More PvP enabled areas

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by uberkingkong, Oct 11, 2022.

  1. Quik Augur

    Oh I'm sorry, I figured when I SPECIFICALLY stated PvE servers that you would understand what I was referring to, that's my bad apparently.

    And you should go back and read the first post. It says NOTHING about a NEW server, it simply says add more pvp enabled areas.

    So, let me reiterate, if you want a new TLP PvP server, I am all for it...

    Otherwise leave MY PvE servers alone.
    Duder, Skuz and Waring_McMarrin like this.
  2. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    This thread was specifically about adding PvP areas to a PvE server and it uses examples of areas that already exist in game.
    Skuz likes this.
  3. Nozz99 New Member

    100% would play a PvP TLP. A lot of hate towards the idea, always has been it seems. No one wants to play Zek that has been out-of-the-loop because everyone that's been there for decades will have a huge advantage in PvP. A fresh server solves that issue. Do a lock in PoP similar to Agnarr to stop the massive amounts of zones, or a server-based vote for expansions. I know 10 people or so that would come back to EQ for a PvP server that would not come back otherwise. "He KnOwS 10 PeOpLe" - I see the flame coming now, but consider these are people who otherwise would not come back. The base effect would increase from others as well. What's the harm, seriously...we've done everything else 10x, why can't we try PvP 15 years later.
  4. Treeconix Elder

    Did you casually ignore/forget the entire suggestion made by the OP? Try to keep up.
    Duder and Skuz like this.
  5. Nozz99 New Member

    To continue the support of the idea, some thoughts if to be entertained:

    No boxing allowed. There's already some TLPs that have no boxing, this would be needed for a PvP TLP imo.

    I'd like to think coin weight restrictions would be re-implemented as that was a huge part of the thought process with traveling and such. To avoid grief, I could see the need to not reimplement the lose of your corpse, however depending on the system, some sort of corpse would need to be left; Sullon Zek vs Vallon Zek vs Rallos Zek old school rules, or new loot/team rules all together? Personally would prefer a new hybrid. One where it matched Rallos would be neat, but rather than selecting the item, you get a random item from the killed?

    Lock the server at expansion 'X'? I would pick PoP to lock, or LDoN.
  6. Treeconix Elder

    There is no way to enforce no boxing.
    Appren likes this.
  7. Nozz99 New Member



    You make a rule and the majority of the community will abide by it. The few that don't will be reported...It's already stopped on single machine with the client.
  8. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    You & your 10 mates constitute 30% of interested players.

    I'd be all for a "RvR" style PvP TLP if there were anything like enough players to make it worth bothering with, but I am 100% against wasting money & dev time for a dead server.

    I've even suggested a "trial" PvP TLP - release it 1 month ahead of the planned TLP & see what kind of population it gathers to it, give it a month before converting it to the planned TLP to assess the viability.
    If it gets 50-100 people clearly its a complete waste of time still, but if it hits like 1500 or so then the devs have a clear indication it's worth taking a gamble on & could opt to not convert it & let it carry on.
  9. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    That would be a great idea but the PvP crowd would still claim it is the most popular idea ever when it is shown that it has a very low server population.
    Skuz likes this.
  10. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    I believe the same thing would happen too given the abject denial of past failed attempts to show the devs, but I am still open to being proven wrong. In fact I would like nothing more than to be proven wrong about the lack of numbers interested in PvP TLP despite how sure I am I will not be.
  11. McJumps TLP QoL Activist

    No thanks. Server DoA. There just isn't enough interest in doing PvP in a game that has neglected PvP class balance for over 20 years. You would be insanely lucky to see 1000 players online at launch, and even then, most of those would only be there for "tourism" and the population would swiftly decline post-launch.

    Now if you had infinite resources, and could convince them to re-balance all classes with PvP in mind for just the PvP server, you might have something. But that's never going to happen.
  12. CatsPaws No response to your post cause your on ignore

    Even Jen said in an interview that they would be willing to go PVP if there were enough interest and she cited where a turnout to promote it only got 5 responses.

    And wasn't there another rally recently to also show support for PVP where everyone was going to meet at a specific date and time to show support. Again only a handful showed up
  13. Quik Augur

    I really don't think PvE players honestly care much about a PvP server. I know I most certainly don't. I do think we find it humorous that PvP'ers think it would be some massively popular server that would pull in lots of players!!!!

    I do think a PvP focused TLP is probably a bit overdue to try again, the problem is no matter what ruleset they use, or what expansions they allow or lock it to, PvP players always seem to think that "if EQ had just done something different" that it would have been immensely popular.

    I honestly don't think it will be a very big draw but I could be wrong, the issue is, if they do try it, and it fails, they are stuck with a server they still have to take care of and it probably isn't making them much money.

    Like Krono or hate it, it is still one of the biggest money makers for DBG, and can anyone here answer about whether PvP servers deal in Krono much?

    If a server isn't buying much Krono, why in the world would DBG even want to make it happen? They are a "for profit" company and expect to make a profit. Sub's alone will not be enough to make them happy, so that leaves Krono and other store bought items.

    Anyone in favor of a PvP server needs to start thinking of a financial reason for DBG to start one, and not a nostalgic reason or personal desire to see it happen. It is all about the money, so start throwing them ideas on money.
  14. Treeconix Elder

    I mean first off, you literally described policy, not enforcement.

    Also, the enforcement of truebox is easily circumvented for those that choose. Outside of some code, the day-to-day enforcement is non-existent. And isn't true box just a form of boxing? How are you going to enforce no trueboxing? IP Filtering? Hi VPN.
  15. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    one month trial prior to being wiped & converted into whatever TLP it was planned to be

    PvP TLP

    "RvR" type 3-faction ruleset Good Vs Neutral Vs Evil

    Level cap 50

    only classic zones open

    Capture the flag objectives in each zone/dungeon group and a fort in each that can be defended, capturing the flag secures objectives for 1 hour, capturing the fort locks that group of zones to the faction that won it for 3 hours also granting them a small bonus to plat/loot drops for the duration.

    No loot may be taken from player corpses but a "personal loot" from player-kills, this personal loot deprecates for killing the same player - eventually reduced to zero for repeated kills of the same player - find someone new to slay. This deprecation has a delayed reset of 6 hours.
    Corpse may be summoned to safe zones which cannot be won by any of the 3 factions & in which no PvP can take place.

    Each of the 3 factions has a "starter zone" which cannot be taken from them.

    PvP Scenarios:
    Play as a Shrouded monster in a 3 sided battle PvP "monster mission", even-levelled, even aa'd, even-spelled team - every player is shrouded & must choose from the allocated monster-types on offer, this offers each side the same number of each kind of monster & only the most skilled team will win.
  16. mark Augur

    i wish they did a pvp tlp that reset every 2 months but the pvp would still complain they dident get the ruleset they wanted
  17. mark Augur

    pvp players deserve to have fun also.
  18. Nozz99 New Member


    a trial seems fair if that would be a consideration.
  19. McJumps TLP QoL Activist

    This requires resources and time to be devoted to coding the different scenarios, resources and time that should be spent fixing current bugs within the game and working on the next expansion release (where the bulk of their income is drawn). I have to say it would be a bad idea to waste any amount of time or effort on something that they themselves have said there isn't enough interest in.

    Its all about that bottom line and they have decided that PvP is not a moneymaker. Devoting any amount of resources to it would result in a net loss.
  20. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    A trial when the PvP crowd has hosted events to show the interest in a server and those events have drawn almost no players? There is already a PvP server that people can go on to show there is interest in a new one but no one seems to want to do that. They would much rather the devs spend the time in money needed to create a new server that would require a subscription then spend some time playing on a free server to show interest is there.