PDA

View Full Version : What is the purpose of permanent immunity


Valoric
01-09-2008, 07:57 AM
To be clear, I am referring to the permanent immunity you get at the many ressurection spots on the mapI've been playing for about a month now and I notice that there is no form of area control in world PvP, because after your first death (or evac), you can just stand there and remain a threat to whatever dominant force is there.I just think like it takes away from the feel of PvP when you clearly have control of a zone, but can't actually remove the enemy from it.

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 08:10 AM
Prevents people from camping revive points, killing upbuffed/rez sick players. Also cuts down on revive zerging.

Amphibia
01-09-2008, 08:34 AM
<cite></cite>People still zerg if any fight takes place near a revive spot, and the<b> forced</b> self-immunity (even after zoning in somewhere) is one of the most annoying things in the entire game. Perma-immunity is pretty annoying too - and especially perma immunity after evac, which is just ridiculous! How is that used now? Well, if you're a titlehugging scout, you just evac and stand in immunity while waiting for evac to come back up again. Immune people in the wild also show up on track, which makes it even more annoying. People also fake AFK's a lot, so you'll never know if the people standing there are actually away or of they'll keep an eye on you and break their immunity as soon as you start fighting something. As for people being unbuffed and having rez sickness, here are two solutions to that - one which would also make a lot of classes far less awkward to play: Remove perma immunity entirely and replace it with 2 minute countdown immunity. And maybe also give casters (priests, mages etc) the oppertunity to buff on the run, and/or give buffs shorter casting time (maybe except pets). I liked it better the way that it was, when if you wanted an AFK you ran to an instance, camped out a little or just stayed dead until you were ready. If you saw someone in an open zone then, they were actually attackable - which they should be out in the wild. Permanent immunity is for the cities, and is very unnecessary anywhere else.

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 08:46 AM
I didn't like it the way it was, because it takes me so frikking log to buff, I'd be dead before I finished.Also it's fairly obvious that if you sit around waiting for someone to move from a revive spot to get ganked, they arent going to do it if they can see right in front of their eyes that the odds arent in their favour. Remove the immunity then you allow full groups to grief solos as much as they want.

Amphibia
01-09-2008, 09:00 AM
Alright... I still don't like seeing all those people out in the wild that I can't attack, but nevermind that. Say that you're right, and it was put in to protect soloers. How about at least removing perma-immunity after evac then, and leave the other one in? It's just total BS that some classes can just stand in safety after evac for 10-15 minutes and choose to come back out again when it has refreshed, so that they never have to PvP without that free out of jail card of theirs. I don't think classes an with evac ability need that kind of protection.

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 09:18 AM
Remove titles, keep immunity after evac imo.Or not, I'm not really bothered. When I play my Dirge I find evac useful to go grab a drink, or whatever without worrying about gankage. It's no different from people camping out for 10-15 minutes. (My fury though doesnt have evac, and I dont even really think about it when playing him). Or when I'm in a group and someone has to take a quick AFK for some emergency or whatever, evac + wait till they're back. I dont particularly see the problem with that... I don't think it's abusing the mechanic. Or maybe it is? Same with immunity after death...I's not any different from staying dead before reviving. If I'm solo I use death as an excuse for an AFK, I just revive and buff first so I can get right at it as soon as I get back. I see the biggest issue is people who evac to protect a title and don't leave immunity for another 15 minutes, hence my first statement.

Amphibia
01-09-2008, 09:51 AM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove titles, keep immunity after evac imo.</blockquote>That would work too. I actually find it very odd that the title system is still in the game in it's current, broken form. It serves no purpose but providing some kind of bragging right for typical gank & run classes, and make everyone run like panicked chickens at the slightest chance of dying.

Bayler_x
01-09-2008, 12:47 PM
<cite>Amphibia wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote>Remove titles, keep immunity after evac imo.</blockquote>That would work too. I actually find it very odd that the title system is still in the game in it's current, broken form. It serves no purpose but providing some kind of bragging right for typical gank & run classes, and make everyone run like panicked chickens at the slightest chance of dying. </blockquote><p>1. The purpose of immunity is so that revive spots aren't free-token machines.  If there were no immunity, people would do nothing but camp revive spots.</p><p>2. The reason for permanent immunity is so that a group can stay together.  People have different zone times, based on their computers, their internet connection, etc.  With timer-based immunity, people in a group all become vulnerable at different times.  That makes them easy pickings for other groups who, again, would camp revive spots.  This system lets them all break immunity at the same time, so they can work as a team against anyone who is waiting for them.</p><p>3. Title-hugging evaccers could just as easily camp out until evac is ready again.  Permanent immunity is slightly more convenient for them, but isn't functionally any different.</p><p>4. Titles serve a very valuable role: they prevent friend-farming.  If you took out titles, you'd have to take out pvp tokens and gear, status, faction, and all other benefits that can be gained from pvp.  Because if you didn't, people would just repeatedly kill their friends or 2nd accounts, over and over, to farm those benefits.  Yeah, titles are imperfect and still open to some exploits, but we're better off with them than without them.</p>

Amphibia
01-09-2008, 01:00 PM
<cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>4. Titles serve a very valuable role: they prevent friend-farming.  If you took out titles, you'd have to take out pvp tokens and gear, status, faction, and all other benefits that can be gained from pvp.  Because if you didn't, people would just repeatedly kill their friends or 2nd accounts, over and over, to farm those benefits.  Yeah, titles are imperfect and still open to some exploits, but we're better off with them than without them.</p></blockquote>Your logic is flawed. You do<b> not</b> need a broken and unfair title system to prevent people from farming tokens, because token farming is very much against the EULA. It's the kind of violation of the rules that constitutes a ban, or at the very least suspension. It has happened before, and I can promise you that the fame system doesn't stop anyone who really wants to cheat their way to PvP gear. What prevents those people from doing it is the knownledge that it is against the rules and that they'll get banned if caught - the title system has absolutely nothing to do with that.

Bloodfa
01-09-2008, 01:06 PM
<p>Cut the immunity to 2 minutes.  Stay dead if you need a bio break.  After 2 minutes, anybody can buff, be back to full health, and be ready to roll.  If it takes longer than that, get better food & drink. <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 01:13 PM
<cite>Amphibia wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>4. Titles serve a very valuable role: they prevent friend-farming.  If you took out titles, you'd have to take out pvp tokens and gear, status, faction, and all other benefits that can be gained from pvp.  Because if you didn't, people would just repeatedly kill their friends or 2nd accounts, over and over, to farm those benefits.  Yeah, titles are imperfect and still open to some exploits, but we're better off with them than without them.</p></blockquote>Your logic is flawed. You do<b> not</b> need a broken and unfair title system to prevent people from farming tokens, because token farming is very much against the EULA. It's the kind of violation of the rules that constitutes a ban, or at the very least suspension. It has happened before, and I can promise you that the fame system doesn't stop anyone who really wants to cheat their way to PvP gear. What prevents those people from doing it is the knownledge that it is against the rules and that they'll get banned if caught - the title system has absolutely nothing to do with that. </blockquote>Precisely. Your logic is only potentially correct if the parties involved have similar titles. If one is say, a champion and the other is unranked..they could farm tokens all they wanted without worrying about fame loss. It happens often in this game, and yes, they get caught, lose their token gear, get suspended etc. Removal of titles would have no effect on token farming.

Bloodfa
01-09-2008, 01:21 PM
You mean like 5 Dreads and a Hunter going after my solo Monk?  <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 01:25 PM
That's got nothing to do with anything.

Bloodfa
01-09-2008, 01:27 PM
<p>No, but it was kinda funny to watch.</p>

Expres
01-09-2008, 05:47 PM
Perma-immunity imo is unneeded and another case of a knee jerk reaction from SOE to poor implementation at the start up of PvP.Long ago there used to be shared revive points and very short countdown timers for immunity.As a fix they added a bajillion (exaggerated but only just a little bit) revive points and increased the revive immunity not by a minute, or 2, or 10, or an hour, or 10 hours, but FOR EVER.To top off the ridiculousness of the permanent immunity, it was allowed to affect evac.  Why?IMO there were much better solutions.  5 minute revive immunity is much more than should ever be needed.  And as for revive spots, all the multiple rez points did was allow for more effective zerging, or more efficient travel by death.  All they needed to do was add one extra option for reviving; the ability to revive in your home City or even just at the rez spot in front of the gates.  That alone, with a moderate increase to the revive immunity timer would have solved any revive spot camping.By revive spot camping, I mean the ability for someone to keep killing you, not for the ability for them to come to the revive spot in an attempt to force you from the zone.  And that to me is one thing that is sorely missing from the rule set; any form of Zone Control.The current set up is in my opinion a joke.  It promotes zerging, it promotes immunity sitting for timers.Even if you can justify perma-immunity upon revive, perma-immunity on evaccing really dumb.

Rattfa
01-09-2008, 05:55 PM
If you force everyone from the zone, then you have 0 PvP. Grats you won. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

Sightless
01-09-2008, 06:31 PM
<cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perma-immunity imo is unneeded and another case of a knee jerk reaction from SOE to poor implementation at the start up of PvP.Long ago there used to be shared revive points and very short countdown timers for immunity.As a fix they added a bajillion (exaggerated but only just a little bit) revive points and increased the revive immunity not by a minute, or 2, or 10, or an hour, or 10 hours, but FOR EVER.To top off the ridiculousness of the permanent immunity, it was allowed to affect evac.  Why?IMO there were much better solutions.  5 minute revive immunity is much more than should ever be needed.  And as for revive spots, all the multiple rez points did was allow for more effective zerging, or more efficient travel by death.  All they needed to do was add one extra option for reviving; the ability to revive in your home City or even just at the rez spot in front of the gates.  That alone, with a moderate increase to the revive immunity timer would have solved any revive spot camping.By revive spot camping, I mean the ability for someone to keep killing you, not for the ability for them to come to the revive spot in an attempt to force you from the zone.  And that to me is one thing that is sorely missing from the rule set; any form of Zone Control.The current set up is in my opinion a joke.  It promotes zerging, it promotes immunity sitting for timers.Even if you can justify perma-immunity upon revive, perma-immunity on evaccing really dumb.</blockquote><p>I'm sorry Expresso, if the only reason you want immunity removed is so you can grief people at revive spots to force them out of the zone, then you're........</p><p>With all the shady nonsense that goes on in PvP, like spies, farming titles, farming tokens, et cetera, I don't think we need another reason for people to use lame tactics, and they obviously did at one point, or it wouldn't have been changed.</p>

Bloodfa
01-09-2008, 06:42 PM
Not to pick sides here, but if it were a 2 minute timer, the issue would have resolved itself.  I die.  And I evac.  <b>Nobody</b> needs more than 2 minutes to get set back up.  Group chat still works when dead.  So does Guild chat. Need to take care of something, don't revive.  90% of the time a group that has evacced will stay there until Evac is back up.  Screw that, if you evac you can regroup or zone out, but waiting until evac is back up before venturing out is one of those things that makes people say it's overpowered.  And having the timer reset when logging off for 15 minutes is crap, too.  I've seen too many do it, between that and SK's doing the HT & Evac, then camp.  If somebody's group can't get its act together in less than 2 minutes ... or just stay dead until everyone agrees upon a plan of action ... maybe that group isn't as "hardcore" or talented as they thought they were.

Aerlyn
01-09-2008, 07:07 PM
One scenario that I can think of where removing perma-immunity might have a negative impact is when a solo player revives/evacs where there is a group waiting there.  Let's assume that the player doesn't want to fight because he/she feels that there isn't a chance.Perma-immunity allows them to stand still and wait for a better time to leave.  Eventually the enemy should get bored and leave.  Removing perma-immunity would take away that option from that player.  They still have the 30 second immunity to get away, but there's nothing to prevent the group from following the player for 30 seconds and then attacking.So here's my idea for a way to remove perma-immunity and try to avoid screwing over a player that finds himself/herself in this situation:Take away perma-immunity, but start the immunity timer at something a little higher, like 60 seconds.  If the player moves, then their immunity timer gets reset back to 30 seconds (like it is now), unless it's already counted down to less than 30.  Additionally, let's say that during that 60 second immunity, if the player hasn't moved, then their "Call of [whatever]" ability will be available during that time, even if it hasn't refreshed yet from a previous use.  This would at least give them a way to escape from a waiting group.  After the 60 second immunity counts down, or if the user moves, then their "Call of [whatever]" ability will no longer be available if it wasn't refreshed yet.

Sightless
01-09-2008, 07:11 PM
<p>The best solution would be; if you die, you revive at your home town where your call takes you. If you evac, you have a 2 minute immunity window.</p>

Expres
01-09-2008, 07:51 PM
<cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perma-immunity imo is unneeded and another case of a knee jerk reaction from SOE to poor implementation at the start up of PvP.Long ago there used to be shared revive points and very short countdown timers for immunity.As a fix they added a bajillion (exaggerated but only just a little bit) revive points and increased the revive immunity not by a minute, or 2, or 10, or an hour, or 10 hours, but FOR EVER.To top off the ridiculousness of the permanent immunity, it was allowed to affect evac.  Why?IMO there were much better solutions.  5 minute revive immunity is much more than should ever be needed.  And as for revive spots, all the multiple rez points did was allow for more effective zerging, or more efficient travel by death.  All they needed to do was add one extra option for reviving; the ability to revive in your home City or even just at the rez spot in front of the gates.  That alone, with a moderate increase to the revive immunity timer would have solved any revive spot camping.By revive spot camping, I mean the ability for someone to keep killing you, not for the ability for them to come to the revive spot in an attempt to force you from the zone.  And that to me is one thing that is sorely missing from the rule set; any form of Zone Control.The current set up is in my opinion a joke.  It promotes zerging, it promotes immunity sitting for timers.Even if you can justify perma-immunity upon revive, perma-immunity on evaccing really dumb.</blockquote><p>I'm sorry Expresso, if the only reason you want immunity removed is so you can grief people at revive spots to force them out of the zone, then you're........</p><p>With all the shady nonsense that goes on in PvP, like spies, farming titles, farming tokens, et cetera, I don't think we need another reason for people to use lame tactics, and they obviously did at one point, or it wouldn't have been changed.</p></blockquote>You either twist my words intentionally or just read a little too fast maybe?  Which I am unsure.I did not state I wanted immunity removed.  I stated I thought that PERMA-immunity is a joke and unnecessary in light of the amount of revive spots they gave us and would be further useless if they would offer one additional option to any revive choice, the ability to revive at home.I also stated that I felt PERMA-immunity upon evac is also ridiculous.So again, not sure how you interpreted things in such an erroneous way.Did people exploit the previous model of 30 second immunity upon revive?  Yes.  Was the change they put in a reasonable solution?  IMO no.  It was extreme overkill and caused more problems than it fixed.But again, I stated such already, you just seemed to read something completely different.There is little to fight for in this PvP rule set.  Infamy?  Seriously please don't say yes.  Tokens?  Sure, bot farming ftw.  Zone control, although in a limited form, was actually a part of the game before perma-immunity.  It probably gave people something more tangible to fight for than either of the other two "rewards".Current scenario:  Scout (I'm using scout because they can evac into perma-immunity not for any other reason) is out soloing hunting infamy/tokens (nothing else to hunt for) and spots multiple oranges on track closing fast.  Evacs and sits in immunity till evac is back up.  Lather, rinse, repeat.Current scenario:  Your group is hunting in Stormhold, an enemy(ies) pops out of nowhere when your group enagages ^^^'s, you kill them and the mobs.  Yay you! Right?  Wrong.  Enemy group buffs up and keeps at it.  Trying again, and again, and again, every now and then managing to gank a member of your group for an infamy hit.  No worries.  You will simply stop fighting the mobs and just fight them.  Right?  Wrong.  When you turn around to confront them at the entrance (the only revive spot and in zone) they stay in immunity and wait there, staring at you till you go back to fighting mobs, then they attack again.  So the only option is to keep letting little jackals [I cannot control my vocabulary] at you managing to squeak a kill here and there, or to pack up and leave the zone.  You should be able to drive them from the zone.There is a world of difference between the 30 second immunity we used to have compared to the PERMA-immunity we have now.  It should not in my opinion ever be permanent.Spin it how you want.  Say chasing people from the zone would end the PvP in that zone, but I think you are wrong.  I remember the days when there was 30 second immunity and it was far from being "0 PvP".  Quite the contrary as a matter of fact.

Sightless
01-09-2008, 08:27 PM
<cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perma-immunity imo is unneeded and another case of a knee jerk reaction from SOE to poor implementation at the start up of PvP.Long ago there used to be shared revive points and very short countdown timers for immunity.As a fix they added a bajillion (exaggerated but only just a little bit) revive points and increased the revive immunity not by a minute, or 2, or 10, or an hour, or 10 hours, but FOR EVER.To top off the ridiculousness of the permanent immunity, it was allowed to affect evac.  Why?IMO there were much better solutions.  5 minute revive immunity is much more than should ever be needed.  And as for revive spots, all the multiple rez points did was allow for more effective zerging, or more efficient travel by death.  All they needed to do was add one extra option for reviving; the ability to revive in your home City or even just at the rez spot in front of the gates.  That alone, with a moderate increase to the revive immunity timer would have solved any revive spot camping.By revive spot camping, I mean the ability for someone to keep killing you, not for the ability for them to come to the revive spot in an attempt to force you from the zone.  And that to me is one thing that is sorely missing from the rule set; any form of Zone Control.The current set up is in my opinion a joke.  It promotes zerging, it promotes immunity sitting for timers.Even if you can justify perma-immunity upon revive, perma-immunity on evaccing really dumb.</blockquote><p>I'm sorry Expresso, if the only reason you want immunity removed is so you can grief people at revive spots to force them out of the zone, then you're........</p><p>With all the shady nonsense that goes on in PvP, like spies, farming titles, farming tokens, et cetera, I don't think we need another reason for people to use lame tactics, and they obviously did at one point, or it wouldn't have been changed.</p></blockquote>You either twist my words intentionally or just read a little too fast maybe?  Which I am unsure.I did not state I wanted immunity removed.  I stated I thought that PERMA-immunity is a joke and unnecessary in light of the amount of revive spots they gave us and would be further useless if they would offer one additional option to any revive choice, the ability to revive at home.I also stated that I felt PERMA-immunity upon evac is also ridiculous.So again, not sure how you interpreted things in such an erroneous way.Did people exploit the previous model of 30 second immunity upon revive?  Yes.  Was the change they put in a reasonable solution?  IMO no.  It was extreme overkill and caused more problems than it fixed.But again, I stated such already, you just seemed to read something completely different.There is little to fight for in this PvP rule set.  Infamy?  Seriously please don't say yes.  Tokens?  Sure, bot farming ftw.  Zone control, although in a limited form, was actually a part of the game before perma-immunity.  It probably gave people something more tangible to fight for than either of the other two "rewards".Current scenario:  Scout (I'm using scout because they can evac into perma-immunity not for any other reason) is out soloing hunting infamy/tokens (nothing else to hunt for) and spots multiple oranges on track closing fast.  Evacs and sits in immunity till evac is back up.  Lather, rinse, repeat.Current scenario:  Your group is hunting in Stormhold, an enemy(ies) pops out of nowhere when your group enagages ^^^'s, you kill them and the mobs.  Yay you! Right?  Wrong.  Enemy group buffs up and keeps at it.  Trying again, and again, and again, every now and then managing to gank a member of your group for an infamy hit.  No worries.  You will simply stop fighting the mobs and just fight them.  Right?  Wrong.  When you turn around to confront them at the entrance (the only revive spot and in zone) they stay in immunity and wait there, staring at you till you go back to fighting mobs, then they attack again.  So the only option is to keep letting little jackals [I cannot control my vocabulary] at you managing to squeak a kill here and there, or to pack up and leave the zone.  You should be able to drive them from the zone.There is a world of difference between the 30 second immunity we used to have compared to the PERMA-immunity we have now.  It should not in my opinion ever be permanent.Spin it how you want.  Say chasing people from the zone would end the PvP in that zone, but I think you are wrong.  I remember the days when there was 30 second immunity and it was far from being "0 PvP".  Quite the contrary as a matter of fact.</blockquote><p>You're not talking PvP, you're talking controlling a zone in superior numbers, not allowing other players to do anything beyond getting wiped repeatedly to stroke your ego. And there are only TWO pvp revive/evac spots per large zone. Your overexaggeration is appauling.</p><p>I've played many games in a player vs player setting, for at least 7 years. I've been on both sides of the field, and while it might be fun for a selective few to outnumber their opponents, and prevent them from doing anything until they log off, it isn't fun for the majority. You may want to camp revive spots because you'll find easy fights, but some of us would rather the chance for more equal fights.</p><p>This has absolutely nothing to do with zerging which is a entirely different issue.</p>

Csky
01-09-2008, 08:51 PM
its to cut down on griefers and its a good idea because the person has a chance to port home and go somehwere else instead of being chain griefed

Stinkybeagle
01-09-2008, 10:39 PM
<p>Perma immunity is great when your thinken of what to do other than run the guantlet of rangers camping the sokkor post and quests by the rhino pen in fens... .   Its a great time to use the bathroom , Pick the monitor up off the floor ya just punched, spend time with the girlfriend, play with the family pet , pop some advil and figure out were to hunt were the frag classes are not as thick as a alley cats back.</p><p>    There is no such thing as controling zones in EQ2.  In EQ one there used to be Zone control becouse we had LAS agreements. " Loot and Scoot". You disobey you get greafed and even a mighty GM isnt gonna help yur butt becouse ya didnt leave the zone for 1/2 hour. </p><p>Why is EQ 2 so diffrent? </p><p>Does no one have honer here? </p><p>We can not speak to eachother on oposite sides like we could in EQ 1  and that is why the Devs gotta hold are hands like children. Its like a relegious war , we cant speak the same language so its down to the primal kill all ya can frag frag frag untill no one is left standing mentality.  I remember having huge battles in West commans and outside FP gates when freeport was good controled back in the day. We all could hear eachothers battle crys and the GM's would even come down to spectate. We owned the world when we made are own ruled democraticly.  BUT we also exploted them by X-teaming. The child of the exile faction........ I am still shocked it was implemented in eq2 after the lessons x-teaming brought forth but then again they are restricted this time around, well sorta. ith out cross faction communication there are no nemisies anymore. No more "good fight better luck next time my favorite player to battle....." , "&#$% you n00b wait till i get a couple more lvls!!!",I'll be waiting right here lill buddy".</p><p>A long story short... we play a game that is pretty much facioust , we only get to hear one sided voices. We dont have the luxoury of taunting eachother into huge scale battle like we used too in the old days. We are playing by there rules now , not ours..... If they see somthing that they dont like and enough peeps agree then they will make some of us sit in perma imunity till class is over. Cant plaese every one and we have no power over are server like we used to. Its pretty much just a fancy FPS these days.</p>

Aerlyn
01-09-2008, 11:57 PM
<cite>Stinkybeagle wrote:</cite><blockquote>[snip]We can not speak to eachother on oposite sides like we could in EQ 1  and that is why the Devs gotta hold are hands like children. Its like a relegious war , we cant speak the same language so its down to the primal kill all ya can frag frag frag untill no one is left standing mentality.[snip]<p>A long story short... we play a game that is pretty much facioust , we only get to hear one sided voices. We dont have the luxoury of taunting eachother into huge scale battle like we used too in the old days. We are playing by there rules now , not ours..... If they see somthing that they dont like and enough peeps agree then they will make some of us sit in perma imunity till class is over. Cant plaese every one and we have no power over are server like we used to. Its pretty much just a fancy FPS these days.</p></blockquote>Sorry to deviate a little from the topic, but I definitely agree with what <span class="name">Stinkybeagle</span> is saying here.  I think the lack of communication has a psychological effect of allowing players to avoid seeing enemies as real players and to instead see them as just intelligent (or maybe just unpredictable) mobs.  As a result, there is no respect for enemies and therefore no honor.This effect is similar to how anonymity, such as on internet, can cause some people to act like jerks who are otherwise very nice individuals in person.I assume communication between factions was originally disabled to prevent people from "spying" for their friends using alts.  I imagine, though, that anyone who wants to "spy" can and already is doing it anyway using third-party chat or voice programs.  Personally, "spying" is not something that I would be concerned about if communication between factions were enabled.The only other reason that I can think of to disable communication would be to prevent obscene, inappropriate, or hurtful comments.  If this is really a concern, couldn't everyone have some kind of faction-wide ignore option?  I personally can't really imagine that anything the other faction has to say would be any worse than what people say to each other within the same faction, anyway.

Bloodfa
01-09-2008, 11:57 PM
I still don't see how 2 minutes immunity or staying dead would be abused.  Revive spots are within a 30 second run from bird/sokokar/zones.  Need to [Removed for Content]?  Stay dead.  Or camp for a bit.  These are the things that were done before perma-immunity, and they would do much more to fix the game than break it.And PvP gear doesn't need to be removed.  The faction needed to get it needs to be addressed and raised.  There's absolutely no reason to start at -10,000 faction.And no, there is no honor here, except for a very few instances.  The fights where one runs to the revive and /bows to the vanquished, or vise-versa, those are the memorable ones.  More often than not, a teabag awaits.

Expres
01-10-2008, 12:38 AM
<cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>You're not talking PvP, you're talking controlling a zone in superior numbers, not allowing other players to do anything beyond getting wiped repeatedly to stroke your ego. And there are only TWO pvp revive/evac spots per large zone. <b>Your overexaggeration is appauling.</b></p><p>I've played many games in a player vs player setting, for at least 7 years. I've been on both sides of the field, and while it might be fun for a selective few to outnumber their opponents, and prevent them from doing anything until they log off, it isn't fun for the majority. You may want to camp revive spots because you'll find easy fights, but some of us would rather the chance for more equal fights.</p><p>This has absolutely nothing to do with zerging which is a entirely different issue.</p></blockquote>Seriously?  Read what you wrote, skipping the bold part, then come back and read just the bold part.I spoke nothing of what you are describing, yet you seem to attribute that to me.My post offered clear examples of how permanent immunity is excessive to a fault and allows for abuse IMO greater than would happen if they were to install a REALISTIC immunity timer.  That means long enough to avoid the overly exaggerated horror stories you are fabricating, yet something short of PERMANENT.I have actually been in one of the few situation in this game that allowed for true revive point camping.  The Everfrost revive spot used to be more than 30 seconds from the nearest zone line, even at full sprint.  This is back when you revived with 30 second immunity.  Our group was griefed at that revive spot by a mass of Freeps.  We called out in channel chats for reinforcements and they came, turning it into one big zerg fest but allowing people to make it out.  So I have actually experienced what you describe in this game and most likely you have not, as that was the only revive if I recall correctly that was not within sprint distance of a zone line.  To prevent this they did not need to go from 30 seconds to permanent.So please for one moment stop attacking me and ignoring or twisting what I write.  Stop saying I'm some corpse camping [Removed for Content] farming griefer.  You could not be any farther from the truth.  Take an objective thought on these two following questions, no need to answer them, but at least just think about them:  SOE needed to up the immunity timer on revive to prevent the things you were describing.  Was going from 30 seconds to PERMANENT warranted?  Was allowing someone to sit PERMANENTLY immune in an open PvP zone good for the game?

Sightless
01-10-2008, 02:32 AM
<cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite><p>You're not talking PvP, you're talking controlling a zone in superior numbers, not allowing other players to do anything beyond getting wiped repeatedly to stroke your ego. And there are only TWO pvp revive/evac spots per large zone. <b>Your overexaggeration is appauling.</b></p><p>I've played many games in a player vs player setting, for at least 7 years. I've been on both sides of the field, and while it might be fun for a selective few to outnumber their opponents, and prevent them from doing anything until they log off, it isn't fun for the majority. You may want to camp revive spots because you'll find easy fights, but some of us would rather the chance for more equal fights.</p><p>This has absolutely nothing to do with zerging which is a entirely different issue.</p></blockquote>Seriously?  Read what you wrote, skipping the bold part, then come back and read just the bold part.I spoke nothing of what you are describing, yet you seem to attribute that to me.My post offered clear examples of how permanent immunity is excessive to a fault and allows for abuse IMO greater than would happen if they were to install a REALISTIC immunity timer.  That means long enough to avoid the overly exaggerated horror stories you are fabricating, yet something short of PERMANENT.I have actually been in one of the few situation in this game that allowed for true revive point camping.  The Everfrost revive spot used to be more than 30 seconds from the nearest zone line, even at full sprint.  This is back when you revived with 30 second immunity.  Our group was griefed at that revive spot by a mass of Freeps.  We called out in channel chats for reinforcements and they came, turning it into one big zerg fest but allowing people to make it out.  So I have actually experienced what you describe in this game and most likely you have not, as that was the only revive if I recall correctly that was not within sprint distance of a zone line.  To prevent this they did not need to go from 30 seconds to permanent.So please for one moment stop attacking me and ignoring or twisting what I write.  Stop saying I'm some corpse camping [Removed for Content] farming griefer.  You could not be any farther from the truth.  Take an objective thought on these two following questions, no need to answer them, but at least just think about them:  SOE needed to up the immunity timer on revive to prevent the things you were describing.  Was going from 30 seconds to PERMANENT warranted?  Was allowing someone to sit PERMANENTLY immune in an open PvP zone good for the game?</blockquote><p>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.</p><p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p>

-Arctura-
01-10-2008, 04:23 AM
<cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Amphibia
01-10-2008, 04:46 AM
<cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote>Perma-immunity imo is unneeded and another case of a knee jerk reaction from SOE to poor implementation at the start up of PvP.Long ago there used to be shared revive points and very short countdown timers for immunity.As a fix they added a bajillion (exaggerated but only just a little bit) revive points and increased the revive immunity not by a minute, or 2, or 10, or an hour, or 10 hours, but FOR EVER.To top off the ridiculousness of the permanent immunity, it was allowed to affect evac.  Why?IMO there were much better solutions.  5 minute revive immunity is much more than should ever be needed.  And as for revive spots, all the multiple rez points did was allow for more effective zerging, or more efficient travel by death.  All they needed to do was add one extra option for reviving; the ability to revive in your home City or even just at the rez spot in front of the gates.  That alone, with a moderate increase to the revive immunity timer would have solved any revive spot camping.By revive spot camping, I mean the ability for someone to keep killing you, not for the ability for them to come to the revive spot in an attempt to force you from the zone.  And that to me is one thing that is sorely missing from the rule set; any form of Zone Control.The current set up is in my opinion a joke.  It promotes zerging, it promotes immunity sitting for timers.Even if you can justify perma-immunity upon revive, perma-immunity on evaccing really dumb.</blockquote><p>I'm sorry Expresso, if the only reason you want immunity removed is so you can grief people at revive spots to force them out of the zone, then you're........</p><p>With all the shady nonsense that goes on in PvP, like spies, farming titles, farming tokens, et cetera, I don't think we need another reason for people to use lame tactics, and they obviously did at one point, or it wouldn't have been changed.</p></blockquote>Hmm...I don't think I did that very much, back even it was still possible. Part of the fun back then was that the environment outside the cities felt more "dangerous", and you always had to think fast. After evac or revival, those spots were the last places you wanted to hang out, so you had to keep moving. If the enemy was there, you had to try to outsmart them. You had 30 seconds to do that, and it made the game feel so much more intense. Sadly that is gone now. Oh well, people are camping sokokar posts instead nowadays, is that different somehow? Groups will always camp places where they know other players have to go.... <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

-Arctura-
01-10-2008, 04:53 AM
(( whats the purpose of calling immunity 'permanent' if people can just exploit and break it anyways...Ive seen people get killed in City zones (with no carnage flag up, just afk at docks)Ive seen people get killed while immune at evac pointsIve even Been killed while immune after dying to some mobs at a revive spot, only to come back from the washroom dead again. Know this; Its not immunity, its a ruse. People can and do still break it.You are not safe anywhere outside your innroom. You can be killed in Willowwood or Temple Street, EVEN while immune.

Psych
01-10-2008, 05:04 AM
1. Add an option to turn on/off all speech as in speaking to all alignments. Those who dont want to dont have to, its not like stopping the in game text system stops ventrilo so its really pointless.2. 5 minute immunity upon death/evac. No more. I have watched groups sit in immunity until a player of another alignment makes a run off the docks to reach SOMETHING but they all just charge after him and mow him down. Thats stupid and is as bad as twinking. 5 minutes is enough for ANY pc to load a zone. As for the argument that 2 players might load the zone differently so their 5 minute timers arent in line...I dont care? Its a pvp server not an immunity server. There shouldnt be any place in the game that your 100% safe other than your home city.

Stinkybeagle
01-10-2008, 05:38 AM
<p>Thank you Aerlyn for simplefying my statment.  </p>

Expres
01-10-2008, 01:42 PM
<cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" /></blockquote>Really?  I gave 2 examples of how it does affect game play and is abusable.  Need more?  Bind rushing from immunity to keep someone from killing contesteds?  How about "reverse" revive spot camping, meaning I sit in 100% immunity at a revive spot in a very high traffic area either "scouting" for kills for friends or waiting for an easy kill to come through for myself.  Kill, then evac and do it again.  Immunity being permanent is just as abusable as a too short immunity timer.The immunity timer needs to be set to 5 minutes or less.  That is more than enough for any group to load together and buff together and make a decision on fight or run.And IMO those 2 options, fight or run, are what should be protected vigorously.  The 30 second timer was too short.  It kept people from being able to buff up full and load together as a group.  It also in some cases was too short to revive and Call home.  It needed to be increased.However PERMANENT immunity actually removes the need for either fighting or running.  It is a PERMANENT get out of PvP ticket in an open zone in a possible strategic area.Maybe your idea of "logic" is a little different than mine.

-Arctura-
01-10-2008, 02:42 PM
<cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" />" /></blockquote>Really?  I gave 2 examples of how it does affect game play and is abusable.  Need more?  Bind rushing from immunity to keep someone from killing contesteds?  How about "reverse" revive spot camping, meaning I sit in 100% immunity at a revive spot in a very high traffic area either "scouting" for kills for friends or waiting for an easy kill to come through for myself.  Kill, then evac and do it again.  Immunity being permanent is just as abusable as a too short immunity timer.The immunity timer needs to be set to 5 minutes or less.  That is more than enough for any group to load together and buff together and make a decision on fight or run.And IMO those 2 options, fight or run, are what should be protected vigorously.  The 30 second timer was too short.  It kept people from being able to buff up full and load together as a group.  It also in some cases was too short to revive and Call home.  It needed to be increased.However PERMANENT immunity actually removes the need for either fighting or running.  It is a PERMANENT get out of PvP ticket in an open zone in a possible strategic area.Maybe your idea of "logic" is a little different than mine.</blockquote>(( Hey now, calm down, i didnt say Permanent immunity was the best thing since sliced bread, just that it was logical to say that SOE wants to keep people IN GAME as opposed to camping out and doing something else while they wait for some guy to stop camping the bind spot, or whatever.I would be fine with immunity being nerfed down to 5 minutes, that would be fine... there IS more than 1 way to evac =P

Sightless
01-10-2008, 05:09 PM
<cite>Expresso wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move. <p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />"></blockquote>Really?  I gave 2 examples of how it does affect game play and is abusable.  Need more?  Bind rushing from immunity to keep someone from killing contesteds?  How about "reverse" revive spot camping, meaning I sit in 100% immunity at a revive spot in a very high traffic area either "scouting" for kills for friends or waiting for an easy kill to come through for myself.  Kill, then evac and do it again.  Immunity being permanent is just as abusable as a too short immunity timer.The immunity timer needs to be set to 5 minutes or less.  That is more than enough for any group to load together and buff together and make a decision on fight or run.And IMO those 2 options, fight or run, are what should be protected vigorously.  The 30 second timer was too short.  It kept people from being able to buff up full and load together as a group.  It also in some cases was too short to revive and Call home.  It needed to be increased.However PERMANENT immunity actually removes the need for either fighting or running.  It is a PERMANENT get out of PvP ticket in an open zone in a possible strategic area.Maybe your idea of "logic" is a little different than mine.</blockquote><p>Bind rushing has absolutely nothing to do with immunity timers. They'll bind rush you if the immunity timer is zero, or permanent. If you're an easy kill hanging out at the evac point, you really should become a not so easy kill.</p><p>Like I've said earlier I think immunity timers should be two minutes. BUT if they change it so people can sit at docks and farm people waiting on boats, they need to give us better options of travel. Because I'm not going to build a full group just so "I" can get to Kylong Plains, via boat.</p>

Valoric
01-10-2008, 05:16 PM
<cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" /></blockquote>Logic? The point of his post was that if a smaller and inferior force is camping immunity near something I want to kill, <u><i><b>I</b></i></u> should be the one forced to move away?Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that is completely upside-down

Sightless
01-10-2008, 05:23 PM
<cite>Valoric wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move. <p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src=" width="15" height="15" />"></blockquote>Logic? The point of his post was that if a smaller and inferior force is camping immunity near something I want to kill, <u><i><b>I</b></i></u> should be the one forced to move away?Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that is completely upside-down</blockquote>The illogical part is that bind rushing will happen regardless of the immunity timers. If you're already engaged in the contested mob, you'll have to give up the fight no matter what if they're going to bind rush you. So yes, you're going to have to move on, regardless. Like I said earlier bind rushing has nothing to do with immunity, and is a different debate all together.

Amphibia
01-10-2008, 05:27 PM
<cite>Valoric wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" />" /></blockquote>Logic? The point of his post was that if a smaller and inferior force is camping immunity near something I want to kill, <u><i><b>I</b></i></u> should be the one forced to move away?Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that is completely upside-down</blockquote>To some people, "logic" is always that which is equal to their own opinion at the time.

Expres
01-10-2008, 07:06 PM
<cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Valoric wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move. <p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" width="15" height="15" />"></blockquote>Logic? The point of his post was that if a smaller and inferior force is camping immunity near something I want to kill, <u><i><b>I</b></i></u> should be the one forced to move away?Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that is completely upside-down</blockquote>The illogical part is that bind rushing will happen regardless of the immunity timers. If you're already engaged in the contested mob, you'll have to give up the fight no matter what if they're going to bind rush you. So yes, you're going to have to move on, regardless. Like I said earlier bind rushing has nothing to do with immunity, and is a different debate all together.</blockquote>The intention of suggesting a change was not to eliminate bind rushing, so again, not illogical.  =PThe suggestion is being made for the same reason that suggestions were made about the 30 second immunity being to short.  People are exploiting it and it is affecting game play in a negative way.For the several people who alluded to this causing people to leave zones and that if they stay in zone there is more PvP...   Think back to when there was no permanent revive immunity.  Was there any less PvP then?  IMO there was more, and not just due to there being more people in game.Before perma-immunity if we were "chased from a zone" we didn't call home and log out, we went to the many other level/goal specific areas.  And since then they have put even more content and zones into the game.  There are so many options available to xp/quest in that to infer that people would be forced to log out if they lose the contest for control of one zone is a little over the top, especially when such a thing didn't happen in the past even when immunity was 30 seconds and there were less zones.What provides more PvP?  A system when when you die (or simply evac) you can sit in an open PvP zone in complete immunity?  Or a system where when you die (or evac) you are given an ample amount of time to buff and prepare but then are forced to leave the "safe haven" of immunity?

Marcula
01-10-2008, 07:58 PM
<p><span style="color: #00ccff;">Hmmm.....how is it usually? Last night (at the time) myself, Bloodsplatter, a 78 Warlock and Whiskyjack a 79 ranger were out questing. A full group rolls on us so the ranger evacs us. We used the immunity to go take a bio ect and came back in about 6 min time. The full group were in the background trying to hide behind a rock camping us haa ha! All I can say is that people PvP in their own way and someone will always look for the easy win over the skilled. Immunity seems to work alright at the moment imo.</span></p><p><span style="color: #00ccff;">And I didn't get the name of the Freeportian that Whisky dinged 80 off last night but thanks for repeatedly attacking us so he could get the ding.</span></p>

-Arctura-
01-11-2008, 12:34 AM
<cite>Amphibia wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Valoric wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>-Arctura- wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Sightless wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite></cite>You're overexaggerating the problem, and overreacting to it. I don't believe permanent immunity is needed, see my earlier posts, but I think you are reacting to it wrongly. Permanent immunity hurts no one. People are going to stand immune, or camp until they're ready to go back out. If I was the owner of the gaming company, I'd want them IN GAME, so I can fully understand their move.<p>If you're so close to revive points that people standing immune is troubling, move, go elsewhere. Go to places where if you kill someone, they're a minute or more away from you. For example, Terens Grasp in Kylong Plains.</p><p>There are far more problems with the game I'd rather they address.</p></blockquote>(( Well said. Logic takes the lead and wins the debate! <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img mce_tsrc=" />" /></blockquote>Logic? The point of his post was that if a smaller and inferior force is camping immunity near something I want to kill, <u><i><b>I</b></i></u> should be the one forced to move away?Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but that is completely upside-down</blockquote>To some people, "logic" is always that which is equal to their own opinion at the time. </blockquote>(( Symantics, but...to some people, that which makes sense to them is 'logical', therefore,  assuming their opinions make sense, you are correct. I cant recall offhand anyone with an opinion that they feel is illogical...

MokiCh
01-12-2008, 01:28 PM
Most of the newer people that are crying for perma-immunity to go away probably were never around when there was no perma immunity after death, evac, or at the docks. But the more senior PvPers that have posted in this thread should surely remember what it was like, and maybe think a little about that before crying for it to be brought back.In my estimation, 90% or more of the PvP in the game was to be found at the docks and at revive or evac points. Once you moved away from those points, chances were you could go about your business more or less unmolested. Yes there were often huge melees at the docks or revive points, and they were fun for the first few weeks. They got real tiresome after a while though, both participating in them and just trying to move past them so you could join your group waiting at the RoV entrance. It wasn't fun telling your group in vent that you might be 5 or 10 minutes cause the other side was camping the revive points, and even less fun when, after your group came over to help you get past the gank crews, it turned into one of the aforementioned huge melees, so now you REALLY weren't going to get anything done. I also seem to recall that a lot of the same people that are crying for the removal of perma immunity were crying about the dock gankers and revive zergers that were everywhere back then. "Oh, so-and-so can't PvP, he just got his title camping the bell at the TS docks". Or how about "Player X and guild Y suck donkey nuts, all they do is zerg!". Someone should try and dig up some of those old posts, it would be real interesting to see what people were crying about back then and what they are crying about now. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the things people wanted changed back then are what these people today want to go back to. And I'd even bet that it's mostly the same people that want it changed!If they do revert back to the old way, I would hope that they go the whole nine yards. No dock immunity, no evac immunity, enable in combat evac again, and so on. I wouldn't let the crybabies pick and choose which bits they wanted to keep. Perhaps that would teach them to be careful what they wish for. While I must say I slightly prefer the current system, the old system wasn't bad either. I lived with it and still had fun, and I could live with it and have fun again.