EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > General EverQuest II Discussion > PVP Discussion
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-23-2008, 11:43 PM   #1
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

The goal of this thread  is to facilitate the re-energization of Everquest 2 pvp.

This is a call to all the sharp minds out there to come forward with Good ideas aimed at protecting new players to the game from the Ravaging Predation that had been practiced on them by a previous generation of  Heartless Tier 2/ tier 3 PVP Savages.

This is not a thread for discussion of the pro's or cons of  the,  hopefully,  soon to be patched Optional PVP experience gain game change.

Rather, it is for   a protective mechanism for new players that would advance us much more quickly to that longed for day.

The requirements of this mechanism,  is that it be  not overly complex,  easily enforcable,  low cost as far as any need for code changes,  and open to developer modification as they see fit. There are other parameters that I am sure that I am missing,   and I leave this open for anyone to  come forward with these(within reason , of course).

Worry not unduly of exploitation.  In the game world exploitation is attempteed on practically everything. This would be no different. Lets first get the good ideas out so we can move forward.

Remember, this is a  focused good ideas thread . Avoid at all cost extraneous topics, long diatribes,  or any derailing material. 

Now, everyone   set your cranial neurons on     think,...and.....  Energize!!!SMILEY

Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 12:16 AM   #2
Paikis

Loremaster
Paikis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,254
Default

The problem you have Proe is that you're looking the the current state of PvP and thinking that the removal of the lockers is what caused the decline in T2 PvP. There can be no doubting that there aren't as many people PvPing in T2/T3 as there used to be. The thing you seem to be missing is that it isn't just T2/T3 that is effected. This is not a decline in low-level population caused by removing XP locking, this is an overall general decline in population over all tiers, caused by MANY things. PvP XP may be one of the causes, but it is far from the only cause, and I doubt very much that it is even the top one or two major causes.

The comparitive-lack of lower level PvPers is NOT caused by PvP XP, but rather an overall drop in players accross ALL levels. Low(er) numbers of people PvPing in lower tiers is a SYMPTOM of a lack of population, it is not a CAUSE.

You're looking at a plane crash and exclaiming, "Wow! That plane's wings are in 12 different pieces! No wonder it crashed!"

__________________


Kaelas, Necromancer

Valindor, Templar

Paikis, Troubador

Ashk, Berserker

Mirbolt, Shadowknight
Paikis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 12:46 AM   #3
TerminalEyesore

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 23
Default

Well, if you're wanting something simple, why not just make anyone on your recent kill list that is lower level than you grey out and become unattackable till they go off your list.And if you're in a group, and that person is on anyone in that group's recent kill list, and ANYONE in that group is higher level, then that target is grey until he goes off everyone in that group's recent list. If you weren't in the group when they attacked and killed him, you can drop group so you can attack (but if you WERE in the group at the time, then hes on your recent, and dropping group won't help till he goes off your list).Now for the flip side. Since anyone lower level will always be able to attack a higher level player regardless of kill list, if someone on your recent kill list attacks you, they immediately go off your kill list. If you successfully kill them, they go back on and the timer starts over. And yes, if THEY ATTACK YOU and lose, they can drop a chest AGAIN and lose more infamy, since NO ONE should be able to INITIATE a fight with impunity, thinking they have nothing to lose. IF, however, they kill you, then they stay off your recent list, and you have the option to go seek revenge. That way it can go back and forth, and either player can stop it at anytime by not seeking revenge. It won't stop zerging, but it will stop lower level griefing. To stop zerging, the restricted attacking would have to go both ways, but I'm not sure people would go for that.Its actually the only way to really ENFORCE the no low level griefing rule.
TerminalEyesore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 12:54 AM   #4
Juntaar

Loremaster
Juntaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 43
Default

The way I see it there are a few hurdles for new players:1) Money2) Gear3) Spell Quality4) Metagame4 can only really be learned through PvP experience. Thats part of the fun. 1 can be learned through guilds, or through /ooc in about 5 seconds by just asking (harvesting anyone?). 2 is solved through TD gear, and presumably with the pending update to gear in other zones (hopefully TD / commolands / antonica quested gear is still on par with T2 MC). 3 is the tricky part.Some of the onus has to be on the player - but educating the player about Adept IIIs and how to get them will go a long way. With the TD gear and Adept IIIs, you should be on reasonably fair ground. Obviously if your solo you will get destroyed by a full group. Educate new players through adding a quest that requires them to invite someone to group (so they at least know how) might be a solution to that one.In the long run - they have to help themselves. They have been spoon fed good gear through TD, if we can spoon feed them some sub 20 Adept IIIs (one or two is enough so they are aware - perhaps quest rewards?) and encourage grouping for quests there is not much else left to really do.Could the OP please link where the devs have said the following?"soon to be patched Optional PVP experience gain game change."
__________________
Tech News - Reviews - Forums - Competitions

TechDomain.com.au



Self confessed member of The Zerg - Guild of T4 level lockers, Freeport, Nagafen.

It's on like Donkey Kong.
Juntaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:44 AM   #5
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

TerminalEyesore wrote:
Well, if you're wanting something simple, why not just make anyone on your recent kill list that is lower level than you grey out and become unattackable till they go off your list.And if you're in a group, and that person is on anyone in that group's recent kill list, and ANYONE in that group is higher level, then that target is grey until he goes off everyone in that group's recent list. If you weren't in the group when they attacked and killed him, you can drop group so you can attack (but if you WERE in the group at the time, then hes on your recent, and dropping group won't help till he goes off your list).Now for the flip side. Since anyone lower level will always be able to attack a higher level player regardless of kill list, if someone on your recent kill list attacks you, they immediately go off your kill list. If you successfully kill them, they go back on and the timer starts over. And yes, if THEY ATTACK YOU and lose, they can drop a chest AGAIN and lose more infamy, since NO ONE should be able to INITIATE a fight with impunity, thinking they have nothing to lose. IF, however, they kill you, then they stay off your recent list, and you have the option to go seek revenge. That way it can go back and forth, and either player can stop it at anytime by not seeking revenge. It won't stop zerging, but it will stop lower level griefing. To stop zerging, the restricted attacking would have to go both ways, but I'm not sure people would go for that.Its actually the only way to really ENFORCE the no low level griefing rule.
Nice.SMILEY
Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:48 AM   #6
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Juntaar wrote:
 
The request is, game mechanism that can be patched in to prevent predation of new players by Locked  pro'sSMILEY
Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 07:28 AM   #7
Tamon

Loremaster
Tamon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 28
Default

Although it's not a new idea, I'd suggest increasing the PvP lvl range for zones close to starting cities. This increase PvP range would only be one way so, in zones next to Qeynos, Qeynosians would be able to attack much lower lvl enemies. In Qeynos and the T1 zones, make it unlimited (ie. lvl 80 Qs could kill any lvl of enemy). In Antonica, Qs could attack enemies 30 lvls lower. Players from Freeport could do the same in Freeport and the Commonlands.

This would give the added feeling of defending your land. MC-ed/Fabled T2 level lockers could head out to fight each other in Nek Forest or the Steppes if they want to avoid being ganked. Or they could stay in the T2 zones ganking new players...and risk being treated the same.

This would be extremely simple to code (I guess since I'm not a programmer) but probably not popular with many.  Regardless of whatever suggestions are posted to this thread, I strongly doubt SOE is concerned with this "issue".

BTW, I also think this 3rd thread by the OP is more than enough on the topic of T2 pvp. Just my opinion, of course.

__________________
Smileys are for suckers.
Tamon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 10:43 AM   #8
Devildog93

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 52
Default

I'd be all for greying out people on the recent list...if they remove xp for kills or make it optional at least.-Skile
Devildog93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 11:06 AM   #9
Izzypop

Loremaster
Izzypop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,064
Default

Greying out people on your recent list would only encourage griefing.Level lockers don't want XP from kills, greying out people on your recent would only give them what they want.An active t2/t3 PVP community is a GOOD thing for new playersIt gives new players an instant taste of PvPMany Twinks will train and teach new playersI can't think of anything better than a new player finding himself a group of level locked players to lock & hang with for a month or so while they learn the game.An over actice t2/t3 PvP community is a bad thing.  It only really happens when the end game sucks like back in tier 7, and once an exodus starts it begins a self feeding reaction.  Too much level locking has always hurt end game players more than new players.  It's not going to happen again with as much flaws as t8 has it's still not half as bad as t7 was.
__________________
Izzypop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:03 PM   #10
Paikis

Loremaster
Paikis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,254
Default

I kind of like Sightless' idea. Especially considering the thread's title. It seems quite on topic to me.
__________________


Kaelas, Necromancer

Valindor, Templar

Paikis, Troubador

Ashk, Berserker

Mirbolt, Shadowknight
Paikis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:15 PM   #11
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Tamon wrote:

Although it's not a new idea, I'd suggest increasing the PvP lvl range for zones close to starting cities. This increase PvP range would only be one way so, in zones next to Qeynos, Qeynosians would be able to attack much lower lvl enemies. In Qeynos and the T1 zones, make it unlimited (ie. lvl 80 Qs could kill any lvl of enemy). In Antonica, Qs could attack enemies 30 lvls lower. Players from Freeport could do the same in Freeport and the Commonlands.

This would give the added feeling of defending your land. MC-ed/Fabled T2 level lockers could head out to fight each other in Nek Forest or the Steppes if they want to avoid being ganked. Or they could stay in the T2 zones ganking new players...and risk being treated the same.

This would be extremely simple to code (I guess since I'm not a programmer) but probably not popular with many.  

This is a good one.  The children would see thier enemies pulped by thier noble (or evil) defender.

 Believe it, or not,  this would even be helpful to the predators.  The thrill of trying to outwit a monstrous  beast(level 80 foe) to steal his children!!   My oh my!  

Imaginative players would have a field day!

This would inject a bolt of electrical dynamism into the entire game !!

All tiers  could participate.   The zones would refill,   the excitement would spread outside the PVP servers;   even to the gaming public at large.   Game magazines would write topics on this everquest2 change;  bringing the curious,   and the  hungry,   and the  roleplayers,  and  those who wished a challenge to join us.

This is an excellent idea Mr Tamon.    Bravo.SMILEY

Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:15 PM   #12
Efrath
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Rays of Sunshine
Rank: Dubious Ruffian

Loremaster
Efrath's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 242
Default

Izzypop wrote:
Greying out people on your recent list would only encourage griefing.Level lockers don't want XP from kills, greying out people on your recent would only give them what they want.An active t2/t3 PVP community is a GOOD thing for new playersIt gives new players an instant taste of PvPMany Twinks will train and teach new playersI can't think of anything better than a new player finding himself a group of level locked players to lock & hang with for a month or so while they learn the game.An over actice t2/t3 PvP community is a bad thing. It only really happens when the end game sucks like back in tier 7, and once an exodus starts it begins a self feeding reaction. Too much level locking has always hurt end game players more than new players. It's not going to happen again with as much flaws as t8 has it's still not half as bad as t7 was.
Too bad twinked players doesn't want to invite noobs now isn't it? (Unless they're a healer of course)Anyways, how about disabling PVP ENTIRELY until you're at least leel 25 and only allow players on new characters to PVP under 25.
Efrath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:20 PM   #13
Szerian
Server: Venekor
Guild: Veritas Aequitas
Rank: Member

Loremaster
Szerian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 34
Default

I think it's funny how you're trolling your own thread thereby counterproductively de-railing it, while at the same time the people you condemn of trolling are making you look like a fool.That being said, don't add AA to pvp kills, it would trivialize an already too easy "achievement" system, especially at low levels where AAs mark the difference between twinks and Szerian's
Szerian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:27 PM   #14
Aurumn
Server: Unrest
Guild: Executioners
Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus)

Loremaster
Aurumn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,328
Default

How about a city militia writ for any tier player (perhaps scaleable reward). It could call for x # of kills of opposing alignment or Exile players killed in Tier 1 or 2 zones ajoined to the player's home town.

Examples:

  • Neriak Citizens get writs to protect Darklight Wood
  • Freeps get writs to protect Sunken City, Ruins, Graveyard and Commonlands
  • Q's get writs for Oakmyst, Peat Bog, Forest Ruins and Antonica
  • Kelethin gets writs to Protect Greater Faydark
  • Timorous Deep citizens Protect Gorowyn, Mok Rent, etc (can't remember the names of the 1-20 zones in Kunark, lol)

Empower writ recipients to attack any enemy player within their home zone(s) regardless of level (home team advantage). That way citizens could protect their own, thereby giving them a bit of safety in which to learn the ropes before getting pushed out into the big time. If someone wants to hover around their home city playing cop, so be it. Likewise, if someone is looking for some action and wants to assault a city to get their folks in, there might actually be someone standing guard to fight.

*Edit... um, apparently I took too long to hit submit and Taemon beat me. Oh wellSMILEY I'm a newbie anyhow*

Aurumn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:37 PM   #15
liveja

General
liveja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Foster's Home For Imaginary Friends
Posts: 4,793
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Empower writ recipients to attack any enemy player within their home zone(s) regardless of level (home team advantage)..

Interesting idea. However -- & I'm not sure if this matters at all -- pretty much the only time I've seen any enemy players lower level than I am, they weren't in my "home zone." This might have more impact in TD, tho.

As for trolling: IMO, Proekame trolled his own thread by including comments in his OP about the PvP XP being hopefully made optional, thus giving everyone else a built-in reason to criticize him for bringing up the same subject yet again in yet another thread. Seriously, Proe, if you just want to keep the subject to "ideas to protect n00bs", & don't want to actually argue about whether or not PvP XP serves that purpose, then you shouldn't have included that subject in your OP.

__________________
liveja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 01:41 PM   #16
Kiara

Community Relations
Kiara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,359
Default

This is the one and only warning.Discuss.  Don't bicker and argue.  If you think someone is trolling the thread, don't sit and argue with them.  It just encourages the bad behaviour.You're more than welcome to discuss the topic, but if it can't be done without all the static, it's going in the trash.Additionally, one cannot control what is posted in a thread.  Telling people what they can and cannot say is counter-productive and renders the thread useless.  I won't go in and clean up again.
Kiara is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 02:10 PM   #17
Aurumn
Server: Unrest
Guild: Executioners
Rank: Teen of chaos (2 weeks + 6,857 astatus)

Loremaster
Aurumn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,328
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Interesting idea. However -- & I'm not sure if this matters at all -- pretty much the only time I've seen any enemy players lower level than I am, they weren't in my "home zone." This might have more impact in TD, tho.

...

My baby PvP toon was rolled in TD so I had that in mind. Folks were announcing when enemies were popping into the lowbie zones. I saw at least one low 20's druid pop in while I was questing and I got killed by a couple of mid to low teens while my little level 11 was running about. I'm a total newblet so I've no clue if the idea would be feasible... just figured I'd toss it out there. SMILEY
Aurumn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 02:44 PM   #18
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

[email protected] wrote:
... don't add AA to pvp kills, it would trivialize an already too easy "achievement" system, especially at low levels where AAs mark the difference between twinks and Szerian's

Stay on topic:

The goal of this thread  is to facilitate the re-energization of Everquest 2 pvp.

This is a call to all the sharp minds out there to come forward with Good ideas aimed at protecting new players to the game from the Ravaging Predation that had been practiced on them by a previous generation of  Heartless Tier 2/ tier 3 PVP Savages.

This is not a thread for discussion of the pro's or cons of  the,  hopefully,  soon to be patched Optional PVP experience gain game change.

Rather, it is for   a protective mechanism for new players that would advance us much more quickly to that longed for day.

Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 02:47 PM   #19
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

[email protected] wrote:

How about a city militia writ for any tier player (perhaps scaleable reward). It could call for x # of kills of opposing alignment or Exile players killed in Tier 1 or 2 zones ajoined to the player's home town.

Examples:

  • Neriak Citizens get writs to protect Darklight Wood
  • Freeps get writs to protect Sunken City, Ruins, Graveyard and Commonlands
  • Q's get writs for Oakmyst, Peat Bog, Forest Ruins and Antonica
  • Kelethin gets writs to Protect Greater Faydark
  • Timorous Deep citizens Protect Gorowyn, Mok Rent, etc (can't remember the names of the 1-20 zones in Kunark, lol)

Empower writ recipients to attack any enemy player within their home zone(s) regardless of level (home team advantage). That way citizens could protect their own, thereby giving them a bit of safety in which to learn the ropes before getting pushed out into the big time. If someone wants to hover around their home city playing cop, so be it. Likewise, if someone is looking for some action and wants to assault a city to get their folks in, there might actually be someone standing guard to fight.

*Edit... um, apparently I took too long to hit submit and Taemon beat me. Oh wellSMILEY I'm a newbie anyhow*

Feel free to participate even if your idea mirrors that of others.   Welcome.SMILEY
Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 02:51 PM   #20
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Kiara wrote:
This is the one and only warning.Discuss.  Don't bicker and argue.  If you think someone is trolling the thread, don't sit and argue with them.  It just encourages the bad behaviour.You're more than welcome to discuss the topic, but if it can't be done without all the static, it's going in the trash.Additionally, one cannot control what is posted in a thread.  Telling people what they can and cannot say is counter-productive and renders the thread useless.  I won't go in and clean up again.
Critique noted and accepted.
Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 03:12 PM   #21
Paikis

Loremaster
Paikis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,254
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Stay on topic:

The goal of this thread  is to facilitate the re-energization of Everquest 2 pvp.

No, the goal of this thread (and the 3-4 others you've posted in) is to let you play god-mode tier 2/3 locked XP PvP toons again. This has nothing to do with you wanting PvP re-energized and everything to do with you wanting PvP locking back. It was a horrible idea before they removed it and its still a horrible idea now. No, no, no, a thousand times no.
__________________


Kaelas, Necromancer

Valindor, Templar

Paikis, Troubador

Ashk, Berserker

Mirbolt, Shadowknight
Paikis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 03:23 PM   #22
Azekah1

Loremaster
Azekah1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,887
Default

I kinda think any form of protection could be hazardous in that it will not truly prepare them for what pvp will be like when out of this "protection" mode.So then instead of them being ganked constantly at lvl 10, it will happen at 25 or whenever this protection ends.
Azekah1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 03:47 PM   #23
Proeka
Server: Nagafen

General
Proeka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 153
Default

Kiara wrote:
This is the one and only warning.Discuss.  Don't bicker and argue.  If you think someone is trolling the thread, don't sit and argue with them.  It just encourages the bad behaviour.You're more than welcome to discuss the topic, but if it can't be done without all the static, it's going in the trash.Additionally, one cannot control what is posted in a thread.  Telling people what they can and cannot say is counter-productive and renders the thread useless.  I won't go in and clean up again.
ps Welcome to Everquest 2SMILEY
Proeka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2008, 03:59 PM   #24
Kiara

Community Relations
Kiara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,359
Default

And we're done.There are a bunch of other threads on this topic.  Feel free to continue the discussion there.
Kiara is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:43 PM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.