PDA

View Full Version : Hardcore server


Armironhead
06-06-2007, 04:52 PM
<p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p>

tass
06-06-2007, 05:39 PM
its called vanguard ffa. Near every class can kick your [Removed for Content] or has survivability with no limits and no where to run or zone. Been a month or so since ive been back there though. Im gonna use a month game card once this months game expires and I get sick of pveing my chars.

zorros
06-06-2007, 05:41 PM
<p>Not enough people would play to make it work.</p><p>All the people that wanted FFA servers spent ages on here saying they would leave and never come back when vanguard came out,FFA ftw and all that stuff.Guess what.Most of them have come back.</p><p>Soe has already shut a few servers down due to low numbers playing.I doubt very much that they would open a ffa server up that would be even less populated than the euro servers were.</p>

Image_Vain
06-07-2007, 06:28 AM
FFA would fail. Like our currant PvP system.

Ba
06-07-2007, 07:48 AM
<p>Vanguard FFA is for the weak. No item loot, no corpse runs, and there is safe zones. It's poop. Yes we need a hardcore server. The masses would flock to it, mainly to get away from the carebears that plague this land. </p><p>/signed</p>

Conjourer
06-07-2007, 07:52 AM
<p>I personally would like to see a Sullon Zek style "Deity Alliance" Server come out. If you worship Marr, Tunare, etc your on the "good" team, Brell, Ro your on the "Newt" team....Inny, Zek etc is Team evil...starting cities would be the same according to what you can pick now, ie trolls, ogres freeport...high elves, halflings Qeynos...etc...</p><p>The difference would be that some half elves in Freeport could worship Quellious and be newt....it adds the whole FFA factor to the game without being truly FFA...</p><p>I just have fond memories of the Early days of Sullon I guess...but I think it would be fun.</p>

Wilde_Night
06-07-2007, 09:14 AM
<p>A Sullon Zek style ruleset would be great.  Anyone can attack anyone, but you only take damage, xp loss, lose stuff if the people are in a certain range of you.</p><p>My husband tells a story about our guild way back when on Sullon Zek and how they 'owned' Odus.  He was a 50 Necromancer and came across someone too low for him to punish properly on their land.  So he rooted the guy over and over again, promising him pain (You could talk to the enemy then).. all the while calling in someone the right level to make sure he felt the pain of XP loss for tresspassing.  Afterwards, he was told to log for 24 hours at which time he could reclaim his corpse and items.  Failure to do so resulted in repeated deaths if he or others tried to retrieve his things.  Harsh?  Maybe.  Fun?  For many it was the peak of EQ PvP.  The 'Play Nice Policy' was suspended on Sullon Zek.  GM's let the players police themselves with a few exceptions.  You could corpse camp, bind camp and pretty much 'grief' each other, with one difference to what we experiance here.. no unpunished revive zerging.  You could do it, sure, but there was no Recent List to blanket you.  If you died, you lost everything all over again.  Including your corpse and items.</p>

Image_Vain
06-07-2007, 10:22 AM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>Vanguard FFA is for the weak. No item loot, no corpse runs, and there is safe zones. It's poop. Yes we need a hardcore server. The masses would flock to it, mainly to get away from the carebears that plague this land. </p><p>/signed</p></blockquote> "Maybe" people would come, but, the server would be to low in terms of population, if it was FFA there would be no chance for new players, unless they made a few same zones for PvE.

Siphar
06-07-2007, 10:36 AM
<p>FFA faction? it's called <b><u>EXILE</u></b>... although with level ranges, for you (but not against).</p><p>Pre-70 it is hardcore, and when you finally hit 70, you can still attack <i><u>anyone</u></i> within level range (depending on zone), although it is frowned upon to kill other exiles.</p><p>Being able to be killed by anyone is kind of nice if not kind of lame when you are fighting some people around your level, only to be 1-hitted by a 70 or someone significantly higher level. You consequently lose your cash/infamy to the people you were originally fighting.</p><p>Go figure ~~</p>

tass
06-07-2007, 12:53 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>Vanguard FFA is for the weak. No item loot, no corpse runs, and there is safe zones. It's poop. Yes we need a hardcore server. The masses would flock to it, mainly to get away from the carebears that plague this land. </p><p>/signed</p></blockquote>lol you tell me 1 place that was a safezone in that game. The bank? nope. The crafting place? nope. a guard that u had faction with. .... nope because they were killn off mobs to to faction to get at you lol. And the ffa server over there (not the stupid team 1) did have swarms of people. And then of course like all games devs screw it up or some such thing. I still play the game solely for pvp. Though the 1 thing that I LOVED about that game was the way that the gm's who handled the in game things had there priorities. When you tryed to sell gold and screw with there economy they banned u on the spot along with everyone assosiated with you. And if little care bear noobs would go on and on and on and on in chat and send a gm tells that they were being camped or people were "griefing" them (my guess is they were the pathetic s from games like wow and this 1) the gm would come on and announce server wide to A. Stop sending them tells. and B. Stop being such a baby and let them kill you. Then encourage everyone to grief people like them. That right there is class man lol.  And yes I love to hear a grey noob scream as I slice them open 20 levels above them out of boredom lol. Theres just nothing like the happy go killing feeling in vanguard lol.

Ba
06-07-2007, 10:32 PM
<p>Not going to go into VG FFA as the mods will simply lock the thread and tell us to go discuss it on the VG forums (which I assure I have discussed there many many times already)</p><p>as for EQ2 Hardcore server, VOTE YES IN 2007!</p><p>BTW Siphar, you said FFA "faction", <i>SERVER</i> is the word you are looking for. you want FFA <i>SERVER</i>.</p>

convict
06-07-2007, 10:50 PM
<cite>tass wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>Vanguard FFA is for the weak. No item loot, no corpse runs, and there is safe zones. It's poop. Yes we need a hardcore server. The masses would flock to it, mainly to get away from the carebears that plague this land. </p><p>/signed</p></blockquote>lol you tell me 1 place that was a safezone in that game. The bank? nope. The crafting place? nope. a guard that u had faction with. .... nope because they were killn off mobs to to faction to get at you lol. And the ffa server over there (not the stupid team 1) did have swarms of people. And then of course like all games devs screw it up or some such thing. I still play the game solely for pvp. Though the 1 thing that I LOVED about that game was the way that the gm's who handled the in game things had there priorities. When you tryed to sell gold and screw with there economy they banned u on the spot along with everyone assosiated with you. And if little care bear noobs would go on and on and on and on in chat and send a gm tells that they were being camped or people were "griefing" them (my guess is they were the pathetic s from games like wow and this 1) the gm would come on and announce server wide to A. Stop sending them tells. and B. Stop being such a baby and let them kill you. Then encourage everyone to grief people like them. That right there is class man lol.  And yes I love to hear a grey noob scream as I slice them open 20 levels above them out of boredom lol. Theres just nothing like the happy go killing feeling in vanguard lol. </blockquote>Hows that game doing? Didn't they just sell the game to SoE??

Image_Vain
06-08-2007, 03:38 AM
<cite>convict wrote:</cite><blockquote><ol><li>Hows that game doing? Didn't they just sell the game to SoE?</li></ol></blockquote> Everyone sells out to SoE, SoE is the king of MMO's

azekah
06-08-2007, 04:44 PM
lol....so what is hardcore about killing someone who has no chance of defending himself? sounds pathetic to me... EQII PvP actually makes sense in that it forces you to "try" and fight fair... of course all you ppl who are scared of real fights just find gank groups or twink yourself out at level 10...

Ba
06-08-2007, 06:04 PM
<p>so why not put in a FFA item loot server? take out the no level limits for all i care. No safe zones, item loot, and FFA is where it's at. Can't go through life bein' scared folks. It would be RZ part 2. awesome. </p><p>And for those that remember, Sullon Zek was great fun too. </p>

Image_Vain
06-08-2007, 06:07 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>so why not put in a FFA item loot server? take out the no level limits for all i care. No safe zones, item loot, and FFA is where it's at. Can't go through life bein' scared folks. It would be RZ part 2. awesome. </p><p>And for those that remember, Sullon Zek was great fun too. </p></blockquote> I heard PlanetSide is only 10 dollars.

Image_Vain
06-08-2007, 09:51 PM
<cite>myrdhyn wrote:</cite><blockquote> Lol.  Thats great.  Thats what I feel like on my level 20 exile.</blockquote>Enjoy it while you can, It seems all the whining from other threads calling for a lvl lock nerf or what not actually worked.

Ba
06-09-2007, 12:18 AM
<cite>Image_Vain wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>myrdhyn wrote:</cite><blockquote> Lol.  Thats great.  Thats what I feel like on my level 20 exile.</blockquote>Enjoy it while you can, It seems all the whining from other threads calling for a lvl lock nerf or what not actually worked. </blockquote> I heard Planetside is free.

Image_Vain
06-09-2007, 06:29 AM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Image_Vain wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>myrdhyn wrote:</cite><blockquote> Lol.  Thats great.  Thats what I feel like on my level 20 exile.</blockquote>Enjoy it while you can, It seems all the whining from other threads calling for a lvl lock nerf or what not actually worked. </blockquote> I heard Planetside is free. </blockquote> You heard wrong.

tass
06-09-2007, 03:27 PM
<cite>convict wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>tass wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><p>Vanguard FFA is for the weak. No item loot, no corpse runs, and there is safe zones. It's poop. Yes we need a hardcore server. The masses would flock to it, mainly to get away from the carebears that plague this land. </p><p>/signed</p></blockquote>lol you tell me 1 place that was a safezone in that game. The bank? nope. The crafting place? nope. a guard that u had faction with. .... nope because they were killn off mobs to to faction to get at you lol. And the ffa server over there (not the stupid team 1) did have swarms of people. And then of course like all games devs screw it up or some such thing. I still play the game solely for pvp. Though the 1 thing that I LOVED about that game was the way that the gm's who handled the in game things had there priorities. When you tryed to sell gold and screw with there economy they banned u on the spot along with everyone assosiated with you. And if little care bear noobs would go on and on and on and on in chat and send a gm tells that they were being camped or people were "griefing" them (my guess is they were the pathetic s from games like wow and this 1) the gm would come on and announce server wide to A. Stop sending them tells. and B. Stop being such a baby and let them kill you. Then encourage everyone to grief people like them. That right there is class man lol.  And yes I love to hear a grey noob scream as I slice them open 20 levels above them out of boredom lol. Theres just nothing like the happy go killing feeling in vanguard lol. </blockquote>Hows that game doing? Didn't they just sell the game to SoE?? </blockquote>ya they did. Its such a shame to that they laid off all of those great devs that made that game with the pathetic tools they gave them to work with. Ah heres the link I was looking for. This is an example of why games end up so pathetic or go downhill so fast. In fact if its like this in soe with a [Removed for Content] for a manager overseeing production than I apologize for any criticizing I gave a dev. <a href="http://www.f13.net/index.php?itemid=561#more" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://www.f13.net/index.php?itemid=561#more</a>

Ba
06-09-2007, 03:30 PM
Enough getting off topic, ladies. Man up and support the no safe zone / item loot movement.

Image_Vain
06-09-2007, 07:30 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote>Enough getting off topic, ladies. Man up and support the no safe zone / item loot movement. </blockquote> Ugh, if your going to have a FFA, then at least have safe zones so new players can lvl, or enable transfers from PVE servers.

tass
06-09-2007, 09:17 PM
lol I think ur missing the point of ffa. In that server there is no safe zone. None at all, and if they do it right theres no zones because the entire world is open. Banks, crafters, everything nothing is safe. You quickly learn who has ur back and who's gonna kick ur [Removed for Content].  I actually had friends on both sides. At 1 side were the rightious anti greifers, and on the other side were the people who didn't give a dam if you were a greifer or not. If you gave infamy you were dead unless a friend of theres. Wasn't to much I could do as I liked both peoples playing styles so when it came to my friends running into each other I let em have there fun against 1 another and watched the outcome. Unless the noobs hit me then id beat em down. God what fun lol. And just try and waste a banker or crafter, u'll find that most people in the room higher or even lv than you dont take kindly to it. Hell even the lower ones blast you away.

Image_Vain
06-09-2007, 09:23 PM
<cite>tass wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol I think ur missing the point of ffa. In that server there is no safe zone. None at all, and if they do it right theres no zones because the entire world is open. Banks, crafters, everything nothing is safe. You quickly learn who has ur back and who's gonna kick ur [I cannot control my vocabulary].  I actually had friends on both sides. At 1 side were the rightious anti greifers, and on the other side were the people who didn't give a dam if you were a greifer or not. If you gave infamy you were dead unless a friend of theres. Wasn't to much I could do as I liked both peoples playing styles so when it came to my friends running into each other I let em have there fun against 1 another and watched the outcome. Unless the noobs hit me then id beat em down. God what fun lol. And just try and waste a banker or crafter, u'll find that most people in the room higher or even lv than you dont take kindly to it. Hell even the lower ones blast you away. </blockquote> In that case, that means it would be almost impossible to lvl. However, it would be good if you couldn't transfer your character there and everybody had to start over from scratch. EQ2 open world? impossible.

Ba
06-09-2007, 09:35 PM
<p>SOE has done it before with Rallos Zek, they do it now with VG (but with no item loot), they can do it again here. It works, its fun, and it's a challenge. Those that want their softball pvp can stay on the existing servers and get nerfed every other LU and whine until they get their way or go play the WoW carebear zergfest. Make a server for people who can suck it up and fight, win, AND lose with gusto. I would be all for permadeath and no level limits too, but I know that's too much for most folks.</p>

tass
06-09-2007, 09:36 PM
exactly. Which is why this game will never ever be close to what real pvp is even supposed to be. From the combat, to the classes to the decking out of gear it doesn't come close in any aspect. Its a pve game through and through.

Image_Vain
06-10-2007, 07:46 AM
<cite>tass wrote:</cite><blockquote>exactly. Which is why this game will never ever be close to what real pvp is even supposed to be. From the combat, to the classes to the decking out of gear it doesn't come close in any aspect. Its a pve game through and through. </blockquote> I agree, this game was made for PVE and will never be a PVP game, no matter how much it tries, L2 was made from the ground up for PVP. The only way FFA would work is if SOE made it that you had to start over from scratch, no character transfers. Or, if SOE made that even players from currant PVP servers/PVE servers could join at anytime.

tass
06-10-2007, 04:08 PM
they'd have to do alot more than that. They would have to rewrite the entire class system because lets face it, some classes just blow with others being the kings over all.  I know vanguard wasn't the biggest hit but what they did with the classes was somewhat the right thing. Every class has its ups and downs, Healers can heal but not dps, dps healers can dps but not really heal, everything has its own chaotic balance. Not only that but the combat system would have to be redone. The whole in combat out of combat thing.. gone. Certain classes like the bard and such would be the only ones to have a marginal speed increase and even then you have classes that can slow em down (ie in vanguard classes like the sorcerer have a small dmg spell that slows the target down from running) The entire zone system would have to be redone so you wouldn't have the im gonna wait by a gate players so that every place in every aspect is pvp no pve safeness. As is the ffa world. Attacks would be reworked, coding, everything. It would cost so much money to actually make a REAL pvp server in this game and thats not even including if they wanted to go for what newer games are offering like flying. The cost would be mind boggling. Which is why soe probably forked over the cash in the first place for vanguard. It already has all of the basic coding and classes and game mechanics set up, all they have to do is edit things like the graphics engines and crack down on the bigs and BAM they have themselves another source of monthly income. That is of course if they do it right. If they make an error its just a cash down the drain.

Armironhead
06-10-2007, 10:02 PM
<p>EQII PvP actually makes sense in that it forces you to "try" and fight fair... -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p>I dont understand why people want fair fights -- fair fights are duels not war </p><p>and as for safe zones, for ffa they are not necessary.  --- what you would really want are fortified zones.  The closer to the main city, the heavier the fortifications -- so only the most determined enemy grps could pierce the city walls.  IMO that makes for sense from a story/game point of view and is closer to rl model.  </p>

natasha
06-10-2007, 11:47 PM
I don't think a FFA would work well, more specifically for newer players. To someone who has just bought the game, and is trying to learn this giant MMO and live in NOrrath, adding the additional challenge of being killed every two steps you take by higher levels would turn alot of people off. Also, it would kill solo-ers, who are the heart of the game really, as it would be impossible to do anything solo with a brand new toon who was new to the server.

tass
06-11-2007, 04:38 AM
you know its not going to be implemented on the servers right? Even if they did fork out the cash to make a server that was ffa it would be completely separate. Its like people don't even think or read or know.

Image_Vain
06-11-2007, 07:14 AM
<cite>tass wrote:</cite><blockquote>you know its not going to be implemented on the servers right? Even if they did fork out the cash to make a server that was ffa it would be completely separate. Its like people don't even think or read or know. </blockquote> Link please?

Rajasa
06-11-2007, 11:03 AM
<p>I read some of the responses calling people "carebears" and "noobs" et al... That isn't very constructive.</p><p>Let me state this plain and simple. There is NO such thing as "hardcore" in a video game. That's right, it's a game. Meant to be played and enjoyed.</p><p>For your information, people who play on pvp servers don't mind being killed. What they mind is being killed over and over again by people who cheat, level-lock, twink and buy gold to twink on the internet. They have zero chance of defending themselves, and that is certainly NOT hardcore my friends.</p><p>That childish behavior goes on in every pvp game on the market, and is the single biggest reason why the vast majority of people do not care to play on the pvp servers, although I still do.</p><p>So, the point I'm trying to make is this. You'll never get a decent population of people to play on a so-called "hardcore" server, until the 12 yr old mentality crowd learns how to simply "enjoy" the competition of playing a game and not being uber and unkillable.</p>

greploco
06-11-2007, 11:10 AM
<p>no</p><p>in this era of competition beteween multiple mmo and also some pvp servers suffering because of lack of population there should be no further dilution of the eq2 pvp population</p><p>hardcore would not attract new people it would only weaken existing servers</p><p>plenty of zones in eq2 pvp are already hardecore because of the level ranges</p>

Echgar
06-11-2007, 11:30 AM
You are all certainly welcome to discuss the idea of having a "hardcore server", but that does not give the license to let loose on the forums in a "hardcore" manner.  Let's have a civil discussion please. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> For those of you desiring more information about Planetside, there is a lot of good information over on the <a href="http://planetside.station.sony.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Planetside site</a>.

Image_Vain
06-11-2007, 11:42 AM
<cite>Echgar wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are all certainly welcome to discuss the idea of having a "hardcore server", but that does not give the license to let loose on the forums in a "hardcore" manner.  Let's have a civil discussion please. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> For those of you desiring more information about Planetside, there is a lot of good information over on the <a href="http://planetside.station.sony.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Planetside site</a>. </blockquote>I simply, love your avatar. This is "<span style="color: #cc0000">E V E R Q U E S T : I I</span>" When the game was released SOE had no plans to add PVP, but because people whined and groaned about PVP server, SOE went ahead and made some PVP servers. This game was not built for PVP, and will never "even" out, it's PVE through and through, and thats where the vast majority is, PVE, does that make them <span style="color: #00ff66">Carebears</span>? no, simply means that they enjoy maxing out their character and enjoying Raiding/PVE than PVP. an FFA server would fail, just like the currant PVP system, IMHO.

Norrsken
06-11-2007, 12:19 PM
<cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear.

Image_Vain
06-11-2007, 03:17 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote> Perma death eh? the server would last about 5 minutes.

Gagla
06-11-2007, 03:20 PM
<p>I'd agree with no level ranges in pvp or if level ranges worked both ways. !0 level range, Someone at 30 can't attack someone over 40, etc. I often become frustrated by the fact that at lvl 70 as a Templar... people 40 levels lower than me can mess me up pretty bad. I think I have a fairly good chance at one vs ones with most classes, but it is always a close fight.</p><p>There have been plenty of times I'll engage another 70 and dumb crap will happen. Attack a warden, 3 30's come over... I start getting taunted. Well, guess I lose the power war. Attack a 70 assasin in TT, he's suddenly grouped and three more even cons come around the corner, I run and zone to antonica. Run to TS griffon, see that they've evacced, turn and run the other way. A moment later I get snared by a lvl 28, I stop to cure and 4 70's descend upon me. Or... 70 wizard engages me by NQ gates, I turn and start wailing on him. I get him to half, his fusion brings me to half... I am then spam taunted by 4 different teens. Guess if I can't chuck damage at the wizard... I die and lose fame. Fighting a ranger in TS, he runs out of power... I think I've finally stabilized... Lvl 31 ShadowKnight runs over and HTs me for over 1k and I'm down. I kind of wish some guy 39 levels lower than me couldn't nuke for more than I can...</p><p>The point I'm trying to make is if I can't attack you, it's kind of unfair for you to be able to attack me. I'm a dreadnaught and I think I'm decent... maybe I make a poor choice to try running around solo with a templar, especially when other people tend to run around grouped... or greys jump in when I think I've finally found someone solo. Either take away level limits or enforce them both ways. I'd even settle for fixing a few things in pvp... Idk how many teens can land spells on a lvl 70 mob and I'm fairly certain any 70 mob can oneshot a lvl 30 regardless of how twinked they are. I could just be wrong in assuming that when I'm 40 lvls above someone they should be incapable of hurting me.</p><p>This is slightly off topic and not so much a 'remove level limits' post as a 'I'm a 70 who gets killed by 30's' rant... and I disapprove. But, I thought the post would be somewhat humorous and figured I'd give everyone a good laugh. I guess maybe if I was another class like a warlock I could care less about grays attacking me... one good rift could wipe a raid.</p>

Armironhead
06-11-2007, 04:16 PM
<cite>greploco wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>no</p><p>in this era of competition beteween multiple mmo and also some pvp servers suffering because of lack of population there should be no further dilution of the eq2 pvp population</p><p>hardcore would not attract new people it would only weaken existing servers</p><p>plenty of zones in eq2 pvp are already hardecore because of the level ranges</p></blockquote><p> I dont think we need to make a new server for hardcore -- they can use vox after all its dead anyway -- hence no weakening of existing servers, just the rebranding of a dead/dying server.  Also you have to ask that if its the competition between mmo's that is causing eqii's population to suffer then why should soe continue down the same path -- rather they should try something different, like hardcore for those that want the challenge.  And as for there being enough unlimited zones in eqii -- well all i can say is try living on vox -- there are only 2 zones with any significant t7 pvp tt and bs.  I for one am tired of seeing the same scenery over and over again.  (Yes sometimes I find farmers in ss but that is getting to be more infrequent -- also i use to go to lop for pvp action but it was so rare that i would see anyone else there that it is just not worth the time taking the [Removed for Content] boat to get to the place). </p>

Image_Vain
06-11-2007, 04:43 PM
Ugh, if you want PvP go to Guild Wars, it's easy to lvl and free.

tass
06-11-2007, 10:02 PM
<cite>Image_Vain wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Echgar wrote:</cite><blockquote>You are all certainly welcome to discuss the idea of having a "hardcore server", but that does not give the license to let loose on the forums in a "hardcore" manner.  Let's have a civil discussion please. <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> For those of you desiring more information about Planetside, there is a lot of good information over on the <a href="http://planetside.station.sony.com/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">Planetside site</a>. </blockquote>I simply, love your avatar. This is "<span style="color: #cc0000">E V E R Q U E S T : I I</span>" When the game was released SOE had no plans to add PVP, but because people whined and groaned about PVP server, SOE went ahead and made some PVP servers. This game was not built for PVP, and will never "even" out, it's PVE through and through, and thats where the vast majority is, PVE, does that make them <span style="color: #00ff66">Carebears</span>? no, simply means that they enjoy maxing out their character and enjoying Raiding/PVE than PVP. an FFA server would fail, just like the currant PVP system, IMHO. </blockquote>THANK YOU SOMEONE GETS IT. Now for my comment the mod is right we cant discuss this in a hardcore fashion any more. Get ur bats yall. its nubbles beat down time!!!! Also another side note. The current ffa system is in vanguard which as irony would have it soe now has control over since the managers over there screwed themselves. Now I know its hard but picture this. You own 2 products that people pay to use. cars, games whatever. Both products are different hence why people play them both. Would you take product b and combine it into product a so that its more convenient for people to not pay to have both? Or would you leave product a and b separate so that people pay to play 2 items? This reason is just 1 insight of why there wouldn't be a new server made or an old server "made into" a real pvp like thing like all the other games out there. Now you can disagree and say that a company is there for the people to make them happy but then you are a [Removed for Content]. Sorry for the harsh truth, heres a glass of water to help you cope and think.

Norrsken
06-12-2007, 10:37 AM
<cite>Image_Vain wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote> Perma death eh? the server would last about 5 minutes. </blockquote>And thus, we know how hardcore everyone begging for it is. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Armironhead
06-12-2007, 08:35 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote>How about real corpse looting?  What we get now is just some piece of random c'rap -- kinda pointless

Rajasa
06-13-2007, 04:56 PM
[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote><p>LOL! That could be the dumbest statement I ever read on the forums. </p><p>Another 12 yr old heard from. Just what we need more of. </p>

Armironhead
06-13-2007, 05:48 PM
<cite>Rajasa wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote><p>LOL! That could be the dumbest statement I ever read on the forums. </p><p>Another 12 yr old heard from. Just what we need more of. </p></blockquote>Now comeon -- he may just be a Diablo II hardcore fan.  I played diablo II for a long time, but never made the jump to hardcore b/c I had too many lag issues at the time.  But at least "real" hardcore was there for those who wanted a challenge.  Here, PVP is one fit for all.  And it certainly seems that it is a carebear style that soe plays to.  Every update nerfs the toons and narrows the range, to coddle the complainers.  What about those of us, who don't want to be coddled? Who want a challenge?  Perma death and real corpse looting are extreme -- I admit --but they would be different, certainly take this game away from the "tag you're it" style play prevelant now.  But I submit that we don't need an extreme departure away from the current rules -- just get rid of the pvp lvls on one sever [Vox ;]so that pep's who don't want their hand held have some place to go.

mh
06-13-2007, 07:53 PM
   Good idea.  Make a hardcore server, and then one with a more restrictive ruleset, for people who like even matches and competition.  Then all of you leet speaking "hardcore" kids will have a place to cultivate your "epeen" while the rest of us enjoy our "carebear" pvp.  Would solve a lot of problems i think.

Norrsken
06-13-2007, 08:55 PM
<cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote>How about real corpse looting?  What we get now is just some piece of random c'rap -- kinda pointless </blockquote>Well, with perma death, full body loot feels pretty natural. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> they aint gonna use the gear anyway.

Norrsken
06-13-2007, 08:59 PM
<cite>Rajasa wrote:</cite><blockquote>[email protected] wrote: <blockquote><cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>A server aint hardcore if it aint got perma death. Anything else is carebear. </blockquote><p>LOL! That could be the dumbest statement I ever read on the forums. </p><p>Another 12 yr old heard from. Just what we need more of. </p></blockquote>And why is it dumb? Because you wouldnt dare to leave the city on a FFA perma death server? Prolly not. Its my sincere opinion, it aint harcore without perma death. And yes, as have been pointed out, I played a few hardcore toons in D2. Most of them died in duels and were simply gone. And, to be honest, if you are gonna poke fun at someone over being infantile, you should refrain from taking the childish route yourself.

Xantinya
06-13-2007, 09:01 PM
<cite>Armmiller wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Anybody else think that there should be a hardcore server?  No pvp lvls and immune zones.  (Perhaps they can make it on Vox since it is being slowly depopulated).  I mean after all we are suppose to be in a war?  It makes no sense that you cant kill an enemy standing rt next to you merely because he is not as tough.  Afterall, war is not about fairness, but rather bringing as much force as you can to the table so you can win.  In fact, as far as I'm concerned, a fair fight is not a war, but rather a duel.  Hence, IMO the pvp lvls create a disconnect b/t the story line and the actual game play.  Regardless, I think there are lots of folk out there who want the challenge of hardcore, especially those who believe that SS was ruined when they imposed the range limits.  I recognize that this creates a "prob" for lower lvl folk, but hey there is always going to be differences between grunts and generals.  Moreover, the balance can be maintained by better and more fortified areas (such as x-roads) where lower lvl types could head for cover from the npc guards. </p></blockquote>If you want FFA go exile, simple as that.