There are plenty of reasons why PvP in EQ just doesn't work, those have been covered pretty well in this thread already. There are also reasons why the current level of CS in EQ doesn't work for PvP, and those have also been covered already. But what hasn't been covered are the reasons that open world PvP is doomed to fail in MMO games. There have been plenty of different implementations of PvP in MMOs. Arena's, Duel's, Open World, X vs X Tournaments, Realm vs Realm, and Battlegrounds (small and large). There are probably more I don't even know about, but that's the basic list. Some of these are very successful concepts and some are not. Open world PvP sounds exciting on its face, but the experience is generally the most lopsided of the available options. Gankers will gank, and griefers will grief. People who are only having fun when ruining somebody else's day gravitate to this style of PvP because it gives them what they want, potentially unbalanced fights. On the flip side you have Duels, Tournaments, and small Battlegrounds (like Arathi Basin in WoW). These are inherently balanced in player count, designed for players to feel like they had an even shot even if wildly outmatched by their opponents. When the fight is over, win or lose, you have a pretty good idea of what made the difference. But not everybody wants small scale PvP, the mistake is thinking open world PvP is the solution. Why would you give up basic balance just to increase the scale? You don't have to, Alterac Valley in WoW is the perfect example. A large scale PvP battleground, with mostly balanced player counts, and at a scale and spread out enough where that matters less anyway. Other concepts went a different direction. Dark Age of Camelot had Realm vs Realm. You could PvE safely in your own realm, or unsafely the open PvP area connecting the realms. This at least gave you a choice to advance while in twitchy defense mode, without forcing that to be the only option. That separation is important for people who might like PvP but can't commit to the 100% twitchy defense life. This isn't our original EQ gaming community, even if many of the players are the same people as back then, their lives have likely changed. We have families, kids, distractions, responsibilities. It's not that PvP should cater to that, but that the pool of willing PvP enthusiasts will be smaller if they have to choose between dying while AFK and upsetting their wife. PvP needs to be designed to draw in players, and open world PvP is designed to do the opposite. I played a little PvP in EQ on SZ, most of my PvP was in WoW BG's and on an open world PvP server. Did some in DAoC also, but not much. Most recently I've dabbled with PvP in The Division which has both the equivalents of some BG's and an open world PvP area. They have the same problem there in what is called the Dark Zone. It's mostly wolves, very few sheep. People learn fast that if they aren't killed by somebody cheating, they will be killed by people looking for unbalanced fights. As the sheep leave, the wolves get bored and leave also. Open world PvP is a crap sandwich in a shiny package to draw people in, but then they leave once they get a taste. It's the same on WoW open world PvP servers, gankers just looking for easy targets. If you want PvP in EQ, it at least needs a fresh take. The old model doesn't work anymore. It's probably not worth DBG investing time into trying to do this differently, even if that's the only feasible future for PvP. The other issues with CS and class balance would still apply in a PvP scenario where the situation was more balanced in player counts or where participation was optional. Given that, the concept probably isn't viable even with a fresher take.