![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
"lol bindcamp their ass! prollum solveedd!"
no, retard. 1> it is against the server rules to bindcamp them 2> even it were not they still lose nothing, hence the shiteater with nothing better to do than waste your time dying repeatedly will be undeterred. even the MINOR xp loss the server currently has will curtail this sort of bullshit because after they have made you kill them for the 5th time they are out an hour or so of xp. if you are playing normally and not throwing your corpse at random people the xp loss should barely effect you. as an aside....... i am not speaking of just dungeons 50% of the classes can bind, and since the vast majority will be playing one of said classes you speak from your asshole. most people with bind (which again will comprise 80% or more of the server) bind near their xp spot or whatever their camping. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
|
||||
|
I didn't read your shit post because you realize bind rushing will also be against the rules, therefore using your own logic, your original point is null and void.
In case you forgot it's right up there Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#3
|
|||
|
WTB Item loot.
Like Darwoth said coin loot just isn't that big of deal passed the newbie levels. I feel like there is really nothing major to risk or gain through PvP. I miss the excitement of killing someone having the chance to loot a valuable item.
__________________
Spud McKenzie, Level 60 Druid <Divinity>
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
The blue server awaits here if you can't handle XP loss <------------------
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
As someone who plans to participate in PVP, death is statistically more likely to happen to me than any blue player, and thats even if I'm careful. What I mean is, if I PVP, I should be prepared to lose exp often, forcing me to spend more time playing "blue" just to maintain my current level.
It just seems a bit counter-intuitive. The reason were having a pvp server is why? So that blue players can take a break from playing p99? | ||
|
|
|||
|
#6
|
|||
|
PvE begets PvP, and vice versa.
__________________
“Smile, breathe, and go slowly.”
![]() | ||
|
|
|||
|
#7
|
|||
|
I've read some of what other people have suggested, and I think there's some good stuff that's been suggested, many rule-sets that I think would work wonderfully, and I feel are just plain simpler and less exploitable than the "dynamic" pvp system. It was a great idea, it's just really difficult, and not worth the time and effort to test/code/develop/troubleshoot/police/etc. So, here's my feedback and suggestions:
I liked the hardcore rules on Sullon Zek that you could kill anyone on the other teams. That server was different though, because you had team-mates to back you up (supposedly), and also faction help you could fall back on like guards and class trainers and such (supposedly this is being worked on?). Without a team to rely on, and currently no assist from NPC's, there isn't going to be as much of a "safe" area for anyone, ruling out that type of no level limit rule-set. Thus, I suggest either a +-10/+-5 or +-8/+-4 ruleset similar to what a couple other people have mentioned. Let me explain the numbers. In a 10/5 ruleset, 10 levels would be the engage range, while -5 is the loot/exp death range. You can freely attack anyone within a 10 level range of you, but you'd only be able to loot coin from or cause an experience death to someone 5 levels below you. If you manage to kill the player higher level than you (between 5-10 levels) they could still lose exp and be looted, as a penalty for sucking so bad (if that's easy to code/set up, if not, no biggy, basic +-10/+-5 is fine). If people think that's too hardcore, you could make it +-8/+-4, where 8 levels is the max engage range, but 4 levels it the loot/exp range. In my mind, this system facilitates a higher amount of pvp engagement, while not making the penalty so severe for those getting stomped on by someone who is realistically way out of their league. Larger engage range, in my opinion, allows for more immersion [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. So would faction assist, for that matter. Now, if you REALLY wanted to get tricky, you could do a scaling version of this ruleset, where at lower levels it's something like 6/3 (levels 1-10), then 8/4 (11-25 or 30), then 10/5 (26+ or 31+). Something along these lines would be ideal for this type of FFA server, in my opinion. I'd actually like to request some feedback from everyone on this particular idea, both the X/Y idea and the scaling 6/3, 8/4, 10/5 range. To me these sound really good! What do you think?
__________________
P1999 Blue: Relent Less - 60 Bard ; Red: Shifty - 24 Druid
Formerly: Toomuch Twohandle 65 Ranger on Sullon Zek | ||
|
Last edited by Toomuch; 10-15-2011 at 04:39 AM..
Reason: grammar
|
|
||
|
#8
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
You will most likely die
By the hands of my arm When I come and fly And take over your face With the front of my Hatredcopter | |||
|
|
||||
|
#9
|
||||
|
Quote:
Generally decreases PvP quality by encouraging low risk PvP, like ganking. Facilitates a pro-caster environment. Casters can PvP naked, especially when they initiate PvP. Go ahead, let's see how it works out. I'll play either way.
__________________
Greattaste, Halfling Druid
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#10
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
![]() |
|
|