Discussion: PvP Deaths (Item/Coin/XP Loot/Gain)

[Cfullard]

Originally Posted by Billbike [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Let's just stick to the vote. When I played on live, 3 of the 4 pvp servers were no item loot, I wonder why?

Originally ALL the PvP servers (Minus Sullon Zek which came out with no item loot from the start) were item loot and coin loot as well as coin loot. There was a large population of players there as well, and the PvP was a fun even if you did lose items. You had no casters, yes, but all in all the server was still a lot of fun and people still fought in gear even if they were casters.

The answer to why the servers were changed to no-item loot was because carebears got tired of farming items when they were ganked so they whined, and whined, and whine some more. Sony listened to the whiners because "Everquest is first and foremost a PvE game" So the loot system to no item loot / coin only and guess what happened? High end PvP mostly stopped and there were a LOT, a LOT more PvP twinks running around from the level ranges of 8-16 (because level 8 is when you could start PvPing players.)

I encourage item loot because yes, you can get ganked but it also forces players to be more situationally aware and observe their surroundings. It also makes players be more cautious with their play and actually think about their odds of survival when they engage. Yes, there was a LOT less warriors, but I honestly can say it didn't kill them off.

And to the trolls. If you can't give a good arguement to support your claim? Shut the hell up.

[greatdane]

Originally Posted by Cfullard [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Originally ALL the PvP servers (Minus Sullon Zek which came out with no item loot from the start) were item loot and coin loot as well as coin loot. There was a large population of players there as well, and the PvP was a fun even if you did lose items. You had no casters, yes, but all in all the server was still a lot of fun and people still fought in gear even if they were casters.

The answer to why the servers were changed to no-item loot was because carebears got tired of farming items when they were ganked so they whined, and whined, and whine some more. Sony listened to the whiners because "Everquest is first and foremost a PvE game" So the loot system to no item loot / coin only and guess what happened? High end PvP mostly stopped and there were a LOT, a LOT more PvP twinks running around from the level ranges of 8-16 (because level 8 is when you could start PvPing players.)

I encourage item loot because yes, you can get ganked but it also forces players to be more situationally aware and observe their surroundings. It also makes players be more cautious with their play and actually think about their odds of survival when they engage. Yes, there was a LOT less warriors, but I honestly can say it didn't kill them off.

And to the trolls. If you can't give a good arguement to support your claim? Shut the hell up.

Or, as it is known in English, the majority were against it and Sony wisely catered to the majority. It shouldn't be too difficult to understand, nor is it a huge mystery why all three itemloot servers got rid of itemloot. PvPing for gear is fun for a little while, but even winning a piece loses its novelty after a while as people figure out that the whole gear aspect of the game - by far the most prominent part of Everquest - is rendered largely pointless when you can and will lose your items on a regular basis. Having to fight without gear on isn't fun, nor is the insane imbalance that occurs when you compare what each class can do without gear. If you choose to wear your gear, you face a number of realities that just kill the game for most: lose link? Lose your best item. Get raped by a ganksquad? Lose your best item. Get one-shot by some overpowered crap? Lose your best item. Your child is about to drink oven cleaner and you have to run and stop him? Lose your best item. We're not in high school anymore, and the prospect of losing what might have taken days or weeks to acquire is just not an appealing feature anymore. Everquest's already sketchy PvP becomes even worse when you can't rely on itemization to do its part to even out what wasn't designed very well. It seems pretty clear that most people are starkly against itemloot, so until a poll proves otherwise, it's hard to take anyone seriously when they claim that itemloot is an important part of EQ PvP. To me, it completely ruins it. The incentive to grief and cheat becomes too big, the inherent imbalances become hugely amplified, and the actual EQ gameplay becomes meaningless. Itemloot would only have a place if this was some insular arena game based wholly on the act of fighting evenly matched fights against other players. Since that's not the case, itemloot can stay the hell away.

[Xareth]

Originally Posted by Billbike [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Let's just stick to the vote. When I played on live, 3 of the 4 pvp servers were no item loot, I wonder why?

So if I (downs pvp virgin) want to play basketball (pvp) in the NBA (r99) and win, I need to be of African decent (caster in this example) because of my genetics (class play mechanics in an environment that makes it easier for certain classes to exploit the rules of the server)?

Hahahaha I love it

Originally Posted by Yukahwa [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Xareth - The fact that I could get killed many times and still enjoyed playing PVP really doesn't have any bearing on whether or not there is item loot on the server. I didn't have anything worth looting at all..this is lvl 1 I'm talking about. I was still killed just for the fun of killing me.

Bluebies that can't handle dying this way will certainly not play on R99. For everyone else, I think they are more likely to stick around if they dont get dominated by people 8 levels more powerful then them..and the twinks that do dominate them actually represent an opportunity for a nice piece of droppable gear instead of an unstoppable unpunishable force.

1. Dying sucks. If you have marginalized the importance of winning, then kudos to you.

2. You won't be able to pvp until 6+ I'm assuming, and it's not like it will take an hour to get there.

3. If it's item loot then the +/- 8 (most favorable) range could be reassessed - reason being the same reason why item loot will shrink the population.

[Silikten]

I think item loot should be +/- 4 levels for battles to actually be somewhat fair. An 8 level gap is just futile for the -8 character ><

[gloinz]

Originally Posted by Silikten [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think item loot should be +/- 4 levels for battles to actually be somewhat fair. An 8 level gap is just futile for the -8 character ><

this is clearly bluebie talk

[Nirgon]

So, the PvE centric game... with a *separate* pvp server... needed pve catered to that separate server? I think giving into the cry babies is what has made games suck more and more as the genre moves "forward". Grab your flat brimmed hat, techno music and dust up your lips with cheetos cuz your pixels are now safe in the modern game. Death means nothing, player interaction has no real value, just acting like idiots crying over pixels. The best pvp you get is two people trying to tag a mob first and then fight with each other and CSR over it.

Ok, go on.. I'd say something but I think Gloin covered it. Someone has had some nasty pvp run-ins in the past [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

I you want the server to be more blue, there's one that's already like that and you don't even have to reroll to play it.

This just needs to be settled with a poll and resolved for good.

[pickled_heretic]

no xp loss, most people will be afraid to pvp at all 30+ with exp loss as it is. it also forces more time be spent pveing to level if you die, which is pretty counterintuitive for a pvp server. I would actually be in support of XP loss if you got XP for killing someone, e.g. you kill someone, you get their lost exp. I just don't want to have the rules support a negative sum game where everyone loses in the long term. But i'm sure something like this won't be implemented.

as far as loot: full coin loot, 1 item that is not held in addition. that way, you can pvp, and get gear and lewt for pvping.

[greatdane]

You're welcome to make a poll. People have already spoken, though, and you can simply look back through this thread and see page after page of people saying no to itemloot with the occasional person every other page saying yes. That's strike one against itemloot: the majority is against it.

Next, let's look at the purpose of red99. I think it's safe to say that its main function is to provide classic Everquest without p99's biggest problem: the inability for players to settle disputes among themselves. Hopefully it'll provide an entertaining and dynamic PvP environment as well, especially considering the increasing interest (from people most of whom don't want itemloot - how about that). It's not to provide a griefing-centric PvP arena with as contentious and unruly community, which is what itemloot promotes. The more it hurts to die and the more you gain from cheating, griefing and being a complete douchebag, the worse the community will be. That's strike two against itemloot: it conflicts with what the server tries to provide.

Besides that, let's ponder what itemloot actually does to the PvP environment: it essentially discourages PvP for anyone who gives a shit about their gear, and while there are some who don't, it's obvious that most do. It also completely wrecks the actual fights as people will either fight naked or will stop fighting back as soon as they're at a disadvantage so they can instead frantically cram their gear into bags. There's no need to go into great detail about how unspeakably unbalanced EQ PvP is without gear - fully half of the classes cannot function without it while several other classes are barely affected by going naked - the classes that already have the advantage even against geared opponents. There is some minor merit to the fact that itemloot makes the actual outcome of a PvP fight more exciting because of the potential for loss/gain of equipment, but it would be naïve to argue that this doesn't come at the total expense of the quality of those fights. Strike three against itemloot: it makes for shitty PvP.

Finally, let's let common sense do the talking: you miss the itemloot feature that existed in the game's infancy over a decade ago. You were probably in high school then, the game was new, you could put in eight hours a day, and itemloot was perceived as part of PvP simply because it was a continuation of the Ultima Online tradition. Once it became evident that Everquest's gameplay was profoundly different and didn't mesh at all with itemloot, the problems became immediately obvious. Most people stopped wanting to PvP, itemloot was removed from all three servers, and no MMORPG has ever bothered with it since. If you're one of the apparent minority who cannot enjoy PvP that doesn't include the possibility of taking other players' items, you may just have to accept that a PvP server that caters to the majority and aims to provide actual Everquest with a PvP theme, instead of Grieftown 2011, might simply not seek to satisfy to you. Trying to argue against the majority and common sense seems a little futile.

But go ahead and make a poll if you want it in numbers. Democracy is a wonderful thing.

[Yukahwa]

People that wear items on item loot servers are more powerful and more likely to win PVP conflicts. People that "give a shit about their gear" and never wear it simply get dominated time and time again. Yeah, A warrior should swap his crafted out for bronze when its utter lack of resists aren't doing him any good vs. a caster..but that is just common sense.

Again if you want a blue server lets just stick with P99 as it is.

No item loot allows twinks free reign. It sucks.

[Billbike]

Twinking is fun.