GU60 PvP Changes now on TEST-COPY

[Talathion]

Corydonn wrote:

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Limiters are pretty stupid.

a limiter should be 5 seconds, max, for everything.

30 seconds is along time for PvP... lol

Once every 30 seconds per passive proc would still save lives. It does with the Banshee Hoop already.

Banshee Hoop made me scream like a banshee in pvp because of AE autoattack.

[Talathion]

Crismorn wrote:

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Crismorn wrote:

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Corydonn wrote:

Crismorn wrote:

Good guards will still be viable, just as they have always been.

If you can press buttons then you will be fine, if you cant then yeah I'd suggest rerolling.

Passive taunts are stupid and nothing close to the same as ward/heal/dmg procs as none of those 3 force me into a position where I can no longer play MY toon.

Passive taunts would have probably been way less effective in Velious with the new AAs that offer groupwide taunt immunity for Bards and Warriors. Still I would prefer to see them put back in with some sort of limiter, Otherwise my taunts >>>>> Any other taunts.

Enless your fighting an SK, then your taunts do nothing

err.. his doing something was just autoattack, Brawlers Autoattack has a +50% chance to target lock you.

I fully understand that you would have no idea if someone is actually good at this game since you have zero basis for comparisson but rest assured Corydonn is an extremely good player who will still be head and shoulders above pretty much every other fighter in eq2 after this change because *gasp* he actually understands his toon and has more then a vague clue about the other 23 classes which is pretty much the backbone of being good at any game

If you love him so much, why don't you marry him?

I appreciate and enjoy playing with and against very good players as it allows me to gauge where I am and what I can work on, this must be difficult for you to grasp as you pretty much do the exact opposite by rolling FoTM classes and avoiding going against skilled players at all costs "which is a good idea since you are mediocre at best"

Whats a FOTM Class?

Brawler?

[Crismorn]

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Crismorn wrote:

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Crismorn wrote:

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

Corydonn wrote:

Crismorn wrote:

Good guards will still be viable, just as they have always been.

If you can press buttons then you will be fine, if you cant then yeah I'd suggest rerolling.

Passive taunts are stupid and nothing close to the same as ward/heal/dmg procs as none of those 3 force me into a position where I can no longer play MY toon.

Passive taunts would have probably been way less effective in Velious with the new AAs that offer groupwide taunt immunity for Bards and Warriors. Still I would prefer to see them put back in with some sort of limiter, Otherwise my taunts >>>>> Any other taunts.

Enless your fighting an SK, then your taunts do nothing

err.. his doing something was just autoattack, Brawlers Autoattack has a +50% chance to target lock you.

I fully understand that you would have no idea if someone is actually good at this game since you have zero basis for comparisson but rest assured Corydonn is an extremely good player who will still be head and shoulders above pretty much every other fighter in eq2 after this change because *gasp* he actually understands his toon and has more then a vague clue about the other 23 classes which is pretty much the backbone of being good at any game

If you love him so much, why don't you marry him?

I appreciate and enjoy playing with and against very good players as it allows me to gauge where I am and what I can work on, this must be difficult for you to grasp as you pretty much do the exact opposite by rolling FoTM classes and avoiding going against skilled players at all costs "which is a good idea since you are mediocre at best"

Whats a FOTM Class?

Brawler?

Flavor of the month class.

It's basically why you betray and/or reroll so often

[Balrok]

dam you guys for detrailing my PvP mentor dialog with pages of quotes within quotes within quotes.... about a much needed change.  Adding skill back into the taunting skill is a great thing to separate the mindless button mashing tanks with the good ones.

[Olihin]

To answer the flying mount question, you will be grounded rather then dismounted.   So you will still be able to keep the benefits of the ground mount while being unable to fly until you are no longer engaged. 

Passive abilities have been disabled.  Fighters have various taunts that can still be used to keep targets engaged.  Guardians for example have Taunting Assault, Provoke, Plant, Shout and Taunting Blow.  That is not counting any AA taunts that work in PvP or single fight use taunts like Rescue and Sentry Watch.  Please note that we are also looking at the balance based on a group vs. group combat.    

Adding a passive limiter would not give us the active participation we would like from fighters in a PvP setting.  At this point, a group that is taunt locked, would be clearly on the base of the actions of the fighter/s in the group vs. their simple presence in the group.  

Please remember that all feedback is appreciated and evaluated.  Please keep it on topic to avoid tl:dr comments.

Olihin

[Balrok]

Olihin wrote:

Passive abilities have been disabled.  Fighters have various taunts that can still be used to keep targets engaged.  Guardians for example have Taunting Assault, Provoke, Plant, Shout and Taunting Blow.  That is not counting any AA taunts that work in PvP or single fight use taunts like Rescue and Sentry Watch.  Please note that we are also looking at the balance based on a group vs. group combat.    

Adding a passive limiter would not give us the active participation we would like from fighters in a PvP setting.  At this point, a group that is taunt locked, would be clearly on the base of the actions of the fighter/s in the group vs. their simple presence in the group.  

Olihin

Awesome post.. sticky this for future reference, cause you hit it on the head.

[Corydonn]

It's still my opinion the complete removal of passive taunts is taking more skill/levels of play away from the game than it is adding... Plus it's also two buffs to my already powerful class that I don't really think is needed. Oh well

Edit: Also, Most of the bad passive taunts were only triggered by the other team making mistakes. You could avoid darn nearly all of them with communication.

[Ilovecows]

Olihin wrote:

To answer the flying mount question, you will be grounded rather then dismounted.   So you will still be able to keep the benefits of the ground mount while being unable to fly until you are no longer engaged. 

Passive abilities have been disabled.  Fighters have various taunts that can still be used to keep targets engaged.  Guardians for example have Taunting Assault, Provoke, Plant, Shout and Taunting Blow.  That is not counting any AA taunts that work in PvP or single fight use taunts like Rescue and Sentry Watch.  Please note that we are also looking at the balance based on a group vs. group combat.    

Adding a passive limiter would not give us the active participation we would like from fighters in a PvP setting.  At this point, a group that is taunt locked, would be clearly on the base of the actions of the fighter/s in the group vs. their simple presence in the group.  

Please remember that all feedback is appreciated and evaluated.  Please keep it on topic to avoid tl:dr comments.

Olihin

So all passive abilities are being disabled from pvp now?  Not just taunts?

[Corydonn]

Ilovecows@Nagafen wrote:

Olihin wrote:

To answer the flying mount question, you will be grounded rather then dismounted.   So you will still be able to keep the benefits of the ground mount while being unable to fly until you are no longer engaged. 

Passive abilities have been disabled.  Fighters have various taunts that can still be used to keep targets engaged.  Guardians for example have Taunting Assault, Provoke, Plant, Shout and Taunting Blow.  That is not counting any AA taunts that work in PvP or single fight use taunts like Rescue and Sentry Watch.  Please note that we are also looking at the balance based on a group vs. group combat.    

Adding a passive limiter would not give us the active participation we would like from fighters in a PvP setting.  At this point, a group that is taunt locked, would be clearly on the base of the actions of the fighter/s in the group vs. their simple presence in the group.  

Please remember that all feedback is appreciated and evaluated.  Please keep it on topic to avoid tl:dr comments.

Olihin

So all passive abilities are being disabled from pvp now?  Not just taunts?

It kinda makes me laugh a bit, Should illusionists be constantly pressing buff buttons to boost my autoattack damage by 2.5x? Should dirges and priests be pressing buttons to increase my mitigation by 20%? Should SKs and Paladins be pressing combos to keep their fear immunity, Or Brawlers their Strikethrough immunity?

[Talathion]

This change was just a huge nerf to guardian. :/

[Ilovecows]

Failathion@Nagafen wrote:

This change was just a huge nerf to guardian. :/

It was a nerf to every tank, although they were the ones hit the hardest.

[Crismorn]

Corydonn wrote:

Ilovecows@Nagafen wrote:

Olihin wrote:

To answer the flying mount question, you will be grounded rather then dismounted.   So you will still be able to keep the benefits of the ground mount while being unable to fly until you are no longer engaged. 

Passive abilities have been disabled.  Fighters have various taunts that can still be used to keep targets engaged.  Guardians for example have Taunting Assault, Provoke, Plant, Shout and Taunting Blow.  That is not counting any AA taunts that work in PvP or single fight use taunts like Rescue and Sentry Watch.  Please note that we are also looking at the balance based on a group vs. group combat.    

Adding a passive limiter would not give us the active participation we would like from fighters in a PvP setting.  At this point, a group that is taunt locked, would be clearly on the base of the actions of the fighter/s in the group vs. their simple presence in the group.  

Please remember that all feedback is appreciated and evaluated.  Please keep it on topic to avoid tl:dr comments.

Olihin

So all passive abilities are being disabled from pvp now?  Not just taunts?

It kinda makes me laugh a bit, Should illusionists be constantly pressing buff buttons to boost my autoattack damage by 2.5x? Should dirges and priests be pressing buttons to increase my mitigation by 20%? Should SKs and Paladins be pressing combos to keep their fear immunity, Or Brawlers their Strikethrough immunity?

Yeah but none of those abilities stops the opposing player from controlling their toon, its a dumb mechanic.

eq2 is the only game where taunts force players into positions where they cannot control their own toon.

Tbh I would be fine with leaving taunt procs/passive taunts if they added taunt immunity signets for status/gold like every other cc ability in game has as a counterpart.

[Talathion]

The mechanic is genius, it actually makes a tank.. a tank!

[Balrok]

Corydonn wrote:

It kinda makes me laugh a bit, Should illusionists be constantly pressing buff buttons to boost my autoattack damage by 2.5x? Should dirges and priests be pressing buttons to increase my mitigation by 20%? Should SKs and Paladins be pressing combos to keep their fear immunity, Or Brawlers their Strikethrough immunity?

I'm not following you here.  These are all "buffs", where a taunt is an ability.  Actually, it's a Crowd Control ability.  So I would reword the above for passive taunts with, "Should illusionists have an until cancel buff that triggers a mez/stun/stifle/daze target or group encounter when hit or attacking?"  Of course any one of these would not be as big of a deal since they have Immunities.  Taunt, Snare and Knock Back are they only Crowd Control abilities in the game that do not have an Immunity timer.  Tanks get 2 of the 3.

just to be perfectly honestly... I don't care either way.  I should support having passive taunts, cause it allows me to hide behind a tank easier.  But that doesn't mean I still don't think passive anything are a good thing.  More skill in this game is cool.

[Balrok]

I don't think there is much arguement that the best guard ever was Broncas.  I know he played the class like this....

Spec/Gear Purely defensive and to absorb damage (pure meat shield)Group with good healers/dps (Guard is a group based tank)Run around Taunting people (Not just taunt sometimes, not just taunt in between CAs/Auto Attack... taunt all the time and taunt everyone, not just the other groups tank... everyone.)

That is a good tank and how I want to see them played.  I don't want them to be insane DPS that auto taunts people without any knowledge they are even taunting.

[Killque]

Crismorn wrote:

Tbh I would be fine with leaving taunt procs/passive taunts if they added taunt immunity signets for status/gold like every other cc ability in game has as a counterpart.

The Legacy PvP Merchant sells such an item (where you buy Pumice Stones and Discord items).

10 Second immunity to taunts. FYI.

[EndevorX]

Is DoV PvP armor still going to retain the presence of ZERO physical mitigation?Regardless, here is why the changes are very poor.1.) contested content viability suffers for casuals presently (no reliable "block force", less of a chance due to no PvE/PvP crit mit unity)2.) future contested content viability suffers for casuals (mistaken, intentional rift separating PvE/PvP stats severely handi-caps competence in the face of codependent challenges)3.) cookie cutter mundaneity championed & incorporated with stifled futures3a.) PvP is best stimulated through PvE interoperability & contested progression3b.) all instances given a contested state with 2-4 rare gems/bolts/plates/threads/needles/screws/patches/links/clasps required from each for hardmode PvP gear3c.) battlegrounds would offer an "elite" tier with gear/AA/spell quality requirements to obtain the same hardmode PvP gear4.) ignores past precedent of consistent PvP ongoing in TSO due to PvP offering interoperable reward5.) ignores past precedent of warfields/battlegrounds failure/die-off due to lack of interdependent reward6.) ignores past precedent of T3 level locking die-off after Mastercrafted was needlessly buffed, damning the PvE farm scene7.) ignores players on the fence about PvP who would enjoy variety in augmenting PvE excellence through PvP8.) devalues scouts/mages9.) exacerbates priest/fighter imbalances10.) retains handi-caps for casuals due to their lack of PvP gear, nullifying the attempt to disavow "raiding required for competence"10a.) unifying PvE/PvP crit mit & nerfing "In PvP" versions of DoV EM/HM raid gear (crit mit/cb/pot) would give casuals adequate survivability10b.) DoV PvP gear could be appointed extra Toughness for flat PvP damage mit to compensate for any needs demanded by retaining unified PvE/PvP Cb/Pot11.) all-in-all, reinforces the mistaken idea that lazy game design is acceptable11a.) tolerable if SOE's budget/fiscal liberty consists of immense fail12.) no PvP +/- 1 rank fame range makes fame gain easymode12a.) fame gain will be disregarded while players zerg writs for easy faction to min-/max-asap12b.) +/- 1 rank fame range ensures zerging is a greater risk, as harder to find targets makes fame hits more precious

13.) low tier PvP is also kept cookie-cutter with excessive survivability (crit mit, toughness, ward proc, reflect proc, all needless with low tier PvP not having any high crit/potency)

[Faeward]

Mentored players can once again fight back if attacked in PVP.  NOTE: If a player does not have the red outline around his name, he is likely mentored and you should not attack him.

This is quite possibly the best change ever. I mentor a lot and this will make things so much more entertaining!

[33kerry]

I am not seeing any mention about existing tokens. Will we be able to use them or trade them for any new ones?

[Olihin]

33kerry wrote:

I am not seeing any mention about existing tokens. Will we be able to use them or trade them for any new ones?

We are not adding a new token, only factions.  So you can spend your tokens on the new armor once you get the faction for that slot.

Olihin

[Balrok]

Olihin wrote:

PvP Mentoring

• Players grouped with mentors cannot attack other players unless they are attacked first.
• Mentored players can cast beneficial spells while in PVP combat.
• You can now attack a target based on his actual level.  This means if you mentor you will still be attackable by anyone who could attack you before mentoring.

Olihin

Sorry Olihin, I just can't let this one go.  Not sure why, since I don't even play lower tier PvP... but I just know this is a problem.  Just curious why the following changes were made in the past?

Live Update #21: March 23, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253085*** Player-versus-Player ***- You can now mentor only in instances on PvP servers.

What was the reason they decided to disable mentoring in open or contested zones on PvP servers back then?  Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Seems like this was a quick fix to stop people from exploiting mentoring in PvP.

Live Update #22: April 13, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253092*** Player-versus-Player ***- There is now a 60-second countdown that begins when you elect to mentor another player. While it is in progress, moving or casting a spell will cancel the countdown. Mentoring will begin if the countdown is completed without interruption.- While mentoring, you may not make hostile acts against another player or player pet, nor can you perform beneficial actions upon any player or player pet that is hated by another player.

Ok, so just under a month later they provide a solution to mentoring on a PvP Server.... since you just can't take away the option in open or contested zones.  Why was there a 60-second countdown added?  Was there a concern people would exploit the instant enable/disable mentoring option in PvP?  Why was the decision made to completely disable hostile actions or perform beneficial actions when mentored?  Could they not have allow a "fight back" option then? Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Was this to prevent people from exploiting mentoring in PvP?

Fast forward to GU60.  Has mentored PvP combat changed in anyway since 2006?  If it's been balanced correctly for PvP combat and I'm just not aware of it, please let me know.  If nothing has changed, then you see problem, right?  5 years later and the mentoring gap has increased to introduct even better gear, abilities and AA's to "attempt" to scale down.  Someone saw a problem back in 2006, so I just need to confirm... as it will be even worse in 2011.  It will be exploited again.  This attempt to help 1% will mess with the remaining 99%.

I actually like the statement that was made when chronomagic mentoring was introduced September 23, 2009:

-Chronomagic works the same on PvP servers as it does on PvE servers. However, it also has all the same restrictions as mentoring—namely that you cannot engage in PvP combat while the chronomagic effect is on your character. This makes it quite a bit more dangerous on PvP servers, so good luck and be careful!

Thanks!

[Peak]

Exur@Nagafen wrote:

Olihin wrote:

PvP Mentoring

• Players grouped with mentors cannot attack other players unless they are attacked first.
• Mentored players can cast beneficial spells while in PVP combat.
• You can now attack a target based on his actual level.  This means if you mentor you will still be attackable by anyone who could attack you before mentoring.

Olihin

Sorry Olihin, I just can't let this one go.  Not sure why, since I don't even play lower tier PvP... but I just know this is a problem.  Just curious why the following changes were made in the past?

Live Update #21: March 23, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253085*** Player-versus-Player ***- You can now mentor only in instances on PvP servers.

What was the reason they decided to disable mentoring in open or contested zones on PvP servers back then?  Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Seems like this was a quick fix to stop people from exploiting mentoring in PvP.

Live Update #22: April 13, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253092*** Player-versus-Player ***- There is now a 60-second countdown that begins when you elect to mentor another player. While it is in progress, moving or casting a spell will cancel the countdown. Mentoring will begin if the countdown is completed without interruption.- While mentoring, you may not make hostile acts against another player or player pet, nor can you perform beneficial actions upon any player or player pet that is hated by another player.

Ok, so just under a month later they provide a solution to mentoring on a PvP Server.... since you just can't take away the option in open or contested zones.  Why was there a 60-second countdown added?  Was there a concern people would exploit the instant enable/disable mentoring option in PvP?  Why was the decision made to completely disable hostile actions or perform beneficial actions when mentored?  Could they not have allow a "fight back" option then? Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Was this to prevent people from exploiting mentoring in PvP?

Fast forward to GU60.  Has mentored PvP combat changed in anyway since 2006?  If it's been balanced correctly for PvP combat and I'm just not aware of it, please let me know.  If nothing has changed, then you see problem, right?  5 years later and the mentoring gap has increased to introduct even better gear, abilities and AA's to "attempt" to scale down.  Someone saw a problem back in 2006, so I just need to confirm... as it will be even worse in 2011.  It will be exploited again.  This attempt to help 1% will mess with the remaining 99%.

I actually like the statement that was made when chronomagic mentoring was introduced September 23, 2009:

-Chronomagic works the same on PvP servers as it does on PvE servers. However, it also has all the same restrictions as mentoring—namely that you cannot engage in PvP combat while the chronomagic effect is on your character. This makes it quite a bit more dangerous on PvP servers, so good luck and be careful!

Thanks!

But it's not the same as it will have been back then.

There are restrictions to mentoring in place still.

Not to mention, if I'm a 90 mentored to 30, a 90 can still come kill me.

[Balrok]

Peak@Nagafen wrote:

But it's not the same as it will have been back then.

There are restrictions to mentoring in place still.

Not to mention, if I'm a 90 mentored to 30, a 90 can still come kill me.

Restrictions that can easily be worked around.  The whole 90 mentored can get smoked by a 90 thing didn't make much sense to me really.  Like giving them an option to fight back, but allowing them to get one shotted at any point in time by a 90.... as if they were an Exile or something.  tbh.... if the intent was to encourage people to mentor to complete old zone quest and be able to fight off PvP (again, why mentor here?) then why add the option of them getting blown up by a passing 90?  You just made their mentored questing harder! 

I just don't get why this was added back with complex restrictions/rules to manage when they should focus everything on PvP balance.  So would the pvp solution be to have a pocket 90 hanging around to wipe the mentored targets?

If a group has a mentored healer at a bell in another zone, are they flagged attackable or can they attack?  When they enter PvP combat and the mentored healer zones over, is he/she automatically put in PvP combat?  The whole thing just smells dumb.

[EQ2Player]

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

Is DoV PvP armor still going to retain the presence of ZERO physical mitigation?Regardless, here is why the changes are very poor.1.) contested content viability suffers for casuals presently (no reliable "block force", less of a chance due to no PvE/PvP crit mit unity)2.) future contested content viability suffers for casuals (mistaken, intentional rift separating PvE/PvP stats severely handi-caps competence in the face of codependent challenges)3.) cookie cutter mundaneity championed & incorporated with stifled futures3a.) PvP is best stimulated through PvE interoperability & contested progression3b.) all instances given a contested state with 2-4 rare gems/bolts/plates/threads/needles/screws/patches/links/clasps required from each for hardmode PvP gear3c.) battlegrounds would offer an "elite" tier with gear/AA/spell quality requirements to obtain the same hardmode PvP gear4.) ignores past precedent of consistent PvP ongoing in TSO due to PvP offering interoperable reward5.) ignores past precedent of warfields/battlegrounds failure/die-off due to lack of interdependent reward6.) ignores past precedent of T3 level locking die-off after Mastercrafted was needlessly buffed, damning the PvE farm scene7.) ignores players on the fence about PvP who would enjoy variety in augmenting PvE excellence through PvP8.) alters open world PvP writs to fame dependency, shuffling players into battlegrounds as the easymode route for min-maxing8a.) ignores solvent ideas such as rare drops from contested, i.e. possibly 3 runes/gems/bolts/incantations/imbues/stitchings/boilings from EACH TSO/SF/DoV instance named, but in contested versions8b.) the battlegrounds version for upgraded gear would be a higher-tier bracket, demanding certain statistical/equipment criteria8c.) engaging w/ more than 2 people results in 2-1 fame per hit, potentially requiring from 18-36 people to finish a writ instead of 6-128d.) engaging w/ a raid+ results in no fame hit (this amount of people will be required to kill many/most competent 2 priest groups [worse with 2p/2fighter groups])9.) devalues scouts/mages10.) exacerbates priest/fighter imbalances11.) retains handi-caps for casuals due to their lack of PvP gear, nullifying the attempt to disavow "raiding required for competence"11a.) unifying PvE/PvP crit mit & nerfing "In PvP" versions of DoV EM/HM raid gear (crit mit/cb/pot) would give casuals adequate survivability11b.) DoV PvP gear could be appointed extra Toughness for flat PvP damage mit to compensate for any needs demanded by retaining unified PvE/PvP Cb/Pot12.) all-in-all, reinforces the mistaken idea that lazy game design is acceptable12a.) tolerable if SOE's budget/fiscal liberty consists of immense fail13.) no PvP +/- 1 rank fame range makes fame gain easymode13a.) fame gain will be disregarded while players zerg writs for easy faction to min-/max-asap13b.) +/- 1 rank fame range ensures zerging is a greater risk, as harder to find targets makes fame hits more precious

Nonsense. That is in one word what all of the above says.

[Cocytus]

[Vaylan77]

Just from reading I wanna quit.The mentored thing purely sucks. You don't get credit when killing them? So you just can use mentored 90s in your t4 group. Wait for being atk and then atk back. You are get all the buff benefits from the high level non t4 spells and the mentored players actually can hit back? Oh my.Instead of tweaking the game so PVP fits into the game SOE only makes exceptions that have effects on PVP which sucks. Basically SOE makes 2 games. Since WFs are nowadays not much more than a big BG anyway I wonder how long it will take that we have to zone on a special server anyway each time we wanna do PVP which has its own set of rules.

[Proud_Silence]

Exur@Nagafen wrote:

Olihin wrote:

PvP Mentoring

• Players grouped with mentors cannot attack other players unless they are attacked first.
• Mentored players can cast beneficial spells while in PVP combat.
• You can now attack a target based on his actual level.  This means if you mentor you will still be attackable by anyone who could attack you before mentoring.

Olihin

Sorry Olihin, I just can't let this one go.  Not sure why, since I don't even play lower tier PvP... but I just know this is a problem.  Just curious why the following changes were made in the past?

Live Update #21: March 23, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253085*** Player-versus-Player ***- You can now mentor only in instances on PvP servers.

What was the reason they decided to disable mentoring in open or contested zones on PvP servers back then?  Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Seems like this was a quick fix to stop people from exploiting mentoring in PvP.

Live Update #22: April 13, 2006http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=253092*** Player-versus-Player ***- There is now a 60-second countdown that begins when you elect to mentor another player. While it is in progress, moving or casting a spell will cancel the countdown. Mentoring will begin if the countdown is completed without interruption.- While mentoring, you may not make hostile acts against another player or player pet, nor can you perform beneficial actions upon any player or player pet that is hated by another player.

Ok, so just under a month later they provide a solution to mentoring on a PvP Server.... since you just can't take away the option in open or contested zones.  Why was there a 60-second countdown added?  Was there a concern people would exploit the instant enable/disable mentoring option in PvP?  Why was the decision made to completely disable hostile actions or perform beneficial actions when mentored?  Could they not have allow a "fight back" option then? Was mentored PvP combat not balanced or over powered in anyway?  Was this to prevent people from exploiting mentoring in PvP?

Fast forward to GU60.  Has mentored PvP combat changed in anyway since 2006?  If it's been balanced correctly for PvP combat and I'm just not aware of it, please let me know.  If nothing has changed, then you see problem, right?  5 years later and the mentoring gap has increased to introduct even better gear, abilities and AA's to "attempt" to scale down.  Someone saw a problem back in 2006, so I just need to confirm... as it will be even worse in 2011.  It will be exploited again.  This attempt to help 1% will mess with the remaining 99%.

I actually like the statement that was made when chronomagic mentoring was introduced September 23, 2009:

-Chronomagic works the same on PvP servers as it does on PvE servers. However, it also has all the same restrictions as mentoring—namely that you cannot engage in PvP combat while the chronomagic effect is on your character. This makes it quite a bit more dangerous on PvP servers, so good luck and be careful!

Thanks!

THIS !!

Changing mentoring system to fight back is not needed, it will not benefit anyone except the ones exploiting it. There was nothing wrong with current system !

it was said before, mentoring is a PVE tool to provide options to complete PVE content and it's not working AT ALL in regards to pvp mechanics.

Already now it's a pain in the butt to level up somewhere and suddenly a 90 Paladin mentored to 40 runs past you and wipes out the entire zone. now this is how it was now and how it will be after this ill-thought out changes:

- BEFORE: i can try to attack the mentored person, forcing pvp mechanics upon him in hopes it will slow down the mob slaughtering. Anyone who ever met a mentored paladin knows how good the chances are to stop him/her from annihilating every mob in the zone

- AFTER :  I have one, maybe two options: leave the zone and go somewhere else. if i attack the mentored person i might as well jump off a cliff to my death.  I call in help (pvp solution?lol) ...odds are, the mentored person will still own the whole group of actual level toons.

I've seen a few threads about people crying about how unfair it is they can't fight back in pvp while mentored. I've always regarded them as not very bright and the typical "give me give me now" type of crowd that's lurking around more and more these days. Any competent dev would be able to think further then 30 seconds ahead in time and realize what kind of consquences such a change will bring. So i thought.

[EndevorX]

EQ2Player wrote:

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

Is DoV PvP armor still going to retain the presence of ZERO physical mitigation?Regardless, here is why the changes are very poor.1.) contested content viability suffers for casuals presently (no reliable "block force", less of a chance due to no PvE/PvP crit mit unity)2.) future contested content viability suffers for casuals (mistaken, intentional rift separating PvE/PvP stats severely handi-caps competence in the face of codependent challenges)3.) cookie cutter mundaneity championed & incorporated with stifled futures3a.) PvP is best stimulated through PvE interoperability & contested progression3b.) all instances given a contested state with 2-4 rare gems/bolts/plates/threads/needles/screws/patches/links/clasps required from each for hardmode PvP gear3c.) battlegrounds would offer an "elite" tier with gear/AA/spell quality requirements to obtain the same hardmode PvP gear4.) ignores past precedent of consistent PvP ongoing in TSO due to PvP offering interoperable reward5.) ignores past precedent of warfields/battlegrounds failure/die-off due to lack of interdependent reward6.) ignores past precedent of T3 level locking die-off after Mastercrafted was needlessly buffed, damning the PvE farm scene7.) ignores players on the fence about PvP who would enjoy variety in augmenting PvE excellence through PvP8.) alters open world PvP writs to fame dependency, shuffling players into battlegrounds as the easymode route for min-maxing8a.) ignores solvent ideas such as rare drops from contested, i.e. possibly 3 runes/gems/bolts/incantations/imbues/stitchings/boilings from EACH TSO/SF/DoV instance named, but in contested versions8b.) the battlegrounds version for upgraded gear would be a higher-tier bracket, demanding certain statistical/equipment criteria8c.) engaging w/ more than 2 people results in 2-1 fame per hit, potentially requiring from 18-36 people to finish a writ instead of 6-128d.) engaging w/ a raid+ results in no fame hit (this amount of people will be required to kill many/most competent 2 priest groups [worse with 2p/2fighter groups])9.) devalues scouts/mages10.) exacerbates priest/fighter imbalances11.) retains handi-caps for casuals due to their lack of PvP gear, nullifying the attempt to disavow "raiding required for competence"11a.) unifying PvE/PvP crit mit & nerfing "In PvP" versions of DoV EM/HM raid gear (crit mit/cb/pot) would give casuals adequate survivability11b.) DoV PvP gear could be appointed extra Toughness for flat PvP damage mit to compensate for any needs demanded by retaining unified PvE/PvP Cb/Pot12.) all-in-all, reinforces the mistaken idea that lazy game design is acceptable12a.) tolerable if SOE's budget/fiscal liberty consists of immense fail13.) no PvP +/- 1 rank fame range makes fame gain easymode13a.) fame gain will be disregarded while players zerg writs for easy faction to min-/max-asap13b.) +/- 1 rank fame range ensures zerging is a greater risk, as harder to find targets makes fame hits more precious

Nonsense. That is in one word what all of the above says.

Oops. #8 is mistaken & I changed the list to appropriately reflect the alterations.

Rothgar mentioned writs being tied to fame, but since the servers came back, it's now known that PvP writs will give faction not divvied relative to kills.

But no, the evaluation of GU#60's grave PvP flaws isn't nonsense in any way.

Here's the updated list.

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

Is DoV PvP armor still going to retain the presence of ZERO physical mitigation?Regardless, here is why the changes are very poor.1.) contested content viability suffers for casuals presently (no reliable "block force", less of a chance due to no PvE/PvP crit mit unity)2.) future contested content viability suffers for casuals (mistaken, intentional rift separating PvE/PvP stats severely handi-caps competence in the face of codependent challenges)3.) cookie cutter mundaneity championed & incorporated with stifled futures3a.) PvP is best stimulated through PvE interoperability & contested progression3b.) all instances given a contested state with 2-4 rare gems/bolts/plates/threads/needles/screws/patches/links/clasps required from each for hardmode PvP gear3c.) battlegrounds would offer an "elite" tier with gear/AA/spell quality requirements to obtain the same hardmode PvP gear4.) ignores past precedent of consistent PvP ongoing in TSO due to PvP offering interoperable reward5.) ignores past precedent of warfields/battlegrounds failure/die-off due to lack of interdependent reward6.) ignores past precedent of T3 level locking die-off after Mastercrafted was needlessly buffed, damning the PvE farm scene7.) ignores players on the fence about PvP who would enjoy variety in augmenting PvE excellence through PvP8.) devalues scouts/mages9.) exacerbates priest/fighter imbalances10.) retains handi-caps for casuals due to their lack of PvP gear, nullifying the attempt to disavow "raiding required for competence"10a.) unifying PvE/PvP crit mit & nerfing "In PvP" versions of DoV EM/HM raid gear (crit mit/cb/pot) would give casuals adequate survivability10b.) DoV PvP gear could be appointed extra Toughness for flat PvP damage mit to compensate for any needs demanded by retaining unified PvE/PvP Cb/Pot11.) all-in-all, reinforces the mistaken idea that lazy game design is acceptable11a.) tolerable if SOE's budget/fiscal liberty consists of immense fail12.) no PvP +/- 1 rank fame range makes fame gain easymode12a.) fame gain will be disregarded while players zerg writs for easy faction to min-/max-asap12b.) +/- 1 rank fame range ensures zerging is a greater risk, as harder to find targets makes fame hits more precious

13.) low tier PvP is also kept cookie-cutter with excessive survivability (crit mit, toughness, ward proc, reflect proc, all needless with low tier PvP not having any high crit/potency)

[Valonia]

With the changes to mentoring I'd like to see some new way to craft in peace .. until now mentoring was a semi-safe way to do the horid faction grind in the new zones and general crafter quest, that for some weird reason have to take place in pvp and pve enabled zones.

We all know how well a crafter in crafting equipment can fight back. If this has to be the new way at the very least give us a chance to equip our pvp gear when we are being attacked while crafting .. it's worse enough that the combine will fail, but at least we'd have a chance to fight back.

Alternatively flag crafting areas as save zones. But I reckon the strong whine of 'true pvp-players' would make that a no go.

[Pavahac]

 So I guess people are saying that mentoring is for pve servers and that all pve content should be removed? I like the

 change now you have to be careful who you choose to fight. Before steam roll in destroy the player mentoring and the

 group laugh and see if they can do it again, that was working so well. FYI, people quit saying your speaking for me

 when you are not, unless you have talken to at least 90% of the player base you do not speak for the majority. In

 game polls need to be taken not suggestions from the forums.