50% health threshold - again - request for a fix

[Faenril]

OK - This topic was already discussed but no action was taken so here we go again...The problem:In order to improve the pvp experience by making it somewhat more fair by preventing frustrating deaths, SOE introduced long ago the following rule:If you get engaged in pvp below 50% health and never get above this threshold during the encounter, you are not eligible for fame loss, KvD hit, and you do not drop any chest or any sort of reward if you get killed.The reasons this rule was introduced are obvious, and it probably sounds like a good idea at first glance.But this rule is bogus, it has a fundamental flaw: if you kill somebody when engaging below 50% health you are still fully eligible to pvp rewards.We see this rule being abused daily on pvp servers (mainly to prevent fame loss).It's an open door to countless exploits and cheap tactics, the most common ones being the use of safehouse to break encounter when you get below 50% health then reengage, or the choker to drop health...So this rule is flawed:YOU SHOULD NEVER BE ELIGIBLE TO PVP REWARDS IF YOU ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO PVP DEATH PENALTIES.Possible fixes:1 - Remove the rule. If you get caught at low health it's your problem, too bad for you. Probably not the best way to fix it though.2 - Implement some "first hit" logic. If you started the pvp encounter, you are eligible to pvp rewards/penalties regardless of your HPs. Better than #1, but a little tricky to implement. Not balanced since it favors some classes too, who rely heavily on getting the jump on their target and/or are good at locking down their target (some scouts, enchanters...).3 - Make the rule symmetrical. If you are not eligible to pvp penalties, then you are not eligible to pvp rewards either. You dropped your health before engaging somebody ? Fine but you won't be rewarded if you win. That's my favored options, sounds reasonnable and easy to implement.Discuss...

[Bozidar]

<p>#2.  if you engage first then you lose fame/coin</p>

[Dh]

<p>They should also fix the recent list so it doesn't add people that died out of range where they did not drop a chest/give you fame and status.</p>

[Ecafmi]

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK - This topic was already discussed but no action was taken so here we go again...The problem:In order to improve the pvp experience by making it somewhat more fair by preventing frustrating deaths, SOE introduced long ago the following rule:If you get engaged in pvp below 50% health and never get above this threshold during the encounter, you are not eligible for fame loss, KvD hit, and you do not drop any chest or any sort of reward if you get killed.The reasons this rule was introduced are obvious, and it probably sounds like a good idea at first glance.But this rule is bogus, it has a fundamental flaw: if you kill somebody when engaging below 50% health you are still fully eligible to pvp rewards.We see this rule being abused daily on pvp servers (mainly to prevent fame loss).It's an open door to countless exploits and cheap tactics, the most common ones being the <span style="font-size: large;color: #ff0000;">use of safehouse</span> to break encounter when you get below 50% health then reengage, or the choker to drop health...So this rule is flawed:YOU SHOULD NEVER BE ELIGIBLE TO PVP REWARDS IF YOU ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO PVP DEATH PENALTIES.Possible fixes:1 - Remove the rule. If you get caught at low health it's your problem, too bad for you. Probably not the best way to fix it though.2 - Implement some "first hit" logic. If you started the pvp encounter, you are eligible to pvp rewards/penalties regardless of your HPs. Better than #1, but a little tricky to implement. Not balanced since it favors some classes too, who rely heavily on getting the jump on their target and/or are good at locking down their target (some scouts, enchanters...).3 - Make the rule symmetrical. If you are not eligible to pvp penalties, then you are not eligible to pvp rewards either. You dropped your health before engaging somebody ? Fine but you won't be rewarded if you win. That's my favored options, sounds reasonnable and easy to implement.Discuss...</blockquote>    Umm, as I far as I know, if you're engaged in PvP combat, Safehouse doesn't BREAK an encounter... plus..if you use Safehouse while being attacked...it engage's you in PvP combat... So, I'd say you have wrong information on that <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> Oh, and also, Safehouse doesn't break PvE encounters either... but I may not know what I'm talking about...I'm just a lonely little Brigand... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Faenril]

<cite>Sneakky@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>OK - This topic was already discussed but no action was taken so here we go again...The problem:In order to improve the pvp experience by making it somewhat more fair by preventing frustrating deaths, SOE introduced long ago the following rule:If you get engaged in pvp below 50% health and never get above this threshold during the encounter, you are not eligible for fame loss, KvD hit, and you do not drop any chest or any sort of reward if you get killed.The reasons this rule was introduced are obvious, and it probably sounds like a good idea at first glance.But this rule is bogus, it has a fundamental flaw: if you kill somebody when engaging below 50% health you are still fully eligible to pvp rewards.We see this rule being abused daily on pvp servers (mainly to prevent fame loss).It's an open door to countless exploits and cheap tactics, the most common ones being the <span style="font-size: large;color: #ff0000;">use of safehouse</span> to break encounter when you get below 50% health then reengage, or the choker to drop health...So this rule is flawed:YOU SHOULD NEVER BE ELIGIBLE TO PVP REWARDS IF YOU ARE NOT ELIGIBLE TO PVP DEATH PENALTIES.Possible fixes:1 - Remove the rule. If you get caught at low health it's your problem, too bad for you. Probably not the best way to fix it though.2 - Implement some "first hit" logic. If you started the pvp encounter, you are eligible to pvp rewards/penalties regardless of your HPs. Better than #1, but a little tricky to implement. Not balanced since it favors some classes too, who rely heavily on getting the jump on their target and/or are good at locking down their target (some scouts, enchanters...).3 - Make the rule symmetrical. If you are not eligible to pvp penalties, then you are not eligible to pvp rewards either. You dropped your health before engaging somebody ? Fine but you won't be rewarded if you win. That's my favored options, sounds reasonnable and easy to implement.Discuss...</blockquote>    Umm, as I far as I know, if you're engaged in PvP combat, Safehouse doesn't BREAK an encounter... plus..if you use Safehouse while being attacked...it engage's you in PvP combat... So, I'd say you have wrong information on that <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> Oh, and also, Safehouse doesn't break PvE encounters either... but I may not know what I'm talking about...I'm just a lonely little Brigand... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote>Not sure about the details, but I heard if the brig did not engage you until he hits 50%, he can safehouse and then kill you, getting the reward without risk.Tbh I have more trouble with ppl trying to engage directly below health threshold <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Ecafmi]

hmm... I'll see if I can get someone to test this out, if so, it does need to be fixed. Anyone on venekor want a chance for free fame to check an exploit out <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />***Edit*** "Possible Free Fame" If it is as stated, and I don't loose fame, I'm not going to just let you kill me again <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Bozidar]

<cite>Sneakky@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>    Umm, as I far as I know, if you're engaged in PvP combat, Safehouse doesn't BREAK an encounter... plus..if you use Safehouse while being attacked...it engage's you in PvP combat... So, I'd say you have wrong information on that <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> Oh, and also, Safehouse doesn't break PvE encounters either... but I may not know what I'm talking about...I'm just a lonely little Brigand... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/97ada74b88049a6d50a6ed40898a03d7.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></blockquote><p>if you cast safehouse prior to combat, and get "safehoused", it breaks the encounter for those attacking you.  you can then charge back at them and attack w/o fear of fame loss.</p><p>it's an exploit, and should have been fixed 5 updates ago, imo.  but what do i know, i'm just a lonely little brigand who never spec'd safehouse so that he didn't get associated with all the mercenaries out there exploiting this.. </p>

[Ecafmi]

Idk, every time I use safehouse after getting at least "hit" by someone in pvp, I'm automatically engaged and it doesn't break anything... I've always casted it prior to PvP as well. Idk though, I don't look for exploits or try and use 'em. Mainly use safehouse to get away =P

[Faenril]

When I get the jump on a brig and he cancels safehouse, I usually get out of combat. I'm not sure if the brig is put in combat, maybe. Even this way, if he was below 50% he gets put in combat below the threshold >> no risk. Idk what happens if there is a DOT or debuff on the brig when he cancels safehouse, but I assume I get put back in combat immediately anyway. Anyway my concern is not HOW ppl exploit the rule. I just gave some well known examples but there are probably other ways. What must be fixed is not the means to exploit the holes in the rule, what must be fixed is the rule *itself*. Otherwise ppl will always find other cheap ways...

[Bozidar]

<cite>Sneakky@Venekor wrote:</cite><blockquote>Idk, every time I use safehouse after getting at least "hit" by someone in pvp, I'm automatically engaged and it doesn't break anything... I've always casted it prior to PvP as well. Idk though, I don't look for exploits or try and use 'em. Mainly use safehouse to get away =P </blockquote>use it before you get hit

[Buttcliffe]

Please fix this!

[Sorffats]

Yes.  I agree with this choker thing.  There are several people that run around looking for pvp witht he choker on.  One fighter in a high end Q guild who's name starts with a "Z", ran around Danak a few weeks ago chokering himself to under 50% health.   Even had a pet up that was named "Youcantgetmyfame".  He was running around just engaging anyone he could once he got below 50% health because he was fully aware that he couldn't lose anything, but he could still gain fame and updates.I agree with the OP, I say make it so that if you can't lose fame/infamy, kvd, etc then you also can not gain anything.  Either that or make some kind of code that notices people using exploits from items such as bloodthirsty choker that if they are killed in pvp under the repeated effect of bloodthirsty choker, then they should have their title dropped two ranks (a dreadnaught would be dropped to destoyer),  they should be carnage flagged, and have a penalty placed upon them that doesn't allow them any immunity anywhere.

[Bozidar]

Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night.  stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw

[Bloodfa]

I gotta say, the part about dropping 2 ranks for getting hit while chokered, I like it a lot, and it made me giggle.  But it's kind of embarassing to giggle when you're 40. 

[gdawg311]

I didnt read this whole thread only the OP but<b><span class="postbody">1 - Remove the rule. If you get caught at low health it's your problem, too bad for you. Probably not the best way to fix it though.</span></b>This is the absolute best way to fix this, the pvp is way too carebear as it is with all the stupid rules that keep getting implemented. In fact I propose that they remove all these stupid rules they have in place, I remember back in EQ1 PVP how much fun it was because there were no rules, ( evac, zoning, run speed, immunities etc. ). Just my 2cp.

[Sorffats]

<cite>Bozidar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night. stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw</blockquote>Yup, fought this person tonight along with two of his buddies who's names start with "dry" and "idont" and respectively end in "ken" and "miss".All three of them ran around under 50% health.   My group killed them all a dozen times or so, never got a kill for them.  I died to them probably 4 times throughout the night and lost infamy and got charged a death each time.   So sick of wusses who think their crap don't stink and use a definite exploit.   They should have there titles completely removed.One of the groups that was out managed to charm "dry" to allow his health to get back above 50%.  But the moment charm was broke, he immediately evac'd to save the precious fame that he'd acquired all night by false means.

[CtrlF]

<cite>Eragahn@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bozidar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night. stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw</blockquote>Yup, fought this person tonight along with two of his buddies who's names start with "dry" and "idont" and respectively end in "ken" and "miss".All three of them ran around under 50% health.   My group killed them all a dozen times or so, never got a kill for them.  I died to them probably 4 times throughout the night and lost infamy and got charged a death each time.   So sick of wusses who think their crap don't stink and use a definite exploit.   They should have there titles completely removed.One of the groups that was out managed to charm "dry" to allow his health to get back above 50%.  But the moment charm was broke, he immediately evac'd to save the precious fame that he'd acquired all night by false means.</blockquote><p>C'mon Eragahn .. when you went out to pvp you knew there was a rule that if you engaged people under 50% health you wouldn't get credit. Why would you expect the people you meet out there to have over 50% health?</p><p>I think that if you know the rule is in place and you go out to pvp anyway, you deserve exactly what you get. I'm not sure why people in "100% health easy-mode" expect every rule they don't like to be changed to something more convenient for their playstyle.</p><p>You knew the risk when you left Freeport that night, you shouldn't expect the rule to be changed just because you enjoy the benefits of having 100% health.</p><p>Man .. some people!</p>

[Buttcliffe]

this chokering thing is just dumb.   You should NEVER be in a position to gain something and have zero chance of losing it, in Player vs. Player scenarios.  Dreww quit cheating

[yellowbelly08]

<p>My guild know if i catch them chokering they would be in serious trouble. All the respect a player has built up on the server instantly evaporates when they are caught using the choker in this way, but I guess its worth that risk to some people. They assume its better to be a master/overseer with no respect than a champion/dread with respect intact. They assume wrong...... p.s I expected more from Dryken tbh, sorry dude you just lost it...</p><p>Galoro</p>

[Ecafmi]

Ok.... So the 50% Safehouse thing does work..O.o... I found out tonight by accident!! Casted safehouse right before a fight to get closer to a ranger, or at least try when he got in that are, canceled it right when he got to that area...I was under 50% when I did...stupid lag... of course... I didn't loose fame or anything...MAKE NOTE!!!!::: Right after, I mean ASAP when I spawned I ran to Scalak (giving his name for confirmation) I made a pet saying sorry, another stating that I really didn't mean too, another telling him that he gets his infamy from me (free kill) I then ran off the docks, out of immunity, sat down, and took my death so he got his fame he deserved! Again, sorry Scalak for that happening, I hope there isn't any hard feelings!!! See ya in the killing fields!!So, in turn, this EXPLOIT needs fixed, also right after my death and talking through pets w/ scalak, I /bug'd it, then of course here I am posting about it...so hopefully this gets fixed!!!

[Faenril]

<cite>CtrlFrk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eragahn@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bozidar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night. stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw</blockquote>Yup, fought this person tonight along with two of his buddies who's names start with "dry" and "idont" and respectively end in "ken" and "miss".All three of them ran around under 50% health.   My group killed them all a dozen times or so, never got a kill for them.  I died to them probably 4 times throughout the night and lost infamy and got charged a death each time.   So sick of wusses who think their crap don't stink and use a definite exploit.   They should have there titles completely removed.One of the groups that was out managed to charm "dry" to allow his health to get back above 50%.  But the moment charm was broke, he immediately evac'd to save the precious fame that he'd acquired all night by false means.</blockquote><p>C'mon Eragahn .. when you went out to pvp you knew there was a rule that if you engaged people under 50% health you wouldn't get credit. Why would you expect the people you meet out there to have over 50% health?</p><p>I think that if you know the rule is in place and you go out to pvp anyway, you deserve exactly what you get. I'm not sure why people in "100% health easy-mode" expect every rule they don't like to be changed to something more convenient for their playstyle.</p><p>You knew the risk when you left Freeport that night, you shouldn't expect the rule to be changed just because you enjoy the benefits of having 100% health.</p><p>Man .. some people!</p></blockquote>I agree it's not ppl's fault that a poorly thought out rule was put in game, together with the tools to exploit it.Individuals should not be blamed for system design errors.Though you are wrong Drew: one SHOULD expect the rules to be changed, when they favor a lame playstyle over those who try to enjoy the game 'as intended' - unless you think SOE's idea of pvp was everybody running around in orange health, in which case I feel sorry for you...I'm not asking, nor do I expect, anybody to be "punished" for taking advantage of the in place ruleset. But I DO expect game mechanics to be fixed, when they are broken, as in that case.It's little similar to the "exile faction" issue: SOE created the mess by poorly thought mechanics, so they have to sort it out now...

[CtrlF]

<cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>CtrlFrk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eragahn@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bozidar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night. stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw</blockquote>Yup, fought this person tonight along with two of his buddies who's names start with "dry" and "idont" and respectively end in "ken" and "miss".All three of them ran around under 50% health.   My group killed them all a dozen times or so, never got a kill for them.  I died to them probably 4 times throughout the night and lost infamy and got charged a death each time.   So sick of wusses who think their crap don't stink and use a definite exploit.   They should have there titles completely removed.One of the groups that was out managed to charm "dry" to allow his health to get back above 50%.  But the moment charm was broke, he immediately evac'd to save the precious fame that he'd acquired all night by false means.</blockquote><p>C'mon Eragahn .. when you went out to pvp you knew there was a rule that if you engaged people under 50% health you wouldn't get credit. Why would you expect the people you meet out there to have over 50% health?</p><p>I think that if you know the rule is in place and you go out to pvp anyway, you deserve exactly what you get. I'm not sure why people in "100% health easy-mode" expect every rule they don't like to be changed to something more convenient for their playstyle.</p><p>You knew the risk when you left Freeport that night, you shouldn't expect the rule to be changed just because you enjoy the benefits of having 100% health.</p><p>Man .. some people!</p></blockquote>I agree it's not ppl's fault that a poorly thought out rule was put in game, together with the tools to exploit it.Individuals should not be blamed for system design errors.Though you are wrong Drew: one SHOULD expect the rules to be changed, when they favor a lame playstyle over those who try to enjoy the game 'as intended' - unless you think SOE's idea of pvp was everybody running around in orange health, in which case I feel sorry for you...I'm not asking, nor do I expect, anybody to be "punished" for taking advantage of the in place ruleset. But I DO expect game mechanics to be fixed, when they are broken, as in that case.It's little similar to the "exile faction" issue: SOE created the mess by poorly thought mechanics, so they have to sort it out now...</blockquote><p>Sorry, but this isn't Dreww</p><p>Also, my reply was for Eragahn as a mirror image of his post about Master Amnesty. My goal was to point out that his narrow-minded opinion there could be mirrored in any dispute, regardless of what side he takes.</p><p>Personally, I thought my "100% Health Easy-Mode" was a dead giveaway.</p>

[Sorffats]

<cite>CtrlFrk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Faenril@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>CtrlFrk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Eragahn@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bozidar wrote:</cite><blockquote>Yep, had an exile chanter who's name starts with a D attack my brother's fury in nek last night. stupid thing was he couldn't even lose fame, he just exploits out of habit. (name ends in ewwww) btw</blockquote>Yup, fought this person tonight along with two of his buddies who's names start with "dry" and "idont" and respectively end in "ken" and "miss".All three of them ran around under 50% health. My group killed them all a dozen times or so, never got a kill for them. I died to them probably 4 times throughout the night and lost infamy and got charged a death each time. So sick of wusses who think their crap don't stink and use a definite exploit. They should have there titles completely removed.One of the groups that was out managed to charm "dry" to allow his health to get back above 50%. But the moment charm was broke, he immediately evac'd to save the precious fame that he'd acquired all night by false means.</blockquote><p>C'mon Eragahn .. when you went out to pvp you knew there was a rule that if you engaged people under 50% health you wouldn't get credit. Why would you expect the people you meet out there to have over 50% health?</p><p>I think that if you know the rule is in place and you go out to pvp anyway, you deserve exactly what you get. I'm not sure why people in "100% health easy-mode" expect every rule they don't like to be changed to something more convenient for their playstyle.</p><p>You knew the risk when you left Freeport that night, you shouldn't expect the rule to be changed just because you enjoy the benefits of having 100% health.</p><p>Man .. some people!</p></blockquote>I agree it's not ppl's fault that a poorly thought out rule was put in game, together with the tools to exploit it.Individuals should not be blamed for system design errors.Though you are wrong Drew: one SHOULD expect the rules to be changed, when they favor a lame playstyle over those who try to enjoy the game 'as intended' - unless you think SOE's idea of pvp was everybody running around in orange health, in which case I feel sorry for you...I'm not asking, nor do I expect, anybody to be "punished" for taking advantage of the in place ruleset. But I DO expect game mechanics to be fixed, when they are broken, as in that case.It's little similar to the "exile faction" issue: SOE created the mess by poorly thought mechanics, so they have to sort it out now...</blockquote><p>Sorry, but this isn't Dreww</p><p>Also, my reply was for Eragahn as a mirror image of his post about Master Amnesty. My goal was to point out that his narrow-minded opinion there could be mirrored in any dispute, regardless of what side he takes.</p><p>Personally, I thought my "100% Health Easy-Mode" was a dead giveaway.</p></blockquote> First of all, I caught the sarcasm with CtrlFrk's reply.  <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Secondly, if requesting that the game be fair for EVERYONE is considered narrow minded ....  guilty as charged.

[Faenril]

<cite>CtrlFrk wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>Sorry, but this isn't Dreww<p>Also, my reply was for Eragahn as a mirror image of his post about Master Amnesty. My goal was to point out that his narrow-minded opinion there could be mirrored in any dispute, regardless of what side he takes.</p><p>Personally, I thought my "100% Health Easy-Mode" was a dead giveaway.</p></blockquote>Oh my bad then, completely missed that one ^^. That's what happens when I'm lacking coffee :p.