hell do I need a root and stifle?  A mobs auto attack damage is exactly what I'm trying to avoid when using a stun, because those few seconds of damage negation save me way to often.</P> <P>A lot of spells, namely a few warlock spells are having the stun component removed entirely.    This is so two warlocks Im guessin cant stun lock an entire encounter.   So nerf em, take it away and end it. </P> <P>Makes no sense, an immunity timer seems like an intelligent response to the "problem".  Not nerfing every class in the game, especially those who like to solo / duo primarily.</P> <P>SOE over the last year seemed to have been taking steps forward to improve the solo aspect of the game, why now are they taking one huge step back?</P> <P>None of it adds up.</P>

[Skratttt]

<hr size="2" width="100%">To the OP ...it makes PERFECT sense....reason being encounters were too easy if you had a class with several stunns or 2 in a group (just chain stunn it to death...allmost no risk)......It has NOTHING to do with pvp due to the fact that a) the pvp ruleset allready has something of this sort way before this was even considered for PvE b) as mentioned before PvP and PvE spell effects are completely separate one from another<div></div>

[tralin]

<P>So, instead of nerfing why not put in immunity timers similar to those in PVP?  How, in any case does that not solve the problem, and in fact not improve on it?</P>

[enc]

because it would add complexity into the game just for the sake of not using nerfs that ppl dont like.

[Pins]

<DIV>The reason why you can't use an immunity timer in PvE like you do in PvP, because it would destroy the enchanter class, and make them useless.  It'd be like saying, we're going to delete the Enchanter class!</DIV>

[Toskrin]

<DIV>Immunity timers selectively nerf enchanters while leaving every other class mostly unaffected.  The purpose of getting rid of the stun component of warlock nukes I'm sure is, just as you say, to get rid of the opportunity to stun lock an encounter.  Which is EXACTLY what the devs have said they are trying to do.  How does that not make sense?  It's really not hard to see how the changes they have proposed meet the goals they have outlined. The immunity timer solution would be just an enormous nerf of two classes to the exclusion of everyone else.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Some people were against PvP from the start and use every change as an opportunity to complain about it.  Once again, LU24 will have very little impact on PvP.  I don't see a thing in the PvE game that has been impacted by the addition of PvP.</DIV>

[Rattfa]

<div></div><font size="4">On the PvP ruleset servers there are 2 different spell lists. Every single spell has DIFFERENT effects and durations depending on whether you are fighting a mob or another player.</font> Fight a mob and spell1 does X, fight a player and spell1 does Y <font size="5">These changes in LU 24 are nothing to do with PvP End of! <span>:smileyindifferent:</span></font> <div></div><p>Message Edited by themixmonkey on <span class=date_text>05-22-2006</span> <span class=time_text>12:45 AM</span>

[Jooneau]

Toskrin, they are changing Trobuador charm duration to 6.5 seconds but leaving Coercer charm alone. How does that fix "stun locking"? I'm dying to read a rational explanation for this outrageous nerf.

[Toskrin]

<DIV><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Jooneau wrote:<BR>Toskrin, they are changing Trobuador charm duration to 6.5 seconds but leaving Coercer charm alone. How does that fix "stun locking"? I'm dying to read a rational explanation for this outrageous nerf.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well, I guess it is part of the control reduction.  I play a troub and this nerf is a gamebreaker.  I won't play a troub anymore if it goes through. I am not trying to justify every nerf being made, just that they have nothing to do with PvP.  The troub's charm spell in PvP is only about 12 seconds anyway, so again, nothing to do with PvP.</DIV>

[Snublefot]

There never ever been a bard stunlocking anything in this game (since lu13). So the "reasons" given by devs is politic PR nonsense. The whole thing started as a pvp thing and spun from there. Sadly for the pve game, and mostly soloers and casual players, it spun out of control.

[WreckageT]

Wow ppl are dense..."started as a pvp thing"... how many times do you thickheaded ppl need to be told that if they wanted to make changes to how a spell functioned in pvp they can do so without it altering the pve functionality of that skill at all.  Once again, because its apparent that some ppls IQs are even lower than I could have imagined, the PvE changes to the spells are because the devs deemed they needed changing in PvE, not PvP.<div></div>

[Atrix Wolfe]

<DIV>You mean just like they changed the guards in PVP and PVE servers ended up with the new ones for no reason?</DIV>

[Rattfa]

Read my postThere are 2 spell lists, 1 for PvP and 1 for PvEjeez, why can you people not READ<span> :smileysad:</span><div></div>

[Aienaa]

<DIV><FONT color=#ffff00>Wow ppl are dense..."started as a pvp thing"... how many times do you thickheaded ppl need to be told that if they wanted to make changes to how a spell functioned in pvp they can do so without it altering the pve functionality of that skill at all.</FONT>  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And how many times do we have to show you that this does make a big difference in PvP....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>When you change a Stun into a Stifle, it means that in PvP that you are not just standing there, but able to auto-attack... Not only able to auto attack, but move as well, which means that if you are only stifled you can turn and face the play to prevent back attack, run away...  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Not only that the stuns in PvP are a portion of the stun from PvE.... Meaning if the PvE stun was 6 seconds, the PvP stun would be about 3 seconds....  So if the stun in PvE is changed from 6 seconds down to 2 seconds, that means the stun in PvP would be further reduced to around 1 second....  Big difference there....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Quit trying to say that changes in PvE have nothing to do with PvP, everyone knows it does and your not kidding anyone saying otherwise...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If they truely wanted to keep them seperate as they originally stated, the the PvP servers should have a seperate Patch, just like the US and Euro servers do...  That is the only way you are going to be able to say that changes to PvE do not effect PvP and vice versa....</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Gwern - 70 Assassin</DIV>

[Toskrin]

<P>Stop pretending to know how the mechanics of PvP work.  PvP stun times are not automatically 1/2 (or any other fraction) of PvE stun times - they are completely separate, and can be controlled separately by the devs.  For instance, Cheap Shot has a 6 second stun time in PvE, and a 2 second stun time in PvP.  Cheap Shot is being lowered to 4 seconds in PvE, and I guarantee you that the time will remain 2 seconds in PvP.  I would guess that 90% of the proposed LU24 changes will have absolutely no impact on PvP.  Most of the changed PvE spells will be unchanged in PvP.</P> <P>As far as the difference between stun and stifle, I play a Troubador in PvP.  I have a 2 second stun and a 4 second stifle.  The stifle is more useful to me, because I have time to cast it, get in close to apply my debuffs, and get back at ranged distance before getting stunned myself.  Melee autoattack damage is meaningless in PvP - it usually parses out to less than 5% of damage done in my PvP fights.</P> <P>Regarding the troub charm nerf, it is a huge hit to my PvE gameplay, but will actually be improved in PvP, because the cast time has been lowered from 6 seconds to 2.5 seconds - hardly a PvP nerf.</P> <P>Face it, there are folks who hate PvP and will blame it for everything wrong with the game - there's no convincing them otherwise.</P>

[Rattfa]

<div><blockquote><hr>Toskrin wrote:<div></div> <p>Stop pretending to know how the mechanics of PvP work.  PvP stun times are not automatically 1/2 (or any other fraction) of PvE stun times - they are completely separate, and can be controlled separately by the devs.  For instance, Cheap Shot has a 6 second stun time in PvE, and a 2 second stun time in PvP.  Cheap Shot is being lowered to 4 seconds in PvE, and I guarantee you that the time will remain 2 seconds in PvP.  I would guess that 90% of the proposed LU24 changes will have absolutely no impact on PvP.  Most of the changed PvE spells will be unchanged in PvP.</p><hr size="2" width="100%"><p><font size="4">Face it, there are folks who hate PvP and will blame it for everything wrong with the game - there's no convincing them otherwise.</font></p><hr></blockquote>Well said!</div>

[Morti]

lol @ no changed in PvP.  Sorry, this patch DOES effect PvP in huge ways.  Less stuns and lower DPS.  Damage reduction from PvE to PvP is percentage based and crowd control spells are halved on people.  I promise you that the stuns that are reduced in duration for PvE will still be set to 1/2 duration on people.  Cheap shot works differently then other stuns and probably will remain a 2 second stun in PvP.  Stop kidding yourselves.<div></div>

[Rattfa]

<div><blockquote><hr>Mortiuz wrote:lol @ no changed in PvP.  Sorry, this patch DOES effect PvP in huge ways.  Less stuns and lower DPS.  Damage reduction from PvE to PvP is percentage based and crowd control spells are halved on people.  I promise you that the stuns that are reduced in duration for PvE will still be set to 1/2 duration on people.  Cheap shot works differently then other stuns and probably will remain a 2 second stun in PvP.  Stop kidding yourselves.<div></div><hr></blockquote>Were you born stupid, or can you just not read?PVP and PVE have 2 DIFFERENT SPELL LISTS. It isn't a case of everything PvP is half PvE...they are entirely seperate. <font size="4">If they wanted to nerf stuns purely for PvP then they could have without touching PvE in the slightest.</font>*sigh*</div>

[Geekyone]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Atrix Wolfe wrote:<BR> <DIV>You mean just like they changed the guards in PVP and PVE servers ended up with the new ones for no reason?</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>The change to the guards on the PvE server was a good idea.  I think it was more of a RP thing than a result of the pvp servers.

[Morti]

<div><blockquote><hr>themixmonkey wrote:<div><blockquote><hr>Mortiuz wrote:lol @ no changed in PvP.  Sorry, this patch DOES effect PvP in huge ways.  Less stuns and lower DPS.  Damage reduction from PvE to PvP is percentage based and crowd control spells are halved on people.  I promise you that the stuns that are reduced in duration for PvE will still be set to 1/2 duration on people.  Cheap shot works differently then other stuns and probably will remain a 2 second stun in PvP.  Stop kidding yourselves.<div></div><hr></blockquote>Were you born stupid, or can you just not read?<font color="#cc0066">Having to result to insults on internet boards speaks highly of yourself.  No, there are not two different spell lists.  Only a checkbox that shows the difference between attacking in PvE and PvP.  Most spells work off of an algorithm to figure the difference when attacking a player as opposed to a mob.  </font>PVP and PVE have 2 DIFFERENT SPELL LISTS. It isn't a case of everything PvP is half PvE...they are entirely seperate. <font color="#cc0066">No there isn't.  Sorry.  You are mistaken here.</font><font size="4">If they wanted to nerf stuns purely for PvP then they could have without touching PvE in the slightest.<font color="#cc0066">They didn't want to nerf stuns purely for PvP.  That's why they nerfed them for both.</font></font>*sigh*</div><hr></blockquote>People should do a little fact checking before posting as if they knew things as said fact.</div>

[Soldancer]

-<p>Message Edited by Soldancer on <span class=date_text>08-25-2006</span> <span class=time_text>07:48 PM</span>

[Rattfa]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Mortiuz wrote:<div><blockquote><div><font size="4"><font color="#cc0066">They didn't want to nerf stuns purely for PvP.  That's why they nerfed them for both.</font></font></div></blockquote></div><hr></blockquote>Thanks for finally understanding <span>:smileyhappy:</span>IF this was BECAUSE OF pvp then they could have simply adjusted the calculations that are already in place to work out how the pvp effects of all the spells are different to the pve effectsIF pvp was the reason behind this then they wouldnt have to adjust PVE spells in any way. <blockquote><hr>Mortiuz wrote:<div><blockquote><div><font color="#cc0066">Having to result to insults on internet boards speaks highly of yourself.  </font></div></blockquote></div><hr></blockquote>I fail to see the insult. I merely asked a question. Just because you decided that it may or may not be the truth isnt my problem.</div><p>Message Edited by themixmonkey on <span class=date_text>05-22-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:42 PM</span>

[Rambling Diatri]

<P> Been playing on EQ's test servers since way back in EQ1 shortly after launch. And I'm here to tell you that you're all comepletely mistaken as to why the nerfs are coming.</P> <P> They are a repsonse to the "unbalanced" portions of KoS skills.  It is once again a matter of SOE nerfing the game silly because the top level uber guilds have  "proven" the game is trivial once you're at level 70 with full AA's, fabled gear, and masters all over your hot bars.</P> <P> Quite similar to what happened back in LU13 when SOE made 99% of the raid content undoable and heroics stupidly over powered. That was all done in response to their pet guilds proclaiming the content was too easy. Which if you were equipped like they were, it was. Of course you'll remember that those changes went live despite an endless string of threads from the testers reporting just how stupidly hard they had made things.</P> <P> This is just a good example of SOE giving too much merit to what the lifeless dink guilds that managed there way to 70 in a week. Same thing happened with drop rates in DoF raid zones. The test raiders kept telling them how poor the drop rate was, there pet guild kept saying it was fine. Of course it was fine, they were standing there in fabled head to toe. So 3 people managing an upgrade out of a several hour raid was fine for them. But for us, made the raid seem like a futile debt quest.</P> <P> Funniest part about SOE deciding there pet guilds opinions mattered more, they atill kept asking us to test things. Had us wipe to the same raid repeatedly, so they could see that their pet guilds view was skewed. Had us running DoF raids to prove that loot drops were to low. But in the end, they still didn't listen to us. Our raid force got so disgruntled from endlessly beating our heads against the wall, only to watch SOE finally listen to the proddie complaints that mimiced what we said. In the end they killed tests raid force, the whole server for that matter. I watched as our population dropped to one tenth what it used to be, simply because people got tired of being ignored only to watch SOE do what we suggested, 2 weeks after it went live. Why test if they only listen after it goes live.</P> <P> So don't  worry. A week or 3 from now they'll undo half of the nerfs having realized that only Boy Uber and his band of Fabled Flunkies  needed to have the abilities reigned in.  </P>

[deathsspite]

<P>Just wanted to say, Cheap Shot is now a two second duration 1-9, and increases linearly throughout progression. Cheap shot's PvP duration IS also a percentage of the main stun, thus we now have been Nerfed throughout PvP. The Illusionist spells are the same. I play a 21 conj on Venekor, and also an Illusionist, these changes are going to drastically affect PvP, but I do think that PvE on my Conj AND my Illus was trivial... On my conj I could solo nameds I wasnt supposed to touch at level 10 (Level 12 Heroic mobs), Although this got progressively more difficult at 14 I could solo the river behmoths in The Caves. I had a level 18 Fighter class next to me dieing every time he tried. On my illusionist I could solo large groups with 3-7 mobs stunned at a time, depending on my pet and my casting.  Now to justify this part, I play a 35 Shadowknight on Befallen. At level 35 as a tank with heals, I have trouble soloing mobs 3 Levels below me with one up arrow, I see conj's one level higher than me soloing yellows (con to them) soloing mobs WITHOUT THEIR PET EVEN DYING. This is sad, because some conj's I see aren't twinked (who are doing that) but my shadowknight is twinked to hell and back (mostly STA and AC influincing the picks though, he's not two offensively twinked). Although I think they should have dumped the changes out over time, they needed to be done. I do not have a class that Isn't getting nerfed, I have a 17 necro, 21 conj, 35 sk, 28 Illus, 21 ranger and a 17 brigand. The only unsensible change I saw on there was the one affecting the Swarm/Dumbfirwe pets, which were usually a waste anyway.</P> <P>Sincerely, </P> <P>Suez of Befallen.</P>

[Jaimster]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> deathsspite wrote:<BR> <P>Just wanted to say, Cheap Shot is now a two second duration 1-9, and increases linearly throughout progression. Cheap shot's PvP duration IS also a percentage of the main stun, thus we now have been Nerfed throughout PvP. The Illusionist spells are the same. I play a 21 conj on Venekor, and also an Illusionist, these changes are going to drastically affect PvP, but I do think that PvE on my Conj AND my Illus was trivial... On my conj I could solo nameds I wasnt supposed to touch at level 10 (Level 12 Heroic mobs), Although this got progressively more difficult at 14 I could solo the river behmoths in The Caves. I had a level 18 Fighter class next to me dieing every time he tried. On my illusionist I could solo large groups with 3-7 mobs stunned at a time, depending on my pet and my casting.  Now to justify this part, I play a 35 Shadowknight on Befallen. At level 35 as a tank with heals, I have trouble soloing mobs 3 Levels below me with one up arrow, I see conj's one level higher than me soloing yellows (con to them) soloing mobs WITHOUT THEIR PET EVEN DYING. <STRONG>This is sad, because some conj's I see aren't twinked (who are doing that) but my shadowknight is twinked to hell and back (mostly STA and AC influincing the picks though, he's not two offensively twinked).</STRONG> Although I think they should have dumped the changes out over time, they needed to be done. I do not have a class that Isn't getting nerfed, I have a 17 necro, 21 conj, 35 sk, 28 Illus, 21 ranger and a 17 brigand. The only unsensible change I saw on there was the one affecting the Swarm/Dumbfirwe pets, which were usually a waste anyway.</P> <P>Sincerely, </P> <P>Suez of Befallen.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>To respond to the highlighted portion - Twinking my armor (which upon inspect is what you see) on a conjurer is sort of the last thing I ever cared about (most people fly through lower levels so fast there isn't any point in twinking yourself til tier 5 anyhow) - you get as many spells upgraded as possible to as high as possible. Because really, wearing pajamas for armor isn't going to change with ... sexier pajamas (+xxINT) - you're still just as dead if your pet goes down.  On an SK, upgrading armor will make you much much better and much more able to take damage... as I'm sure you know <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>I guess I just don't understand how people say "This game is TOO easy, my level 10 [enter class here] can do this"... in my experience, pretty much you are the most powerful you will ever be (except for maybe wearing all fabled) against mobs when you are level 6-13... the game and the things you can accomplish change drastically over the course of many levels.  I understand that everyone can only comment on what they have experienced in the game thus far, but I"ve noticed in the forums lately a lot of people basing their claims on things that the lower levels can do... </P>

[eland]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> tralin wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If stun locking a mob truly is a big issue at hand here I'd like to know why: </DIV> <DIV>A. It wasn't fixed sometime in the last... what... year now? and </DIV> <DIV>B.  Why not add a PVE immunity timer instead of this ridiculous nerf to all classes that makes no logical sense?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>A.  Why do you think the stun-immune heroics in KoS were implemented?  It was an attempted bandage fix to a mechanic that the devs felt was becoming overpowered, but with the result of marginallizing a class' playstyle.  It was a poor fix, though, and insufficient.  Other reasons it could take so long?  Firstly, they knew an across-the-board nerf would be immensely unpopular whether or not it's needed and whether or not overall context is adjusted.  They would weigh other options carefully before doing this.  Additionally, with the number of spells and skills being modified, it would take time to come up with the new data.  It's essentially a complete rebalancing of that portion of the game.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>B.  It wouldn't work in a PvE context without a similar game-wide nerf accompanying it.  It would remove stun-locking, yes.  But given the other stated goal of demarginallizing the enchanter class' control in full groups, it would completely miss the mark.  In fact, it would have the opposite effect of an enchanter not being able to use his control skills much at all due to the immunity timers from other class stuns.  The only way that wouldn't be true would be if they completely removed stuns as a secondary effect on most damage spells, which would be a far greater nerf than reduced timers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think they probably went too far in some cases (e.g. troub charm) but overall it's not hard to see what their intentions are with this LU, and it's not because of PvP.  Many people won't agree with the changes, but it should be pretty obvious what their intentions are at any rate.</DIV>

[Druzgotek]

<P>It is clear that many, if not most, pvp mechanics spill over from pvp servers onto pure pve servers.</P> <P>I just wonder where soe got the idea to ruin the game for everyone, when only a few percent of players play on pvp servers. There is even a research doen that shows most pvp servers having very low population. Is it not enough we suffer lag on pve servers because to make pvp servers soe 'stole' many machines out of pve server clusters?</P>