PDA

View Full Version : the true fix to open world pvp.


Winter12345
07-31-2012, 04:54 AM
<p>I've posted my idea on a few other threads, but I really want to get some feedback and opinions on this idea.<strong> I think that one way to truly stimulate open world pvp is to ONLY allow Achievement experience to be gained from QUESTS and NAMEDS. </strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong>This is why; As of right now, people are able to just grind their toons to full AA + levels in CLOSED instances. They don't need to quest in OPEN zones, or go into dungeons with groups anymore. That's the problem. We need to push them out into the open world zone and one way to do that is to make AA only come from QUESTS and NAMEDS. More people in open world zones = more pvp!</strong></p><p>Essentially, I'm advocating for removing the AA slider. I'M NOT SAYING to disable level locking. You can still do level locking with the "Disable Combat Experience," option but AA should come from QUESTS. They're called achievement points anyway, they should be challenging to get.</p><p>Please give feedback...</p>

Peak
07-31-2012, 06:22 AM
<p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p>

Freejazzlive
07-31-2012, 10:10 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I've posted my idea on a few other threads, but I really want to get some feedback and opinions on this idea.<strong> I think that one way to truly stimulate open world pvp is to ONLY allow Achievement experience to be gained from QUESTS and NAMEDS. </strong>.</p></blockquote><p>Taking away AAXP from exploration events, as your suggestion implies, takes away another incentive to explore the world, meaning less incentive to risk open world PvP. & of course, this idea would have to be restricted to Nagafen, as the PvE players would throw a fit.</p><p>IMO, the best idea I've seen yet for revitalizing open world PvP is the one Peak floated -- keep the Warfields going constantly, not "popping" every 2 hours.</p>

Winter12345
08-01-2012, 12:54 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p>

Winter12345
08-01-2012, 12:59 AM
<p><cite>Freejazzlive wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I've posted my idea on a few other threads, but I really want to get some feedback and opinions on this idea.<strong> I think that one way to truly stimulate open world pvp is to ONLY allow Achievement experience to be gained from QUESTS and NAMEDS. </strong>.</p></blockquote><p>Taking away AAXP from exploration events, as your suggestion implies, takes away another incentive to explore the world, meaning less incentive to risk open world PvP. & of course, this idea would have to be restricted to Nagafen, as the PvE players would throw a fit.</p><p>IMO, the best idea I've seen yet for revitalizing open world PvP is the one Peak floated -- keep the Warfields going constantly, not "popping" every 2 hours.</p></blockquote><p>I forgot about AA coming from exploration events, and therefore wouldn't advocate for removing that AA experience.</p><p>However, AA experience from exploration events would in no way be a barrier to people going out into the open world. In the end, if they're able to find quests that give good AA and more importantly, very good gear, then they'll go out into the zone.</p><p>I'm sorry, but I don't see anyone having less of an incentive to go out into the open because they couldn't get exploration AA. Maybe in 2007 Everquest 2, but surely not in 2012 Everquest 2.</p>

Peak
08-01-2012, 01:08 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p></blockquote><p>Before they changed the AA curve, which actually made it EASIER to get AA, I'd gotten 200+ AA on some characters from named alone.</p><p>You're doing it wrong, good sir.</p>

Winter12345
08-01-2012, 01:14 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p></blockquote><p>Before they changed the AA curve, which actually made it EASIER to get AA, I'd gotten 200+ AA on some characters from named alone.</p><p>You're doing it wrong, good sir.</p></blockquote><p>Even if that's true which I highly doubt, you're probably one of those few players who know every instance in and out and would go into all of them to get enough AA. Your EQ2 experience is not everyone else's experience. I guarantee you the average joe doesn't even know that there is a Runnyeye.</p><p>Furthermore, I'm fairly sure if you gave someone a choice of going into billions of different instances and getting maxed AA or just questing in ONE zone to get max AA, very few people would choose the instance approach.</p>

Peak
08-01-2012, 01:16 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p></blockquote><p>Before they changed the AA curve, which actually made it EASIER to get AA, I'd gotten 200+ AA on some characters from named alone.</p><p>You're doing it wrong, good sir.</p></blockquote><p>Even if that's true which I highly doubt, you're probably one of those few players who know every instance in and out and would go into all of them to get enough AA. Your EQ2 experience is not everyone else's experience. I guarantee you the average joe doesn't even know that there is a Runnyeye.</p><p>Furthermore, I'm fairly sure if you gave someone a choice of going into billions of different instances and getting maxed AA or just questing in ONE zone to get max AA, very few people would choose the instance approach.</p></blockquote><p>Runnyeye isn't one of those instances. And billions was an exaggeration. There are only a few places that I'd really go to for the big AA. It's not like you do 15 instances to get 10 AA, you do one particular named and get 10 AA. Granted, your mileage will vary. If you're closer to 320, you may only get 2-3 AA off that named.</p>

Winter12345
08-01-2012, 01:21 AM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p></blockquote><p>Before they changed the AA curve, which actually made it EASIER to get AA, I'd gotten 200+ AA on some characters from named alone.</p><p>You're doing it wrong, good sir.</p></blockquote><p>Even if that's true which I highly doubt, you're probably one of those few players who know every instance in and out and would go into all of them to get enough AA. Your EQ2 experience is not everyone else's experience. I guarantee you the average joe doesn't even know that there is a Runnyeye.</p><p>Furthermore, I'm fairly sure if you gave someone a choice of going into billions of different instances and getting maxed AA or just questing in ONE zone to get max AA, very few people would choose the instance approach.</p></blockquote><p>Runnyeye isn't one of those instances. And billions was an exaggeration. There are only a few places that I'd really go to for the big AA. It's not like you do 15 instances to get 10 AA, you do one particular named and get 10 AA. Granted, your mileage will vary. If you're closer to 320, you may only get 2-3 AA off that named.</p></blockquote><p>I only used Runnyeye  as an example to show how little people know about EQ2 content. Furthermore, billions or not, the changes throughout this game's history has been due to people wanting SIMPLER rules and regulations...partly because of SOE constantly caving to new players.</p><p><strong>Which is why I'll repeat what I said before, look at the EOF/KOS pvp system where everyone seems to want to go back to; There was NO AA slider. AA experience was from nameds, exploration, quests. The quest zones were FULL of pvp because it was the SIMPLEST AND EASIEST way to get AA and gear.</strong></p><p>I think you're misunderstanding my solution because you're thinking in the perspective of a content-experienced EQ2 player. The new player or average joe would find it too time consuming and pointless to have to farm dungeons to get AA.</p>

ysslik
08-01-2012, 01:37 AM
<p>Remove BGs FTW.</p>

Freejazzlive
08-01-2012, 03:10 PM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Freejazzlive wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I've posted my idea on a few other threads, but I really want to get some feedback and opinions on this idea.<strong> I think that one way to truly stimulate open world pvp is to ONLY allow Achievement experience to be gained from QUESTS and NAMEDS. </strong>.</p></blockquote><p>Taking away AAXP from exploration events, as your suggestion implies, takes away another incentive to explore the world, meaning less incentive to risk open world PvP. & of course, this idea would have to be restricted to Nagafen, as the PvE players would throw a fit.</p><p>IMO, the best idea I've seen yet for revitalizing open world PvP is the one Peak floated -- keep the Warfields going constantly, not "popping" every 2 hours.</p></blockquote><p>I forgot about AA coming from exploration events, and therefore wouldn't advocate for removing that AA experience. </p><p>However, AA experience from exploration events would in no way be a barrier to people going out into the open world. In the end, if they're able to find quests that give good AA and more importantly, very good gear, then they'll go out into the zone.</p><p>I'm sorry, but I don't see anyone having less of an incentive to go out into the open because they couldn't get exploration AA. Maybe in 2007 Everquest 2, but surely not in 2012 Everquest 2.</p></blockquote><p>Well, I don't know about anyone else, but considering how much AAXP one can get at level 10 from explorations alone, I think you're wrong. There's a lot to be had, & the higher in level you get, the more important it is to get as much AAXP as you can, from any source you can. IMO, anything that takes AAXP away, when that AAXP could be gotten in the overland zones, is not a good idea.</p><p>There's also this: while you can get both good AAXP & loot from instances, if you wish to grind AAs it's easier & faster to do it in contested dungeons, rather than clearing an instance & then wasting time on your XP pots running to another instance. It's possible people don't do that on PvP servers because of the extra danger involved, but it's still true.</p><p>I can agree that instances are a major PITA, when it comes to open world PvP. But I really don't think there's much to be done about it. They're here, they're *&^%, & it is what it is. I'd rather just hope that EQ Next does away with the wretched things; I'm sick of instances.</p><p>Edit: since you mentioned brand-new players, think about this -- I think your idea would hurt them considerably, because there would be <strong>LESS</strong> opportunity for them to get the AAs they need to compete. Veteran players, who already have their 320 AAs, don't need yet another built-in advantage.</p>

Daalilama
08-01-2012, 03:53 PM
<p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>[email protected] wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>So basically I continue to go into the billions of instances there are, except I'm mentored to level 10 for the increased AA from named.</p><p>Doing some named that way gave 5-10 AA (or more) before they changed the curves. It'd give even more now.</p><p>Grinding mobs isn't necessary for AA.</p></blockquote><p>As of right now, grinding mobs is the ONLY way people want get their AA. Why? Because quests award too little AA experience, are too time consuming, and offer sub par awards to be worth doing them, and that's why people choose to just find a PL'er to finish the rest of their AA's rather than going out into the OPEN world and questing/pvping.</p><p>Also, your suggestion that people would go to billions of intances is completely unrealistic. There is no way you can get 100 AA just off killing nameds in instances, especially instances from 1-40 if your goal was to get 100 AA and lock at 39. <strong>Proof for this is seeing how PvP was before the AA slider was introduced. People did AA runs, but that was pretty much it. They didn't find 50 different groups to go into every dungeon to kill nameds. Why? Because it's too time consuming and unrealistic. </strong></p><p>Everyone keeps saying let's go back to the EOF/KOS pvp system, well ONE part that made the pvp system so superior is the fact that there was no AA slider. People were forced to go out into OPEN quest zones to get their AA, which stimulated OPEN world pvp.</p></blockquote><p>Before they changed the AA curve, which actually made it EASIER to get AA, I'd gotten 200+ AA on some characters from named alone.</p><p>You're doing it wrong, good sir.</p></blockquote><p>Even if that's true which I highly doubt, you're probably one of those few players who know every instance in and out and would go into all of them to get enough AA. Your EQ2 experience is not everyone else's experience. I guarantee you the average joe doesn't even know that there is a Runnyeye.</p><p>Furthermore, I'm fairly sure if you gave someone a choice of going into billions of different instances and getting maxed AA or just questing in ONE zone to get max AA, very few people would choose the instance approach.</p></blockquote><p>Runnyeye isn't one of those instances. And billions was an exaggeration. There are only a few places that I'd really go to for the big AA. It's not like you do 15 instances to get 10 AA, <strong>you do one particular named and get 10 AA</strong>. Granted, your mileage will vary. If you're closer to 320, you may only get 2-3 AA off that named.</p></blockquote><p>Peak stop sending people to attack me for aa I stopped giving that out anymore.</p>

Vlahkmaak
08-01-2012, 06:08 PM
<p>While I understnad what your trying to achieve the concept as proposed would eventually hurt raiding.  Everytime a utility leaves game it must be replaced.  Can you imagine how hard it would be to convine someone to switch classes for the needs of the raid if they were only gonna get xp by running the same quest lines for the umpteenth-million time?  While your proposal would encourage more open world pvp and killing questors it would make a guild very difficult which would lead to a loss of subs, loss of $$$ for SOE increased loss of dev support and eventually kill the game.</p><p>More open world zones with quest lines less reliance on instances helps alot.  the ability to farm decent gear made SS almsot as fun as the old SoS fights.  had KD been utilized like SS was with a proper pvp/bg update liek we just got KD would ahve been absolutely killer.</p><p>They released a conceptually great zone with open KD that failed becuase it was not married to proper use of a zone like SS was used.  KD had little if any use for most of the player base (gear drops sucked) and that was sad.  Open SS has been great.  There are generally always people looking to grind faction, hunt nameds, or pvp.  A KD sized zone utilized like SS for all manner of open named hunting would encourage pvp grps to go look for the named hunting grps.</p><p>I'd love to see a giant open dungeon several stories deep or so utilized like SS complete with roaming x4 raid mobs deep in at several sections, heroic and x2 nameds to farm, relevant faction hunting, gear hunting etc. with the approprate pvp/e-bg gear upgrades offered at the outset.  Such a zone would go a great distance to bringing pvp back to the open world.</p>