what will you play on the pvp tlp?

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by RABKkehhalla, Jul 29, 2021.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. markkk Lorekeeper

    i will 72 box and be more then half the players on the server, i never see eanyone pvp on the tlp.
  2. Boogatti Journeyman

    What if it's truebox?
  3. Accipiter Old Timer

    Good point. The GMs will outnumber the players so they'll be on the prowl.
    Gnothappening likes this.
  4. quakedragon Augur

    Yes that structured just like in GW2 and ESO. Its structured even though its 80 v 80 v 80.

    WoW Alliance vs Horde is in open world too, so 150 box army can go around taking over everything anywhere anytime if they wanted to. GW2 and ESO are not true open world pvp. EQ is, but to me its not enjoyable and I miss the commandries from the other Zek's ruleset, aka the team aspect. Being in a guild isn't the same as fighting for Neutral team.
  5. Waring_McMarrin Augur

    My point was in those games there is a lot more to PvP than open world clashes and you can PvP and gain progress through instanced content. The best part is that this instanced PvP inst tied to being on a PvP server and everyone can experience it even if they don't want to have open world PvP.

    In EQ all you have are open world pvp and there isn't any in game rewards that you can get from it that are still relevant from what I understand.
  6. Boogatti Journeyman

    The reward is the friendships you make on the way.
    Dumeattres likes this.
  7. Stymie Pendragon

    The HORROR! Don't do that man. /shudders.
  8. Lejaun Augur

    Please make this server. Please. Don't wait. Do it tomorrow. That way we can stop getting the five PVP players begging for a PVP TLP server and show them why another will never be made again.

    PVP is fun. EQ wasn't built for PVP, though.
    Stymie and Demetri like this.
  9. Atomos Augur

    I'm actually impressed with how long it's been since I've seen this topic, it's almost like they are finally getting a clue of what an enormous failure of a server it would be. And I don't say that to hurt anyone's feelings, but that community can barely muster 100 people on a free to play private server.

    Apparently the EQ2 PVP TLP isn't even worthy enough to be put on the server status page. Then again, their server status is pretty depressing even at peak hours, holy crap.
  10. Gnothappening Augur

    I see that once again, the forums are a mistake.
  11. Rauven Augur

    PVP is rather unremarkable in EQ. Like soloing, there's only a few classes that can reliably PVP. But you still need to level and gear up other classes to stay competitive overall.

    Classes like Rogues, Warriors, and Monks are some of the worst PVP choices. They simply get snared and downed. Should they even get attacks in, they'll likely die on damage shields. Classes like Paladins and Clerics simply lack any damage output to be effective outside groups. Classes like Wizards, Enchanters, Mages (these might function the best out of this group), Rangers, Shaman, and Bards fair a bit better but only amongst themselves and classes listed before. Shadowknights, Necromancers, Beastlords (possibly), and Druids are pretty much the go to. They have nasty dots that can get through the stacked resists everyone will be having.

    Everyone has this idealized vision of PVP where two groups have a quarrel over who's taking what and they settle their differences over PVP. That's not how that happens. What realistically happens is a guild with too many people for its own good just zergs everyone out of an area.

    People whine and cry about being zerged and it doesn't go anywhere except they just get zerged more and log off for the night frustrated and with hurt feelings.

    Gear and player skill take a backseat to a cult of personality of who can herd the most cats. That is open world PVP.
  12. Stymie Pendragon

    I totally agree. I played on VZ around launch and PVP was only somewhat balanced under level 10 or so. After that certain classes began to dominate. EQ was never tuned for PVP.

    If they were to setup classes using templates like a battle royale type of game it could be interesting though.
  13. Kaleix New Member

    Gear is always king
    Machen likes this.
  14. Kaleix New Member

    I'd roll a druid. I've pvp'd a lot in eq and druids are always fun.
  15. Machen New Member

    It really depends on what point in eq's history you are talking about. As a raid geared monk earlier on in the pvp era, In the right situation I could take on 2-3 groups of non raid geared people solo and win. Velious and early luclin, snare was not nearly as much of an issue until they rebalanced it. And if you did get snared, instant click dispells took care of it in short order.

    Since those were the glory days of eq pvp, that's the era I choose to judge it by.
  16. RABKkehhalla Elder

    Pumice ftw
  17. Machen New Member

    And when they nerfed that, the rechargeable clickies from CT. I had a bunch and kept them fully charged always.
  18. Green_Mage Augur

    My experience with PvP is in the PoP-GoD era of live. This is what I remember:

    SKs were commonly considered the best because AA harm touch could basically 1 shot someone. They added in a restriction where you could only nuke 70% of someone's HP, they would get you down to that and insta kill you...later however, the cap became like 35% and it became more of a finisher. This was after GoD release however, so a lot of history at the 70% number.

    Wizards were considered very good because they could use several hard to impossible to resist nukes. Chief among them was Manaburn, which would kill most anyone below 70% (later 35%). So if a wizard was allowed to cast on you for 30 secs or so, you were probably dead.

    Bards were impossible to kill. They had a hard time getting kills on their own but were perfect for supporting melees and rangers.

    Paladins and clerics were also impossible to kill but couldn't get kills.

    Necromancers were very dangerous. A lot of hard to resist dots and life taps.

    Druids were also dangerous. They track and dot you down from afar. They are hard to kill because of their heal power. So even when you eventually close in on them they can balance nukes and heals to take you down.

    Rangers were among the best. Their trueshot melted anyone casting. They were also a bit tanky and had some heal power.

    Monks and Rogues could be good if they played the terrain well. Especially in dungeons.

    Warriors were often considered the best if they were fully geared. Especially with some bard or heal support. They might not top dps charts, but they still do a ton of damage by all standards when they have a PoP-era 2hander or something. They were also less prone to getting insta killed by manaburn or harm touch.

    Mages, enchanters and shamans were all considered bad because their spells didn't really land. Mage nukes could, but they were otherwise a squishy class with no healing that many others could out dps.

    I would probably go Druid because that's what I played back then. People also tend to overlook them as a PvP power house.

    I would say "the best" overall would probably be Ranger in the PoP era. Enchanters are actually really good right at launch when their spells land. Shamans are also very good before everyone starts piling on resist gear.
  19. Machen New Member

    Warriors were renowned, just like in pve, for their survivability. Geared warriors like Kamzam were able to survive against incredible odds with just a small amount of heal support. Because they were infamous for survivability, they tended to attract attacks, which usually were useless. I saw geared warriors survive entire guilds attacking them on more than one occasion, while the enemy whittled away at the classes that really mattered until no one was left.
  20. Magician9001 Elder


Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.