Zero risk situations...

[goldfeesh641]

Hey all, I am trying to compile a list of all the possible "zero risk" situations in which someone can be rewarded for PvP.  I've had a fairly long day, so only two at mind, but I figured compiling the two current threads into this one and possibly adding more situations to it would probably be for the best.#1PvP death-zerging      -results in zero risk because you are currently on the other person's recent list but not vice versa, so you can gain from their death#2Remaining below 50% health and engaging     -results in zero risk because of inability to gain credit for killing someone who remains below 50% health the entire battle.If anyone knows any other zero-risk situations, please post them so we compile them.

[Ol]

One that can be very annoying, attacking red-cons dont think theres any others

[Azekah1]

Olik@Nagafen wrote:

One that can be very annoying, attacking red-cons dont think theres any others

You can lose fame to a red con if you engage.It seems bugged at times, but I lost a title to a red when our group tried to attack a red con warlock...Bad idea...

[Snoopdevious]

You need to add Safehousing on top of yourself. I really hate that one and wish they would take safehouse out of the game completely

[Valdar]

Safehouse cast pre-combat doesn't put you in pvpcombat apparently. Should be fixed.

[Riggly]

Choker and safe-house are exploits in my eyes. They are used to create what you described as a no-risk fight. Pretty soon I am going to make a thread with the names of known explioters, because reporting them is boring.

[Krakelkr]

Riggly wrote:

Choker and safe-house are exploits in my eyes. They are used to create what you described as a no-risk fight.Pretty soon I am going to make a thread with the names of known explioters, because reporting them is boring.

That's against the forum rules. Do it on another board :)

[Bloodfa]

Simple.  Change it from 50% to 20% immunity for fame loss, updates, and coin drop.  Safehouse stops being an issue, so does the choker, because it's then a guaranteed loss. 

[Warr]

Using that amulet thing to break mez on yourself.Although now being able to use potions it shouldn't be an issue any longer.

[Kneemin]

Azekah1 wrote:

Olik@Nagafen wrote:

One that can be very annoying, attacking red-cons dont think theres any others

You can lose fame to a red con if you engage.It seems bugged at times, but I lost a title to a red when our group tried to attack a red con warlock...Bad idea...

There is some truth to this, and some falsehood.EX: You and a buddy are pvping, buddy can't lose fame to him but you can... your friend hits the red first and red retaliates, you won't lose anything if you jump in after he retaliates because technically he entered combat with your group before you hit him.EX: Your buddy is targettable by the red, and the red hits you, you can retaliate and not lose anything.EX: 10+ range zones... you get hit by a red and retaliate, you lose nothingThese should ALL result in you losing fame/lootI suggest that its implemented that IF you engage them in any of these situations, first or second. you lose stuffFor the 50% rule - Simple, if you engage first you lose stuff.  May not prevent ppl from following you around with 50% until you are in a bad situation but it would still discourage it.ALso another one ot add to your list of "zero risk situations" is the charm issue, if your solo you can be charmed when your opponent is below 50% and he enters the ruling under #2 - the below 50% exploit (which technically by SOE's standards has officially been declared a "tactic&quot