best of the best

[Awwalike]

if someone has already come up with this idea then suck it, it's a genius idea.

- each guild picks 1 player per class (how they do that I really don't care).
- /random 1000 for seeding (or call people out like a real man would).
- start the fight to death unbuffed
- finally find out who is the best


don't have a guild? sucks at least you can watch (or get tagged under something random)

boom tite idea rite?

[Shrubwise]

finally find out who is the best

I am. Problem solved. /thread

[Jjlent]

idea is good except for the whole guild thing, no reason whatsoever to make it restricted to 1 person per guild and if ur not guilded u cant participate. being in a guild doesn't make someone a good player and not being in a guild doesn't make someone a bad player

[Awwalike]

idea is good except for the whole guild thing, no reason whatsoever to make it restricted to 1 person per guild and if ur not guilded u cant participate. being in a guild doesn't make someone a good player and not being in a guild doesn't make someone a bad player

it makes it way less time consuming for the GMs to accept everyone who can make a character. if someone really wanted to join they could /petition for Amelinda to create a guild, I assume this would filter out some of the not serious contenders. it would also make it so the truly best of each guild were sent and not just everyone from the zerg.

[cmdrrickhunter]

I wouldn't want my guild name on a single fight (if I had a guild).

Are the classes actually that balanced for PvP, or is "Best of the Best" really a call for "SKs whose harm touch isn't on cooldown" or something like that.

What you're describing is similar in nature to Code S in Starcraft, a competition which is CONSTANTLY under fire for not properly representing "the best" because its too restricted -- its too hard to enter (you basically have to play ridiculously well for about 2 years, much better than the existing code S people, before you get a chance to sneak in).

The only reason I can see to do things by guild is to decrease the number of players to make it "cost less" to hold the tourney. If I was going to spend any time fighting, I'd want to know who's 2nd best, 3rd best, and 4th best... and those might actually all be from the same guild.

The usual way this is solved is with feeder tournaments. Have people compete in different tournies to see who is actually the best (not "who is the best in a guild"), then host the finals tournament like you want it to.

Of course, I can't tell from your verbiage. Was that original post a "It'd be cool if some people fought and stuff and the winner got called 'the best,'" or was that a "I'm ready to organize and execute a tournament, sign up here?" If it was the former, then I've probably already put too much thought into it.

[Awwalike]

people confirmed scared of fighting TMA/IB all stars

[Szeth]

I would punch the shit out of all non dragon/god geared monks.

And it would feel so right.

[Awwalike]

but would you beat Perun to get the spot on stage?

[Szeth]

I know where he lives IRL. He can be indisposed.

[Flunklesnarkin]

eq capture the flag >_>

[Lindalind]

if someone has already come up with this idea then suck it, it's a genius idea.

- each guild picks 1 player per class (how they do that I really don't care).
- /random 1000 for seeding (or call people out like a real man would).
- start the fight to death unbuffed
- finally find out who is the best


don't have a guild? sucks at least you can watch (or get tagged under something random)

boom tite idea rite?

If the guilds want to have a tournament why not ?

Maybe they can even get the administrators to publish the winner (s) on the
forums.

[Nirgon]

Without GM moderation things like this don't work so well if you're implying they do it outside of a GM hosted event.

[Flunklesnarkin]

not a huge pvp'er.. but it can work well w/o GM moderation... Id suggest maybe a special zone instance where everybody becomes PVP and players can only reserve it for a set time.. maybe 15 mins per match... enter with a team.. maximum players per team to be set upon reservation of instance... and could build more specialty pvp events from there...

of course that would probably take hours of coding work and id just be happy with just finishing velious ;p

[Vondra]

Over many years I've played many games with pvp, scattered among them were some where many different classes (not all, but enough) could compete in 1 on 1 fights with the other classes of the game in something at least semi approaching balance.

This is not one of those games, at all.

[Flunklesnarkin]

Over many years I've played many games with pvp, scattered among them were some where many different classes (not all, but enough) could compete in 1 on 1 fights with the other classes of the game in something at least semi approaching balance.

This is not one of those games, at all.

I agree.. i never really considered eq a pvp game... its fairly linear.. in that there aren't a variety of pvp events or w/e

It's pretty much who can do the most damage..... avoid getting hit.. do more damage.. the end

would be nice if there were a little more built upon the concept.. even old school variations like capture the flag or guard a npc while the other team tries to kill it type deal...

sure pure pvp is awesome and all.. but variety is the spice of life ;p

[Awwalike]

I agree.. i never really considered eq a pvp game... its fairly linear.. in that there aren't a variety of pvp events or w/e

It's pretty much who can do the most damage..... avoid getting hit.. do more damage.. the end



is that not how every game is lol?
diablo 2 --> hit them don't get hit
WoW --> hurt them more then they hurt you
EQ --> kill them before they kill you
the idea of PVP is to kill the other person before they kill you. if you don't think EQ is a PVP game you never played PVP lol.

[jarkorle]

best monk alive

[Flunklesnarkin]

is that not how every game is lol?
diablo 2 --> hit them don't get hit
WoW --> hurt them more then they hurt you
EQ --> kill them before they kill you
the idea of PVP is to kill the other person before they kill you. if you don't think EQ is a PVP game you never played PVP lol.

Not what i was trying to get at lol... was just saying there could be more to pvp events than massive battle over and over... or one on one... 6 on 6 w/e

[usedtobejubaloftorv]

if you don't think EQ is a PVP game you never played PVP lol

either that or you realize that classes like paladins and warriors - who have zero hope of competing at all in PvP - exist

EQ is not and never was a PvP game, if you think it is, you're a griefer, because that's the PvP EQ offers.

[Thoughtseize]

would be more fun to have a Test of Tactics 6v6 to determine access to future raid content for the opening week.

[Tiggles]

either that or you realize that classes like paladins and warriors - who have zero hope of competing at all in PvP - exist

EQ is not and never was a PvP game, if you think it is, you're a griefer, because that's the PvP EQ offers.

I once saw a warrior kill 15 players by zoning in with an earthshaker and a riposte disc on an enemy raid

[usedtobejubaloftorv]

that's cute, but you only get to do that once before people figure it out

Either way, it just goes to prove the point - screwing with people engaged in PvE combat is not PvP, it's griefing.

Seriously people if you want PvP go play a game that was designed with PvP in mind, and not one where the designers themselves specifically said it was not balanced, was not intended to be balanced, and never was balanced in any way. I hear Call of Duty 3 is pretty hot...



... that is for people good enough that they can actually beat an opponent on even terms. If you can only beat up on the youngest kids in the playground, I guess EQ PvP is your game.

[Szeth]

Pvp could essentially be seen as actions of war against one another...

Do you wait until your enemy sends you a written request for battle to attack them? No, you wait until their pants are around their ankles. EQ PvP is more like a real life engagement than any sort of WoW or other "BG" pvp games are.

[Flunklesnarkin]

... that is for people good enough that they can actually beat an opponent on even terms. If you can only beat up on the youngest kids in the playground, I guess EQ PvP is your game.

to be fair tho thats how every ffa pvp game is... higher levels farm/gank lower levels until the population drops...

only game i've seen that had a system in place to make it sorta ffa pvp was EvE... it had strong "faction" hits if you killed people from certain corporations or w/e..

FFA pvp w/o faction hits doesn't make sense to me... ie... killing humans in a human city should make humans not like you... If its neutral ground / a dungeon or an accepted duel in a town i think that makes sense for no faction hits.

[Nirgon]

would be more fun to have a Test of Tactics 6v6 to determine access to future raid content for the opening week.

Come to the more fun red server.

[usedtobejubaloftorv]

to be fair tho thats how every ffa pvp game is... higher levels farm/gank lower levels until the population drops...

Yes, which is why I don't understand why anyone plays them at all. I don't find it fun to farm/gank lower levels when they have zero chance to put up any kind of fight, and it's definitely not fun being hunted without having the opportunity to defeat the hunter.

And when you're successful people don't want to play with you anymore (population drops as you noted).

What kind of "game" is that? I find it demented and disturbing.

Where exactly does the ganker have fun in this? I can see a little bit of malicious shits & giggles when you first learn you can one-shot lower levels, and a few minutes of playing God while you do. But what then? Just that forever? Once you figure out that you're at no risk from your targets while doing it, going back for more isn't skill, it's being an obnoxious asshole simply because you can. And then of course a great many such people will heap insult upon injury and camp the corpses of their victims - which makes sense if you've already decided to be a sociopath, I suppose.

There's no mistaking the intention - EQ provides no actual reward for this behavior. It is pure volunteer sadism, no profit motive involved - at least a faction server would have a RP justification for it, but that's not the case here.


Games that are designed for PvP have rewards for PvP. Sometimes it's as simple as points, sometimes it's gear, sometimes it's to move through progression, sometimes it's something else - but the game provides an incentive to do it.

Also, games designed for PvP at least attempt balance. If there's a thief, a mage, and a warrior, the mage and warrior being evenly matched, but a thief can beat either one, soon enough everyone is going to be playing a thief, making it pointless to have created the other classes in the first place. (Conversely, if the thief always loses no one will play one, making it pointless to have created that class instead.)

Now, the things that make a good MMO don't necessarily require any of these things, other than balance - but the balance you get is a PvE balance, which is quite different than PvP balance.

A person interested in good PvP gameplay shouldn't even be playing an MMO in the first place because MMOs are fundamentally PvE environments and the game has not yet been created to change that common factor in all MMOs. (There'd be no point to create such a game either since the world outside of combat zones would serve no more function than the lobby of a multiplayer shooter, which is why no one has bothered to try.)

In MMOs, PvP is fundamentally an add-on to PvE. Even in EVE, the most PvP oriented MMO ever, there are PvE objectives that people are fighting for control over.

If you like PvP but not PvE you should be playing a shooter, which is all PvP and no PvE.


One can really boil away every possible justification other than "to get to be mean and a jerk to people" by pointing out the alternatives that are superior for all other purposes. Now that we've faced that truth, the next logical step is to understand that the server population you end up with in such an environment is jerks, masochists aspiring to be jerks, and idiots*.

Naturally, this is no secret to you guys. But it's so inherently unfulfilling, especially once the initial mass of idiots gets boiled off by the griefing and you're playing with no one but other jerks, which is not quite as much fun to the aspiring sadist as is being the e-incarnation of death to a guy still carrying his newbie weapon.

The need for marks + the need to find some justification for this hollow and malicious behavior leads us to the usual evangelizing about how much better the PvP server is, like a shark telling us how great the exercise is and how healthy it is for you when you go deep water diving.


I lost my point here somewhere along the way but bottom line is that anyone who plays EQ in order to PvP is either stupid or malicious. It's fun like tossing pennies at people on the sidewalk from a high rise apartment is 'fun'. It's not fun, it's fucked-up behavior and doing it fucks up the person who is learning those things as habits.


* if you can't figure out which you are it's probably the last one.

[Awwalike]

dude, if you don't like EQ pvp then gtfo the thread?
just because you never delivered a killing blow doesn't mean EQ PVP sucks.

[usedtobejubaloftorv]

dude, if you don't like EQ pvp then gtfo the thread?
just because you never delivered a killing blow doesn't mean EQ PVP sucks.

The additional evidence you have supplied in support of my thesis is appreciated.

[Awwalike]

The additional evidence you have supplied in support of my thesis is appreciated.

your thesis is irrelevant, you are 2 new.

[messiah_b]

Come to the more fun red server.

Where literally 10's of players log in everyday to farm clickies!

*Clicks clickies
*leans back satisfied

[Rezek]

yawn