Time to bring back PVP locks - Page 5

Buttcliffe · 09-09-2008, 12:56 PM

Bring back locking. I like having chars at certain levels because of certain content. I don't like having to die in PVP on PURPOSE to avoid leveling these chars just while going from point A to point B (tho sometimes the revive spot helps).

kreepr · 09-09-2008, 01:07 PM

Faenril you are right.

In defence of the Devs. they have not said they are not updateing the fabled and legendary gear, that I have seen. But I could be wrong maybe they did say it some where.

Bloodfa · 09-09-2008, 01:21 PM

I can't argue about the fact that fabled should be a little better than it is at T2 and T3. It does require an investment of some time and effort. That investment is comparable in scale to the difference in tiers, ie. closer to endgame, fabled becomes harder and harder to get, so the difference in stats should be commensurate, with T2 and T3 fabled being pretty easy to farm for an experienced player. So ... I think we're essentially in agreement.

Kurindor_Mythecnea · 09-09-2008, 01:49 PM

IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods).

Azekah1 · 09-09-2008, 02:08 PM

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods).

Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PvP should.

Kurindor_Mythecnea · 09-09-2008, 02:14 PM

Azekah1 wrote:

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:
IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods).
Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PvP should.

Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue.

Azekah1 · 09-09-2008, 02:39 PM

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue.

People PvE so they can become better PvPers. So in essence, pvp is the movitation for content.If you could get everything from PvE by Pvping, how many ppl do you think would PvE?Sure some still would, but most wouldn't. Heck, the only think that makes PvE exciting is the rewards you get that you know will help you PvP better.I played on Befallen for 2 years and frankly, I'm tired of PvE...I only do it here cuz I have to. But I do as little of it as possible. So if I can get all MC and not have to worry about farming gear, that makes me verrry happy.And don't you think you're being a little hypocritical? You take ppl on AA runs that allows them to skip tons of content. Who needs to quest when you can have 21 AA at level 10?TBH, usually the best pvp is when you go out pvping, and find people who are out pvping.Ganking questers or people fighting mobs is fun, but not nearly as fun as a "good" pvp fight.Content just gets in the way...PvP anyone?

kreepr · 09-09-2008, 03:43 PM

Azekah1 wrote:

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:
Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue.
People PvE so they can become better PvPers. So in essence, pvp is the movitation for content.If you could get everything from PvE by Pvping, how many ppl do you think would PvE?Sure some still would, but most wouldn't. Heck, the only think that makes PvE exciting is the rewards you get that you know will help you PvP better.I played on Befallen for 2 years and frankly, I'm tired of PvE...I only do it here cuz I have to. But I do as little of it as possible. So if I can get all MC and not have to worry about farming gear, that makes me verrry happy.And don't you think you're being a little hypocritical? You take ppl on AA runs that allows them to skip tons of content. Who needs to quest when you can have 21 AA at level 10?TBH, usually the best pvp is when you go out pvping, and find people who are out pvping.Ganking questers or people fighting mobs is fun, but not nearly as fun as a "good" pvp fight.Content just gets in the way...PvP anyone?

So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative????

Azekah1 · 09-09-2008, 03:53 PM

kreepr13 wrote:

So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative????

What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP.

Bloodfa · 09-09-2008, 04:04 PM

I don't think he's being argumentative. Nagafen has a very active, very aggressive PvP population. The majority of the players are out there for the PvP. We'd like the best rewards, the best gear, the best everything to come from PvPing. If that had been the case from the start, the months of arguing about exiles would have never come to be. The best way to have done it, in hindsight, would be with fabled rewards starting after the point where locking is enabled, like 27, so somebody just getting into their MC gear at 22 would still be safe in Antonica for a level, before realizing that the Sherman tank they think they are is a far cry from that Abrams rolling down the hill towards them. Know what I mean?

kreepr · 09-09-2008, 04:11 PM

From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should.

Azekah1 · 09-09-2008, 04:18 PM

kreepr13 wrote:

From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should.

I'm not sure what you think I'm implying.I am just talking about motivation.When I log in, I am thinking about having fun killing people. Or having fun getting gear/AA/xp that will help me kill people.I don't think about finally getting to kill my 1000th gnoll.People on PvE servers usually think about stuff like that.For me, content is like waiting in line for a roller coaster. And PvP is the roller coaster.Would I like to be on a roller coaster 24/7? Not really, sometimes you need a break to chat/harvest/quest/tradeskill...whatever. But it's not nearly as fun : )

Senr · 09-09-2008, 04:37 PM

Sangoma wrote:

Eq2 is dieng and it will soon be the next SWG.Players need options in gameplay and not everyone wants to race to 80 to raid PVP. The diffence between EQ2 and the other MMOs is the PVP and now that locks have been removed people are looking into games such as AoC and soon to be released Warhammer. PVP locks gave us all nice break from leveling, fabled items were worth something, now there is no way i will buy a fable if im going to outlevel it after a few PVP kills. The game is now empty at low levels. There is very little point in creating a new toon unless you plan on crash leveling to 80. A large portion of the game has been destoyed and a vast amount of players lost due to it.The intoduction of cross faction classes was a great idea and it seemed that activity on the servers increased for abit. However the PVP locking is still a must for the avid PVPer. Bring it back before EQ2 and hours are fun are lost are lost.

I'm of the belief that the majority of people who level locked do it not because they prefer being lower level, but because they want to widen the gap between them and the masses. They want to be fully mastered, fully fabled, with the most AAs they can. So when they run into a "normal" person of the same level, they can't lose. But that is what was killing the PvP servers. New people don't want to log in and run into a horde of locked people who kill them as easily as if they were AFK.

kreepr · 09-09-2008, 04:52 PM

Azekah1 wrote:

kreepr13 wrote:
From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should.
I'm not sure what you think I'm implying.I am just talking about motivation.When I log in, I am thinking about having fun killing people. Or having fun getting gear/AA/xp that will help me kill people.I don't think about finally getting to kill my 1000th gnoll.People on PvE servers usually think about stuff like that.For me, content is like waiting in line for a roller coaster. And PvP is the roller coaster.Would I like to be on a roller coaster 24/7? Not really, sometimes you need a break to chat/harvest/quest/tradeskill...whatever. But it's not nearly as fun : )

Sorry I thought you trying to imply that the haveing MC where it's at would be good enough. Where on the same page we both want good gear and it should be available to you if you focaus on PVP or PVE.

Bloodfang I agree and would love the gear you get from the vendors to really be to scale as well. But I disagree with the level, I think it should be no higher then level 20. That would give them 2 levels before your Sherman tank theory. which I do like and made me lol

Bloodfa · 09-09-2008, 05:00 PM

Always glad to provide a chuckle. SMILEY

Curs3 · 09-10-2008, 04:35 AM

this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.

Faenril · 09-10-2008, 05:00 AM

Azekah1 wrote:

kreepr13 wrote:
So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative????
What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP.

I see your point about putting the focus on pvp on pvp servers and getting viable at pvp as fast as possible.Ok, but 2 points:1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets).I have no doubt the fabled/legendary/MC/pve content will get fixed someday. Wether it will all get rebalanced before next century remains to be seen...But I really don't see what was the point to introduce such OP gear in the first place, that will generate huge amount of work for the devs, in order to scale everything accordingly now, when the pre-ROK balance looked fine (at least to me), while this time could be better spent... I don't know... fixing pvp bugs ? SMILEY

Bloodfa · 09-10-2008, 03:55 PM

Curs3 wrote:

this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.

It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so.

Kurindor_Mythecnea · 09-10-2008, 04:23 PM

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

Azekah1 wrote:
kreepr13 wrote:
So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative????
What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP.
Simply because I provide a service wherein you are blind to its benefits, you think that, all of a sudden, the correlation that I am being a hypocrite is reasonable? In order to PvP at maximal potency, players must adventure to gain capped AAs. My aiding others to this end give them MORE room to PvP in that a higher overcap can be maintained. Acting like it is a given that people won't AA XP any longer simply because they overcap is again, showing your novitiate attitude in understanding the aspects of EverQuest II PvP. Those who realize PvPing in T2-T3 is near moot due to the exorbitant amounts of adventurer XP granted quest to T3 or T4 to PvP with an even greater overcap, to allot them a greater duration of PvP without needing to worry about capped AAs.
It's completely fallacious, to say "PvE content gets in the way" as YOU have. People need INCENTIVES and an actual RATIONALE to populate all of the dungeons. Quality Legendary and Fabled gear IS that reason -- it's the underlying CONTENT that draws people to experience a zone. Just because you encounter nubs who stay engaged when an enemy is on track DOESN'T mean that all are inherently inexperienced as you fallaciously claim, positting that "fighting people engaged with mobs is fun". Fact is, when dungeons have content worth competing for, contesting the enemy to acquire the region for farming is what makes for dynamic, enjoyable PvP.
The point is to have both PvE and PvP lines of advancement, for an even greater plane of player choice. PvP faction gear needs to be updated, but so too does that gained from farming dungeons and named. Precluding (impeding before ever beginning) the complexity of the game just to appeal to YOUR personal preferences is a vast oversight that any veteran MMOG developers would vehemently oppose. This type of linear, self-serving thinking is what, I think, forum-goers need to avoid.
I see your point about putting the focus on pvp on pvp servers and getting viable at pvp as fast as possible.Ok, but 2 points:1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets).I have no doubt the fabled/legendary/MC/pve content will get fixed someday. Wether it will all get rebalanced before next century remains to be seen...But I really don't see what was the point to introduce such OP gear in the first place, that will generate huge amount of work for the devs, in order to scale everything accordingly now, when the pre-ROK balance looked fine (at least to me), while this time could be better spent... I don't know... fixing pvp bugs ?

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

(P.S. I am one who supports the PvP lock again initiated at level 20 [being against the level 12-14s who camp level 9s reaching 10], under a few preconditions relative to prudent fixes alotted in areas lacking equity. The introductory tutorial system, DPS class utility disparity, consumable items, evacuation, immunity, respawning, and encounter credit are the points in great need of adjustment. For the goal-getter type of developers & designers, runspeed and fame are the up and coming difficulties in regard to shouldering a solvent PvP situation.)

I think once the aforementioned items received addressing, EverQuest II would be unmatched on terms of entertainment value, and I could therein continue to neglect that which need not be while partaking in the luxury of this MMOG in my leisure. >o

Azekah1 · 09-10-2008, 05:51 PM

Faenril@Nagafen wrote:

1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets).

In regards to number 1 I have to disagree. You can easily trivialize any content by waiting til its green. PvE is only as challenging as YOU make it. On the other hand, PvP is as challenging as the person your fighting makes it, which is a huge difference. Bears can't go craft some MC armor, they are always static.On number 2 I def agree. "Quality" pvp is hard to come by. But when you get it, its pretty awesomely fun : ) But sometimes I get really frustrated or whatever and need to undwind by crafting/harvesting/questing or whatever. But, it's not really these things that keep me coming back. It's the pvp that does.

Shadow_Viper · 09-10-2008, 05:54 PM

The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE.

Kurindor_Mythecnea · 09-10-2008, 06:13 PM

Shadow_Viper wrote:

The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE.

What are your character's levels and how often do you play? Were you a consistent player during the time of level locking? Vain statements of "appreciation" like this are either those sightless or self-serving. Sightless if the commentor doesn't think to provide background on their sentiments, and self-serving if the speaker only wants to express their disdain for the masses that actually support healthy PvP.

Emolad · 09-10-2008, 06:29 PM

Shadow_Viper wrote:
The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE.

QFT

kreepr · 09-11-2008, 10:46 AM

Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:

Curs3 wrote:
this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.
It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so.

How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers.

Bozidar · 09-11-2008, 11:00 AM

i actually saw someone say in 70-79 last night that the only thing that can save eq2 is bringing level locking back

of course, i lol'd

sokil · 09-11-2008, 11:46 AM

Shadow_Viper wrote:

The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE.

Agree! I still remember the reason for this and why it was implemented.

Bloodfa · 09-11-2008, 12:21 PM

kreepr13 wrote:

Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:
Curs3 wrote:
this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.
It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so.
How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers.

I was responding to Curs3 about the suggestion he made in a different thread, not this one. Sorry about the confusion. To clarify what I meant, it doesn't have to be explicitly stated as such (the PWNZ FACEZ crack), I just used it as an example. One can be judged by their actions. When I see people exclusively hanging in zones where all the mobs are grey, and no threat, grouped with others at the far end of the spectrum and keeping far enough away so that they won't be associated with the lower level ones and not counted as a threat, it's not for increased volume in PvP. It's for an unfair (yes, I know, unfair in PvP doesn't exist, but I think you know what I mean) advantage against a considerably weaker opponent. As I've said before, I've got alts in lots of tiers, and actions speak louder than words. Not everybody here (here being the general topic) has an altruistic or honest desire to see things done for the right reasons. How many would lock if there were absolutely no rewards while locked? No AP ding for killing a named. No "You gain achievement for discovering a rare item!" No AP ding when zoning someplace new? Anyway, sorry about the semi-derail on this; it was inadvertent.

And trolls play on both sides of the fence. SMILEY

kreepr · 09-11-2008, 01:52 PM

Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:

kreepr13 wrote:
Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote:
Curs3 wrote:
this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.
It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so.
How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers.
I was responding to Curs3 about the suggestion he made in a different thread, not this one. Sorry about the confusion. To clarify what I meant, it doesn't have to be explicitly stated as such (the PWNZ FACEZ crack), I just used it as an example. One can be judged by their actions. When I see people exclusively hanging in zones where all the mobs are grey, and no threat, grouped with others at the far end of the spectrum and keeping far enough away so that they won't be associated with the lower level ones and not counted as a threat, it's not for increased volume in PvP. It's for an unfair (yes, I know, unfair in PvP doesn't exist, but I think you know what I mean) advantage against a considerably weaker opponent. As I've said before, I've got alts in lots of tiers, and actions speak louder than words. Not everybody here (here being the general topic) has an altruistic or honest desire to see things done for the right reasons. How many would lock if there were absolutely no rewards while locked? No AP ding for killing a named. No "You gain achievement for discovering a rare item!" No AP ding when zoning someplace new? Anyway, sorry about the semi-derail on this; it was inadvertent.
And trolls play on both sides of the fence.

I get what you are saying and yes there are people that take advantage. But there are people in every tier and just as many that take advantage of what ever they can. But I see no advocating to change the game this drastic for those. No it's really IMO small changes you guys are asking for. This really changed everything about how a lot of people played. It was supposed to make it better for the new players and save the game. But it seams that the population has dropped. So what happened to all the new players?? Yeah there are some new players here and there but where was the flood of new players that where getting railed?? As far as would I lock if I didn't get any AA or rewards. Nope I would not even be playing any more.

And what about the trolls under the bridge??

Curs3 · 09-11-2008, 02:20 PM

Only reason why I suggested what I suggest was I would be comfortable with it. I can't speak for all eq2 players, but I can say that if that does happen the way i said it, i would be happy not elevating myself at all. Thats the whole point anyways, to remain stagnant. Hell i can have characters in almost all the teirs, I can have pvp characters running around looking for fights in all levels because of it. So there for it brings more the fight.but if you really want to get into it, how about you do gain the xp but its stored and as soon as you /unlock you'll probably ding like crazy from 3months of stored xp and aa. But either way its balanced, so whats the harm?

Spyderbite · 09-11-2008, 02:51 PM

kreepr13 wrote:

How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher?I believe the devs used combat logs to determine this. Concentrating primarily on those who had extremely high kill counts and extremely low death counts. It was determined that brand new players were the primary targets and far outweighed the combat that actually took place twink vs. twink. Thus the lock was implemented.So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers. Not trolls. Those of us who have lived through those "glory days" of getting 100-500 death counts before ever getting out of our newbie gear. Those of us who have watched friends we've encouraged to play on pvp immediately leave out of frustration of being mowed down as soon as the immunity bar dissapates.. over and over.. again.I think level 30 would be fine place to unlock pvp experience. The only people that would suffer then would be those who raced to 30 without taking the time to learn their character or how to pvp.

09-09-2008, 01:21 PM	#123
Bloodfa Server: Nagafen General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,873	I can't argue about the fact that fabled should be a little better than it is at T2 and T3. It does require an investment of some time and effort. That investment is comparable in scale to the difference in tiers, ie. closer to endgame, fabled becomes harder and harder to get, so the difference in stats should be commensurate, with T2 and T3 fabled being pretty easy to farm for an experienced player. So ... I think we're essentially in agreement. __________________

09-09-2008, 01:49 PM	#124
Kurindor_Mythecnea Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,072	IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods). __________________ \|-\| EverQuest Next Principles to Abide by (30) \|-\| True Ks: 40.2K Ds: 3.6K Ratio:11:1 \|-\| \|-\| PvP Briefing 101 (Outdated) \|-\| 45 Points of Awesome-o for PvP! \|-\|

09-09-2008, 02:08 PM	#125
Azekah1 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,887	Seliri@Nagafen wrote: IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods). Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PvP should.

09-09-2008, 02:14 PM	#126
Kurindor_Mythecnea Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,072	Azekah1 wrote: Seliri@Nagafen wrote: IMO, a tier's Fabled should AT LEAST be as strong as the next tier's Mastercrafted. What people don't realize, acting like having MC so strong is the enabler for the casual player, is that it reduces the need for CONTENT, the motivating factor for populating zones with activity (found through the desire to acquire more than decent or adequate goods). Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PvP should. Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue. __________________ \|-\| EverQuest Next Principles to Abide by (30) \|-\| True Ks: 40.2K Ds: 3.6K Ratio:11:1 \|-\| \|-\| PvP Briefing 101 (Outdated) \|-\| 45 Points of Awesome-o for PvP! \|-\|

09-09-2008, 02:39 PM	#127
Azekah1 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,887	Seliri@Nagafen wrote: Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue. People PvE so they can become better PvPers. So in essence, pvp is the movitation for content.If you could get everything from PvE by Pvping, how many ppl do you think would PvE?Sure some still would, but most wouldn't. Heck, the only think that makes PvE exciting is the rewards you get that you know will help you PvP better.I played on Befallen for 2 years and frankly, I'm tired of PvE...I only do it here cuz I have to. But I do as little of it as possible. So if I can get all MC and not have to worry about farming gear, that makes me verrry happy.And don't you think you're being a little hypocritical? You take ppl on AA runs that allows them to skip tons of content. Who needs to quest when you can have 21 AA at level 10?TBH, usually the best pvp is when you go out pvping, and find people who are out pvping.Ganking questers or people fighting mobs is fun, but not nearly as fun as a "good" pvp fight.Content just gets in the way...PvP anyone?

09-09-2008, 12:56 PM	#121
Buttcliffe Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 704	Bring back locking. I like having chars at certain levels because of certain content. I don't like having to die in PVP on PURPOSE to avoid leveling these chars just while going from point A to point B (tho sometimes the revive spot helps).

09-09-2008, 01:07 PM	#122
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	Faenril you are right. In defence of the Devs. they have not said they are not updateing the fabled and legendary gear, that I have seen. But I could be wrong maybe they did say it some where.

09-09-2008, 03:43 PM	#128
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	Azekah1 wrote: Seliri@Nagafen wrote: Wrong. EverQuest II is a MMOG where fundamentals include PvE progression. Being able to farm quality loot fosters quality PvP, as such zones and areas where there are in demand items become hotspots and enjoyable chokepoints for competition and contest. Nonetheless, with PvP faction merchants and tokens, PvP is "still a motivation" in a sense, at least, unless someone isn't aware that MC is currently better than most offerings given through such a venue. People PvE so they can become better PvPers. So in essence, pvp is the movitation for content.If you could get everything from PvE by Pvping, how many ppl do you think would PvE?Sure some still would, but most wouldn't. Heck, the only think that makes PvE exciting is the rewards you get that you know will help you PvP better.I played on Befallen for 2 years and frankly, I'm tired of PvE...I only do it here cuz I have to. But I do as little of it as possible. So if I can get all MC and not have to worry about farming gear, that makes me verrry happy.And don't you think you're being a little hypocritical? You take ppl on AA runs that allows them to skip tons of content. Who needs to quest when you can have 21 AA at level 10?TBH, usually the best pvp is when you go out pvping, and find people who are out pvping.Ganking questers or people fighting mobs is fun, but not nearly as fun as a "good" pvp fight.Content just gets in the way...PvP anyone? So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative????

09-09-2008, 03:53 PM	#129
Azekah1 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,887	kreepr13 wrote: So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative???? What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP.

09-09-2008, 04:04 PM	#130
Bloodfa Server: Nagafen General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,873	I don't think he's being argumentative. Nagafen has a very active, very aggressive PvP population. The majority of the players are out there for the PvP. We'd like the best rewards, the best gear, the best everything to come from PvPing. If that had been the case from the start, the months of arguing about exiles would have never come to be. The best way to have done it, in hindsight, would be with fabled rewards starting after the point where locking is enabled, like 27, so somebody just getting into their MC gear at 22 would still be safe in Antonica for a level, before realizing that the Sherman tank they think they are is a far cry from that Abrams rolling down the hill towards them. Know what I mean? __________________

09-09-2008, 04:11 PM	#131
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should.

09-09-2008, 04:18 PM	#132
Azekah1 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,887	kreepr13 wrote: From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should. I'm not sure what you think I'm implying.I am just talking about motivation.When I log in, I am thinking about having fun killing people. Or having fun getting gear/AA/xp that will help me kill people.I don't think about finally getting to kill my 1000th gnoll.People on PvE servers usually think about stuff like that.For me, content is like waiting in line for a roller coaster. And PvP is the roller coaster.Would I like to be on a roller coaster 24/7? Not really, sometimes you need a break to chat/harvest/quest/tradeskill...whatever. But it's not nearly as fun : )

09-09-2008, 04:37 PM	#133
Senr Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 57	Sangoma wrote: Eq2 is dieng and it will soon be the next SWG.Players need options in gameplay and not everyone wants to race to 80 to raid PVP. The diffence between EQ2 and the other MMOs is the PVP and now that locks have been removed people are looking into games such as AoC and soon to be released Warhammer. PVP locks gave us all nice break from leveling, fabled items were worth something, now there is no way i will buy a fable if im going to outlevel it after a few PVP kills. The game is now empty at low levels. There is very little point in creating a new toon unless you plan on crash leveling to 80. A large portion of the game has been destoyed and a vast amount of players lost due to it.The intoduction of cross faction classes was a great idea and it seemed that activity on the servers increased for abit. However the PVP locking is still a must for the avid PVPer. Bring it back before EQ2 and hours are fun are lost are lost. I'm of the belief that the majority of people who level locked do it not because they prefer being lower level, but because they want to widen the gap between them and the masses. They want to be fully mastered, fully fabled, with the most AAs they can. So when they run into a "normal" person of the same level, they can't lose. But that is what was killing the PvP servers. New people don't want to log in and run into a horde of locked people who kill them as easily as if they were AFK.

09-09-2008, 04:52 PM	#134
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	Azekah1 wrote: kreepr13 wrote: From your statments it sounds as though you are saying PVP should come befor content. You said Quote- Content should not be the motivation on a pvp server... PVP should. I'm not sure what you think I'm implying.I am just talking about motivation.When I log in, I am thinking about having fun killing people. Or having fun getting gear/AA/xp that will help me kill people.I don't think about finally getting to kill my 1000th gnoll.People on PvE servers usually think about stuff like that.For me, content is like waiting in line for a roller coaster. And PvP is the roller coaster.Would I like to be on a roller coaster 24/7? Not really, sometimes you need a break to chat/harvest/quest/tradeskill...whatever. But it's not nearly as fun : ) Sorry I thought you trying to imply that the haveing MC where it's at would be good enough. Where on the same page we both want good gear and it should be available to you if you focaus on PVP or PVE. Bloodfang I agree and would love the gear you get from the vendors to really be to scale as well. But I disagree with the level, I think it should be no higher then level 20. That would give them 2 levels before your Sherman tank theory. which I do like and made me lol

09-09-2008, 05:00 PM	#135
Bloodfa Server: Nagafen General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,873	Always glad to provide a chuckle. __________________

09-10-2008, 04:35 AM	#136
Curs3 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 225	this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at.

09-10-2008, 05:00 AM	#137
Faenril Server: Nagafen Guild: Purity Rank: Sushi Maker - Alt Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,136	Azekah1 wrote: kreepr13 wrote: So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative???? What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP. I see your point about putting the focus on pvp on pvp servers and getting viable at pvp as fast as possible.Ok, but 2 points:1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets).I have no doubt the fabled/legendary/MC/pve content will get fixed someday. Wether it will all get rebalanced before next century remains to be seen...But I really don't see what was the point to introduce such OP gear in the first place, that will generate huge amount of work for the devs, in order to scale everything accordingly now, when the pre-ROK balance looked fine (at least to me), while this time could be better spent... I don't know... fixing pvp bugs ?

09-10-2008, 03:55 PM	#138
Bloodfa Server: Nagafen General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,873	Curs3 wrote: this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at. It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so. __________________

09-10-2008, 04:23 PM	#139
Kurindor_Mythecnea Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,072	Faenril@Nagafen wrote: Azekah1 wrote: kreepr13 wrote: So because you are tired of PVE then everyone should suffer for it.?.? No there are new players that may want to play the whole game and old players that really enjoy the prize at the end of the tunnel. They added PVP to the game. The base game is PVE and I and many others want that part of the game as well as the PVP. Are you just trying to be argumentative???? What are you talking about?How am I making you suffer?PvE to your hearts content if thats what makes you happy. I'm here for the PvP. Simply because I provide a service wherein you are blind to its benefits, you think that, all of a sudden, the correlation that I am being a hypocrite is reasonable? In order to PvP at maximal potency, players must adventure to gain capped AAs. My aiding others to this end give them MORE room to PvP in that a higher overcap can be maintained. Acting like it is a given that people won't AA XP any longer simply because they overcap is again, showing your novitiate attitude in understanding the aspects of EverQuest II PvP. Those who realize PvPing in T2-T3 is near moot due to the exorbitant amounts of adventurer XP granted quest to T3 or T4 to PvP with an even greater overcap, to allot them a greater duration of PvP without needing to worry about capped AAs. It's completely fallacious, to say "PvE content gets in the way" as YOU have. People need INCENTIVES and an actual RATIONALE to populate all of the dungeons. Quality Legendary and Fabled gear IS that reason -- it's the underlying CONTENT that draws people to experience a zone. Just because you encounter nubs who stay engaged when an enemy is on track DOESN'T mean that all are inherently inexperienced as you fallaciously claim, positting that "fighting people engaged with mobs is fun". Fact is, when dungeons have content worth competing for, contesting the enemy to acquire the region for farming is what makes for dynamic, enjoyable PvP. The point is to have both PvE and PvP lines of advancement, for an even greater plane of player choice. PvP faction gear needs to be updated, but so too does that gained from farming dungeons and named. Precluding (impeding before ever beginning) the complexity of the game just to appeal to YOUR personal preferences is a vast oversight that any veteran MMOG developers would vehemently oppose. This type of linear, self-serving thinking is what, I think, forum-goers need to avoid. I see your point about putting the focus on pvp on pvp servers and getting viable at pvp as fast as possible.Ok, but 2 points:1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets).I have no doubt the fabled/legendary/MC/pve content will get fixed someday. Wether it will all get rebalanced before next century remains to be seen...But I really don't see what was the point to introduce such OP gear in the first place, that will generate huge amount of work for the devs, in order to scale everything accordingly now, when the pre-ROK balance looked fine (at least to me), while this time could be better spent... I don't know... fixing pvp bugs ? Seliri@Nagafen wrote: (P.S. I am one who supports the PvP lock again initiated at level 20 [being against the level 12-14s who camp level 9s reaching 10], under a few preconditions relative to prudent fixes alotted in areas lacking equity. The introductory tutorial system, DPS class utility disparity, consumable items, evacuation, immunity, respawning, and encounter credit are the points in great need of adjustment. For the goal-getter type of developers & designers, runspeed and fame are the up and coming difficulties in regard to shouldering a solvent PvP situation.) I think once the aforementioned items received addressing, EverQuest II would be unmatched on terms of entertainment value, and I could therein continue to neglect that which need not be while partaking in the luxury of this MMOG in my leisure. >o __________________ \|-\| EverQuest Next Principles to Abide by (30) \|-\| True Ks: 40.2K Ds: 3.6K Ratio:11:1 \|-\| \|-\| PvP Briefing 101 (Outdated) \|-\| 45 Points of Awesome-o for PvP! \|-\|

09-10-2008, 05:51 PM	#140
Azekah1 Loremaster Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 1,887	Faenril@Nagafen wrote: 1) By making MC gear OP (at least compared to its legendary/fabled counterparts), SOE is not only breaking items balance (which is annoying), but also content balance (which is more annoying) : any half decent experienced player who rolled an alt recently can agree that if you have proper gear (MC gear for instance), lower tiers content is extremely easy. Most heroic content of your level can be soloed or duoed without much trouble. So by removing the challenge, trivializing content, SOE is limitating the PVE content to a mindless grind to T8, while EQ2's PVE content has potential for being much more than that, and is probably superior to its competitors.2) EQ2 pvp is for sure somehow fun, but with all its design flaws and bugs that remain unadressed, it's far from being good enough to keep me interested 24/7, the same way pve content alone would not hold me in the game. For the most part pvp is a gank fest, which gets little old after a while. This is where you need quality pve content to keep players hooked in the game. When some pve content gets broken, it's as many unsatisfied players that will leave the pvp field too (while they don't play the game solely for pvp, they do take part in the pvp, and provide you targets). In regards to number 1 I have to disagree. You can easily trivialize any content by waiting til its green. PvE is only as challenging as YOU make it. On the other hand, PvP is as challenging as the person your fighting makes it, which is a huge difference. Bears can't go craft some MC armor, they are always static.On number 2 I def agree. "Quality" pvp is hard to come by. But when you get it, its pretty awesomely fun : ) But sometimes I get really frustrated or whatever and need to undwind by crafting/harvesting/questing or whatever. But, it's not really these things that keep me coming back. It's the pvp that does.

09-10-2008, 05:54 PM	#141
Shadow_Viper Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 438	The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE.

09-10-2008, 06:13 PM	#142
Kurindor_Mythecnea Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 1,072	Shadow_Viper wrote: The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE. What are your character's levels and how often do you play? Were you a consistent player during the time of level locking? Vain statements of "appreciation" like this are either those sightless or self-serving. Sightless if the commentor doesn't think to provide background on their sentiments, and self-serving if the speaker only wants to express their disdain for the masses that actually support healthy PvP. __________________ \|-\| EverQuest Next Principles to Abide by (30) \|-\| True Ks: 40.2K Ds: 3.6K Ratio:11:1 \|-\| \|-\| PvP Briefing 101 (Outdated) \|-\| 45 Points of Awesome-o for PvP! \|-\|

09-10-2008, 06:29 PM	#143
Emolad Server: Vox Loremaster Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 147	Shadow_Viper wrote: The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE. QFT

09-11-2008, 10:46 AM	#144
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote: Curs3 wrote: this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at. It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so. How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers.

09-11-2008, 11:00 AM	#145
Bozidar Loremaster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 3,292	i actually saw someone say in 70-79 last night that the only thing that can save eq2 is bringing level locking back of course, i lol'd

09-11-2008, 11:46 AM	#146
sokil Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 280	Shadow_Viper wrote: The addition of forced PVP exp was a needed change. Thank you SOE. Agree! I still remember the reason for this and why it was implemented.

09-11-2008, 12:21 PM	#147
Bloodfa Server: Nagafen General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 2,873	kreepr13 wrote: Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote: Curs3 wrote: this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at. It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so. How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers. I was responding to Curs3 about the suggestion he made in a different thread, not this one. Sorry about the confusion. To clarify what I meant, it doesn't have to be explicitly stated as such (the PWNZ FACEZ crack), I just used it as an example. One can be judged by their actions. When I see people exclusively hanging in zones where all the mobs are grey, and no threat, grouped with others at the far end of the spectrum and keeping far enough away so that they won't be associated with the lower level ones and not counted as a threat, it's not for increased volume in PvP. It's for an unfair (yes, I know, unfair in PvP doesn't exist, but I think you know what I mean) advantage against a considerably weaker opponent. As I've said before, I've got alts in lots of tiers, and actions speak louder than words. Not everybody here (here being the general topic) has an altruistic or honest desire to see things done for the right reasons. How many would lock if there were absolutely no rewards while locked? No AP ding for killing a named. No "You gain achievement for discovering a rare item!" No AP ding when zoning someplace new? Anyway, sorry about the semi-derail on this; it was inadvertent. And trolls play on both sides of the fence. __________________

09-11-2008, 01:52 PM	#148
kreepr General Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 681	Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote: kreepr13 wrote: Bloodfang@Nagafen wrote: Curs3 wrote: this is about bringing back pvp locking, thats it.Now i had an idea that i thought was acceptable but aparently only one person looked at. It was looked at, but the whole thing about bringing back locking has two groups of proponents: those that want it back for an increased volume of PvP, and those that want it back so they can PWNZ FACEZ. The number of players wanting the second option is disproportionately higher than the first, and would receive no benefit by doing so. How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher? I have only seen a few people in this thread say they wanna "PWNZ FACEZ" and they where posting to just be a smart *** troll cause they don't want it back at all. I see the majority of people posting for it wanting it back for content reasons and increased volume of PVP. We are even in aggreance about keeping it out of the low teens and not starting a full lock till somewhere in the 20's. Though most of us are disagreeing about where in the 20's. You where saying 27 and gave a good reason why. I think 20 and gave a good reason why. So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers. I was responding to Curs3 about the suggestion he made in a different thread, not this one. Sorry about the confusion. To clarify what I meant, it doesn't have to be explicitly stated as such (the PWNZ FACEZ crack), I just used it as an example. One can be judged by their actions. When I see people exclusively hanging in zones where all the mobs are grey, and no threat, grouped with others at the far end of the spectrum and keeping far enough away so that they won't be associated with the lower level ones and not counted as a threat, it's not for increased volume in PvP. It's for an unfair (yes, I know, unfair in PvP doesn't exist, but I think you know what I mean) advantage against a considerably weaker opponent. As I've said before, I've got alts in lots of tiers, and actions speak louder than words. Not everybody here (here being the general topic) has an altruistic or honest desire to see things done for the right reasons. How many would lock if there were absolutely no rewards while locked? No AP ding for killing a named. No "You gain achievement for discovering a rare item!" No AP ding when zoning someplace new? Anyway, sorry about the semi-derail on this; it was inadvertent. And trolls play on both sides of the fence. I get what you are saying and yes there are people that take advantage. But there are people in every tier and just as many that take advantage of what ever they can. But I see no advocating to change the game this drastic for those. No it's really IMO small changes you guys are asking for. This really changed everything about how a lot of people played. It was supposed to make it better for the new players and save the game. But it seams that the population has dropped. So what happened to all the new players?? Yeah there are some new players here and there but where was the flood of new players that where getting railed?? As far as would I lock if I didn't get any AA or rewards. Nope I would not even be playing any more. And what about the trolls under the bridge??

09-11-2008, 02:20 PM	#149
Curs3 Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 225	Only reason why I suggested what I suggest was I would be comfortable with it. I can't speak for all eq2 players, but I can say that if that does happen the way i said it, i would be happy not elevating myself at all. Thats the whole point anyways, to remain stagnant. Hell i can have characters in almost all the teirs, I can have pvp characters running around looking for fights in all levels because of it. So there for it brings more the fight.but if you really want to get into it, how about you do gain the xp but its stored and as soon as you /unlock you'll probably ding like crazy from 3months of stored xp and aa. But either way its balanced, so whats the harm?

09-11-2008, 02:51 PM	#150
Spyderbite Server: Venekor Guild: Dark Vengeance Rank: Member Loremaster Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Connecticut Posts: 4,262	kreepr13 wrote: How can you say the amount of people wanting it back to "PWNZ FACEZ" is higher?I believe the devs used combat logs to determine this. Concentrating primarily on those who had extremely high kill counts and extremely low death counts. It was determined that brand new players were the primary targets and far outweighed the combat that actually took place twink vs. twink. Thus the lock was implemented.So the only people I have seen post about "PWNZ THE FACEZ" have been a few trolls with there story book tales of the evil low level lockers. Not trolls. Those of us who have lived through those "glory days" of getting 100-500 death counts before ever getting out of our newbie gear. Those of us who have watched friends we've encouraged to play on pvp immediately leave out of frustration of being mowed down as soon as the immunity bar dissapates.. over and over.. again.I think level 30 would be fine place to unlock pvp experience. The only people that would suffer then would be those who raced to 30 without taking the time to learn their character or how to pvp.