PDA

View Full Version : Titles...Come see!


Ecafmi
05-23-2007, 10:59 AM
<p> Ok, yes... another Title's thread. Now, first off... I'm not some untitled or hunter that can't get titles... I've been</p><p> up to dread.. back down to dest... back up.. and now back to Dest.. But I think titles should be... well not </p><p>removed but changed on how they are earned. I don't think there should be infamy. I think they should change it</p><p> to where you get titles based on your kills.. for example</p><p>  250 kills = Hunter</p><p>  500 kills = Slayer</p><p> 1000 kills = Destroyer </p><p> and so on, you get the picture.. just like mob kills. If they do this.. at least little title huggers won't run..(as much)</p><p> I think it would increase the pvp for the main reason that people would actually have to fight and kill to get there</p><p> titles. Everything would pretty much stay the same except you wouldn't be able to lose your title. It would </p><p>always be there. So no more title huggers.. people running for fear of infamy loss. But at the same time, if you kill</p><p> X player, then for 30 mins, you don't get another count for you kill of X player.. just the same as it is now.. This is </p><p>how I thought it should have been since day one.. but .. anyway.. what are some of your all's thoughts on this?!?</p>

Rattfa
05-23-2007, 11:08 AM
All you would need to do to get a title would be to grief newbs in t2...then not have to worry about anything else while you level to t7. Would be an even worse indication of PvP skill than the current system. You could take that one step further and have it based on kvd ratio, or the gulf between kills and deaths, ie. 250 more kills than deaths, 500 more kills then deaths etc....but this would still promote title hugging and lame tactics to avoid death. SOE tried something clever and new with the titles, and it didnt quite work. The above suggestion is not the answer. It would just be very lame imo.

Microbolt
05-23-2007, 11:51 AM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p> Ok, yes... another Title's thread. Now, first off... I'm not some untitled or hunter that can't get titles... I've been</p><p> up to dread.. back down to dest... back up.. and now back to Dest.. But I think titles should be... well not </p><p>removed but changed on how they are earned. I don't think there should be infamy. I think they should change it</p><p> to where you get titles based on your kills.. for example</p><p>  250 kills = Hunter</p><p>  500 kills = Slayer</p><p> 1000 kills = Destroyer </p><p> and so on, you get the picture.. just like mob kills. If they do this.. at least little title huggers won't run..(as much)</p><p> I think it would increase the pvp for the main reason that people would actually have to fight and kill to get there</p><p> titles. Everything would pretty much stay the same except you wouldn't be able to lose your title. It would </p><p>always be there. So no more title huggers.. people running for fear of infamy loss. But at the same time, if you kill</p><p> X player, then for 30 mins, you don't get another count for you kill of X player.. just the same as it is now.. This is </p><p>how I thought it should have been since day one.. but .. anyway.. what are some of your all's thoughts on this?!?</p></blockquote><p> I think the title system shouldn't be touched.  Besides titles are completly useless.  Why would you put emphasis on them at all?   They dont allow you to buy anything cheaper.  They dont increase your stats at all.  Are they are is fluff and possibly braging rights.</p><p>Even though there are people that have obtain thier title by questionable means.  There are the majority out there that just happen to get the title by PvP'ing well.  Titles are a nice indicator (for the most part) on how tough of an encouter you are about to engage.  So you can adjust your stradegy accoringly.</p><p>Plus the ablilty to lose your title for some create a sence of danger in the game.  This is good so that you dont have people coming up knowing full and well that they will lose come up and just start meleeing on you because they know the have nothing to lose.</p>

Soulhunt
05-23-2007, 11:55 AM
<p>i like the idea of total kills and not losing ur title. not sure its the answer but the system as it stands now is flawed and needs to be fixed in some way or another.</p><p>either that or allow hiding titles or reseting em.</p><p>SOULHUNTER</p>

Groma
05-23-2007, 12:05 PM
title hugger, you ran away from me to avoid a fame hit last night, Sally.

Balrok
05-23-2007, 12:25 PM
<p>Not a fan of this idea at all.... at lvl 70 you'd have everyone being Destoryer, and what's the point of that.</p><p>Here is my 2 cp.</p><p> Just leave the title system!  It is was it is.  If you care about it, good for you.  It means NOTHING, as far as skill goes.  Besides, what else are you going to do when your 70 with 100 aa and have all your pvp gear.  It's a system that at least keeps you working on something forever.</p><p>And just as a side note:  People who zone hug or flee or perma group to keep titles.... Guess what.... they would/will do EXACTLY the same thing if you took the titles away.  So imho, no matter what you change... people play the way the play.  Fact!</p><p>Exur - 70 Coercer</p><p>Venekor</p>

Balrok
05-23-2007, 12:29 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>either that or allow people to hide or reset thier titles. i personally would like to reset mine...would be fun getting my title back imho.</p></blockquote><p>And this is what the system was designed to do.  Why change what people consider "fun".  Again, some people will avoid dieing at all cost... a title doesn't change this playstyle.</p><p>Exur - 70 Coercer</p><p>Venekor </p>

Norrsken
05-23-2007, 12:37 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>All you would need to do to get a title would be to grief newbs in t2...then not have to worry about anything else while you level to t7. Would be an even worse indication of PvP skill than the current system. You could take that one step further and have it based on kvd ratio, or the gulf between kills and deaths, ie. 250 more kills than deaths, 500 more kills then deaths etc....but this would still promote title hugging and lame tactics to avoid death. SOE tried something clever and new with the titles, and it didnt quite work. The above suggestion is not the answer. It would just be very lame imo. </blockquote>And this is different froms tatus quo how?

Rattfa
05-23-2007, 12:40 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>All you would need to do to get a title would be to grief newbs in t2...then not have to worry about anything else while you level to t7. Would be an even worse indication of PvP skill than the current system. You could take that one step further and have it based on kvd ratio, or the gulf between kills and deaths, ie. 250 more kills than deaths, 500 more kills then deaths etc....but this would still promote title hugging and lame tactics to avoid death. SOE tried something clever and new with the titles, and it didnt quite work. The above suggestion is not the answer. It would just be very lame imo. </blockquote>And this is different froms tatus quo how? </blockquote>I'm not sure why you're asking me that... Perhaps read my post again <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Norrsken
05-23-2007, 12:49 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>All you would need to do to get a title would be to grief newbs in t2...then not have to worry about anything else while you level to t7. Would be an even worse indication of PvP skill than the current system. You could take that one step further and have it based on kvd ratio, or the gulf between kills and deaths, ie. 250 more kills than deaths, 500 more kills then deaths etc....but this would still promote title hugging and lame tactics to avoid death. SOE tried something clever and new with the titles, and it didnt quite work. The above suggestion is not the answer. It would just be very lame imo. </blockquote>And this is different froms tatus quo how? </blockquote>I'm not sure why you're asking me that... Perhaps read my post again <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> </blockquote>Doh. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Nevermind me. Im just stupid.

Soulhunt
05-23-2007, 12:59 PM
<p><span style="color: #0099cc">title hugger, you ran away from me to avoid a fame hit last night, Sally. [gromann] </span></p><p><span style="color: #0099cc"><span style="color: #ff3366">of course i ran.....me and sk where in a  fight with 2 healers. was getting interesting and then u showed up to gank fame......when i saw odds turn i fought alittle longer til power ran out and then ran. i dont give infamy away freely....u wherent even there for the start of it...why should i stay just cuase u showed up? ive seen everyone run at some time or another...even u gromann. good luck next time<img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></span></span></p><p><span style="color: #0099cc"><span style="color: #00cc99">SOULHUNTER</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #00cc99">p.s. i can frap now....hope i can show some good fights.</span></p>

shalom
05-24-2007, 12:35 PM
<p>I think the fame/imfamy idea works better.</p><p>What i *would* like to see is some way to monitor actual fame numbers/levels.  How much fame did I get/lose from that last kill/death? How close am I to gaining/losing title?  Lets shine some light on the fame/imfamy numbers and make the current system better.</p>

silentpsycho
05-24-2007, 02:32 PM
<cite>shalom wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I think the fame/imfamy idea works better.</p><p>What i *would* like to see is some way to monitor actual fame numbers/levels.  How much fame did I get/lose from that last kill/death? How close am I to gaining/losing title?  Lets shine some light on the fame/imfamy numbers and make the current system better.</p></blockquote> But if SOE made infamy/fame transparent and measurable, they would have to fix bugs in yet another area of the product.  It will never happen.

Splintered
05-24-2007, 02:47 PM
<p>To OP,</p><p> All that idea would mean is the people who always run in groups or raids would beneift the most. Your little tier 2 guild of extreme twinks all love your titles.</p>

Ameniel
05-24-2007, 05:46 PM
Actually I think the OP's idea rocks...if that happened pvp would be more about just the killing than running to keep titles or KvDs or what not.

Magius789
05-24-2007, 05:54 PM
Just remove them and get it over with.  Sure the hard core/crazy people out there will still run but there are also a lot of people that if it was taken out would just quit caring and stay and fight.  It makes me sick when i see someone asking for help in the chat channels and the only reponse they get are "what are there titles".  Its a pvp server not a "look at my title server"...this same person boasted about their lvl 25 general and how uber they were and then said he was zoning to the caves so.  1. why a lvl 25 was going to the caves I have no idea and 2. caves isn't for pvp its for people ganking lowbies in lvl 1 gear still.....As for the thought of what to do when you hit T7, well thats why they have expansions and give one account 5 or 6 character slots, I can't remember, so you can try another class.  And if you don't like alts and your main has experienced every zone and instance this game has to offer then go outside and enjoy the day!  Read a book, spend time with your lady/man, get a date, watch a movie.  Its summer!   <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

ailen
05-24-2007, 06:24 PM
<p>Terrible idea.  Simply terrible.  It would not be an indicator of your "skill" at a class at all then... it's just be farm a title, move on.</p><p>The title system is screwed up... but only in the respects of how much people care about them.  If you want to PvP your way, without titles in the game, go ahead and disregard them.  Maybe people should be given the ability to "hide" or "turn off" titles from being seen at all.  (only to them that is) so they can run around and fight without ever knowing what title they are, or what someone else is.  That's about the easist choice I can imagine.   just turn that feature off if you don't want to use it, let other people do it if they want to.   It's real hard not to care if it's hanging over your head.   Maybe allow someone to disable fame gain, so they can sit at no title for the rest of their gaming life?  I don't know.</p><p>The current system needs a tweak or two.  Best idea I have read to date is to have a title on a decaying system.  People couldn't run for days on end then, they would have to actually KILL people (which means FIGHT) to maintain their title.  /shrug.</p><p>Either way it's personal choice.  I personally only care so much as to not be a Hunter on a brigand,  because, well, that's a terrible thing to be for one of the most powerful classes in the game, but I don't give a rip beyond that.... I've been a dreadnaught on my brig, solo and I fight everyone, lose it, means nothing.</p><p>If it's there, people will care.  It's like trying to have matching armor even though it means little to nothing how you look.  It's a tag, a title, and its only worth what you make it out to be.</p><p>peace.</p>

sprogn
05-24-2007, 06:44 PM
Great idea, but it should be on kills with decay (say 20% of your kill count decays per week).  The higher your title, the more you must kill to keep it.

Magius789
05-24-2007, 07:22 PM
IMO the title system now is a very poor indicator of skill.  Get into a fight with a person who has a high title and you don't and they start loosing and they just stun/root/snare and run.

ailen
05-24-2007, 07:26 PM
<cite>Magius789 wrote:</cite><blockquote>IMO the title system now is a very poor indicator of skill.  Get into a fight with a person who has a high title and you don't and they start loosing and they just stun/root/snare and run.</blockquote><p> Survival is just as much an indicator of how well you PvP as ganking someone.   You need to EARN your kill, and if you can't do the job... you don't get the kill.</p><p>Its called a tactical retreat.  Yeah, they even have a real phrase for that.</p><p>Hugging zone lines to escape is lame tbh, but if I find you in the open and I start to lose and make a hasty retreat... <b>your bad.</b></p><p>Besides, you're a ranger according to your sig, what are you crying about?  you'll kite someone til they are dead, and you're complaining about someone running?</p>

Lowell_high
05-24-2007, 10:45 PM
Actually, that title system is something close to what Dark Age of Camelot had, everyone competed for the most kills.  It was awesome, and that games pvp owned everquest 2's.  You fought just to kill other players, no one ever really ran away from a fight.  But maybe thats because there was no where to go for the most part. =P

HerbertWalker
05-24-2007, 11:48 PM
<p>Since there are so many people who believe that titles mean NOTHING, I find it odd that in my 1000 or so battles, the title of the enemy most often does reflect the difficulty of the fight.  Your opinions and my experiences don't add up.</p><p>But skill?   Why bring that concept into this debate?  This is not just a game of skill.  It is one of preparation, organization, strategy, and also your skill in employing tactics against the enemy.  There is a lot more to it than just skill.</p><p>You don't like titles because they are not a measure of skill.</p><p>No one ever said that they are!   But it sounds like many of you do not recognize that titles are a fairly accurate measure of the difficulty of the enemy.  This difficulty may be due to skill, or it may not.  Most often it is due both to being ubered out AND having mad skills.  Most often being ubered out goes hand in hand with having a lot of experience with this 3 year old game.  Experience brings with it skill, some faster than others.</p><p>From those I have fought solo, I can identify the lower skill players who gained their title from group play.  They are the vast minority in T1-T5 at the moment.</p><p>Perhaps to be more clear we can define what skill is in this game.  When you speak about skill, are you talking about skill in being the most uber player in the game?  That is what I think of.  Or do you think of skill only as it pertains to a single battle taking place right now?  Because if that is the case, then your model of measuring skill is only relevant when two characters fight with identical gear/AA/spells.  That is the only way to measure skill if you are always going to use an excuse like, "oh but you have that uber wand of destruction, so that is why you won."</p><p>Is evaccing away from a 6 man gank group considered a skilled move?  I think so, but it sounds like some of you would consider it vastly more skilled if the gankee fought back and got one of the gank group wizards down to 60% heath before dying.  Is that more skilled than the evac tactic?</p><p>Do we really need to define every cheese tactic, or can we simply realize that the definition of skill is directly tied to getting results?  In this model, any tactic used to achieve the result is in play.  Tactic becomes irrelevant, only results.  If getting a great title is your end goal, then once you obtain that title you have proven your uber skill - in the minds of all players who follow that model.  It is not relevant that you gained the title through cheesy or even illegitimate means.  You found a way to achieve your end goal.  What gives this model weight, is that achieving the top title in EQ2 actually <b>is</b> difficult and rare.  If any 5 year old could achieve it, then this model would not be a good way to measure skill.</p><p>And yes most definately, in this model, the level locked AA hore ganker may be considered to be the ultimate in skillz.  If his goal is to kill as many of the enemy as possible, and he is doing so, achieving huge results in the form of titles, KvD, status, cash, then that is a very skilled player.  How he got there is not relevant, only whether he achieves or not.  One can choose not to believe in this model, but the opinion of those players is largely irrelevant to those who do.  Many players can, should, and do recognize these results as great skill because many players do not know how to achieve such results, and for some players even if they did know how, they would not have the tactical skill to accomplish them.  Some players are better at video games than others.  Some are more into the research of getting their character suited up than others.  Some players have a lot more patience and time than others, and thus can achieve massive AA's.  All of that must be considered skill in a game like this.</p><p>Are you here to win tons of battles and achieve results that the game itself provides in the form of many types of rewards?  Or are you here to win every "fair" battle you participate in (where only tactical skill is the difference between the players?)  That seems to be the difference in the mindsets of these two types of players.</p>

HerbertWalker
05-25-2007, 12:02 AM
<p>If your goal is to win lots of pvp battles, but your <b>party</b> lacks the skills to catch/prevent runners, then you are simply not a skilled player.  You must not be setting up a proper group to PvP with.  That shows a complete lack of understanding of this game, which is equivalent to having no skill.</p>

shalom
05-25-2007, 12:42 PM
<cite>silentpsycho wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>shalom wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>I think the fame/imfamy idea works better.</p><p>What i *would* like to see is some way to monitor actual fame numbers/levels.  How much fame did I get/lose from that last kill/death? How close am I to gaining/losing title?  Lets shine some light on the fame/imfamy numbers and make the current system better.</p></blockquote> But if SOE made infamy/fame transparent and measurable, they would have to fix bugs in yet another area of the product.  It will never happen.</blockquote><p>you mean this?...</p><p>if(kill){fame = fame + 1}</p><p>if(death){fame = fame - 100}</p>

Bozidar
05-25-2007, 12:47 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>Actually, that title system is something close to what Dark Age of Camelot had, everyone competed for the most kills.  It was awesome, and that games pvp owned everquest 2's.  You fought just to kill other players, no one ever really ran away from a fight.  But maybe thats because there was no where to go for the most part. =P </blockquote><p>Right, DAoC was awesome, that's why you're playing pvp on EQ2.</p><p>When dying ceases to matter, i'll stop playing.  No thanks. </p>

Microbolt
05-25-2007, 07:32 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>Maybe people should be given the ability to "hide" or "turn off" titles from being seen at all.  (only to them that is) so they can run around and fight without ever knowing what title they are, or what someone else is.  </p></blockquote> That is the best idea I've seen in any of the "Please get rid of titles" post floating around.

gfx
05-26-2007, 04:55 AM
Very stupid idea .. Don't make this game more like WoW.

Shindah
05-26-2007, 08:43 AM
<p>Make title's have there own colour system.. If you kill 100 blue cons and 100 yellow cons your title will con white.</p><p>If you kill 110 blue cons and 90 yellow cons your title will be blue.</p><p>[Removed for Content]  when i come across a dread  with the title in bright green :-p</p><p>I understand this systm would have to change a little for lev 70's who can only fight even or under cons, but hey its a start ... and will leave a lot of ganking title zone huggers with a lovely red face hehe.. personally i think it would make a lot more of em fight and loose there tittle rather than be a green con champ/dread etc....</p><p>And please dont get me wrong  ive killed my own fair share of greens when i see em but the difference is , I Hunt even and ups, win loose or draw....</p><p>Whynd 42 brigand, Venekor.... back to pvp after server merge... ( [Removed for Content] i only have 5AA points   arghhhhh  lol)</p>

Soulhunt
05-27-2007, 07:04 AM
<p>i disagree with the idea to maintain ur title by killing an x amount of people a week. 2 problems i see with that is....first, not everyone can play online as long as others. secondly, on server like vox that would be almost impossible with the low population.</p><p>lets face it most people who play this game [myself included] like the idea of having titles and being proud of our accomplishments.</p><p>i like the idea of reseting ur title... to allow those that dont care about titles and those that want the challange to rebuilt it. although i like my title...i think i would reset just to get the new goal of getting it back. i dont see this option upsetting this game too much because i doubt alot of people out there would do it.</p><p>titles to some degree equals the skill of the player, but as we all know not always.</p><p>the conning title seems to be an interesting idea at first, but that would be very time consuming for soe to implement for a fix that would have only alittle impact on the game.</p><p>one last thing, we all know vox is low population, and transfers out were not allowed because its a SE. i didnt ask for vox to be a SE and it wasnt when i started play my toon. i feel soe should allow toons to transfer out of the SE server if they are original toons 'grandfathered' before it became a SE.</p><p>SOULHUNTER</p>

Groma
05-27-2007, 11:59 AM
Vox has always been SE unfortunately, i think the only solution available would be to eventually allow blue servers to transfer over, but we would only be lucky enough to have this happen around the release of RoK.

brambo2
05-29-2007, 02:34 PM
<p>first off..you'll never lose a title..which means all the noobs will have a decent title if they get a good group..i think the title system is fine..but has some problems</p><p>for example - I'm exiled - i get attacked by a..i believe he was a 15 ( i'm lvl 36 )  i resisted whatever spell he casted, next thing i know, a 70 SK one shots me with his HT, i lose notoriety.</p><p>That is the only problem i have with the title system.</p>