Warfields/PvP Ranks/Faction Balance/Immunity/Items

Appreciate your response to my thoughts...but still believe that PvP in an area with MOB aggro would be counter-productive.

PvP around mob aggro has been around since the beginning. There is/was nothing wrong with it. Why must people keep asking for changes to make this game even easier and require less thought or awareness?

The copy/paste of the conversation in tells between you and Auxillery was really tacky, dude.

Thank you...

Hey all,
I regret that I have not been able to post on the forums for some time, but I have been following them when I can. I have had some real life matters that need my attention and I have barely had time to play while the matters were at hand.
This has turned into a serious in-depth matter, and I suppose I will add my thoughts into the discussion.
What I have managed to catch up on, thanks to Seliri and some others are some pending changes. I for one agree with the immunity removal, or the non-reward in War Fields for being in immunity and have never left it. Realize this may give way to people sitting dead in the zone, which you can fix by implementing a code that auto revives you at the nearest point if you do not select within 60 seconds. (you can make this game wide too, there is no reason to sit dead, and if you need to afk for a bathroom or drink/smoke etc. you can camp to character select)
If you couple this with my previous idea of hard level ranges (meaning if you are out of range being below, you can’t haul off and attack and attack a level 81 if you are level 70) with leaving the ranges for different zones where they are now, you should eliminate the “zergfest” for updates. Granted you can still have a ten level range “zerg” of pvp in some zones, but if you are lvl 80 jumping into a group of 90’s in a 10 level zone, you do so at your own risk as it should be. Lower level ranges can still participate, but they will only get updates off of players within their range for that zone. I.E. a lvl 70 jumps in, and can only receive updates off of a level 80 or lower if they are in the mass. 90’s can’t touch them, and they can’t touch 90’s. This should be easy to implement.
Once all that is implemented… 15 tokens for winning a warfield, and 5 for losing seems appropriate. There should always be an incentive for participation, otherwise the eventual result is what you see happening currently in the event.
One other thing I would like to add is that my boss actually suggested an idea that is deceptively simple, yet complex, and would balance out PvP in the open world once it comes back to life a little. If you have toughness be a stat that is contingent on whether or not you can attack a player within your range, it may go a long way to making players feel a little safer, if they do not have PvP gear like the majority of the server does. What I mean is… take for example my dirge class character at 240 toughness. I am wearing 3 pieces of pvp gear, and the rest MC. I am level 80. If a level 90 player wants to attack me, and their toughness is more than 25 points above mine, they cannot attack me until they reduce their toughness to within that 25 point range by switching out gear that has no toughness on it. Most PvP players I know have two sets of gear anyway, PVP and raid gear. Switching out would NOT be an issue, since this is the play style of most players from what I can gather. You would also have to lock gear equipping during pvp combat as well to prevent exploitation.
If I am the level 80 player looking on at the level 90, I could see that their toughness was higher denoted by a little flexed arm symbol highlighted in red by their name. This notifies me that I can attack, but they cannot attack me as of yet, as their toughness is too much for me.
If I am the level 90 player looking on at the level 80, I would see a little wavy line symbol surrounded in red, as well as their name would not have a red outline around it, denoting that I cannot attack that player until my toughness rating is reduced closer to theirs.
Group and raid dynamics on this would work the same way except EVERYONE would have to do the equipment change out. This can be done quite quickly if you make a couple of hot bars with equipment on it, that can be switched back and forth. It also forces a group to communicate what the toughness rating you can attack at is, so others can switch to it.
This modification would be suspended in the BG of course, as that would be way too many calculations for the servers, unless of course it can handle it.(chuckles)
I have also given some thought to the fame reward section, and about the best thing I can come up that works with the present system are special Resins that can be bought starting at the midway point to maximum fame(or dreadnaught I think it is… dunno, not familiar with rank system.) These Resins have an effect on your armor so long as you have the midway title. The effectiveness of these enhancements is based upon your overall fame. Thus, if you drop below 50% max fame, the enhancements start to lose effect and/or disappear entirely. If you continue to climb above 50% of max fame, then the adornments gain effects. For this to be a truly effective system, you must increase the fame loss for each death that you receive consequtively(I.e. if you lose 50 for one death, you lose 75 for two in a row, 125 for three in a row, 200 for four… etc. your simple a+ b=c sequential increment increase) This will promote true gamesmanship, and eliminate the remainder of the “zergfest” as well.
The Resins are not your typical slot based adornments, they are more like tempers or polishes that you can apply. Simply called, they are Scout’s/Fighter’s/Mage’s/Priest’s Discordant Resin Aura(lvl 90, lvl 80 can be called something different like Antagonist’s Resin aura hehe, but there is no level 70 or below Resin). There is one for each equipment slot, jewelry, cloak, charms, ammo, etc. and they can be applied to ANY item once and only once, and cannot be overwritten, and can be bought once you achieve 50% of max fame. At 50% they will have a couple effects that are beneficial to your arch-type. (like for a fighter, like 2% crit chance, 3% double attack chance, 100 mitigation, and 2% potency. Just suggestions and examples, adjust accordingly for arch-type.) As you gain each 5% closer to max fame, the existing stats increase, and at each 10% a new, more powerful effect is added.(Such as say 5 toughness at 60% of max fame) Rinse and repeat as you move on your way toward max fame.
If you drop down to 45% of max fame, then you will lose some( I.e 1.5% crit chance 2% double attack chance, 75 mitigation, 1.5% potency.) At 40% you will lose an effect bonus altogether. Rinse and repeat until you are at 25% of max fame to where you only have 1 minor stat increase(.5% crit chance) and at 20% of max fame, you lose even that one, rendering the applied Resin(s) inert.
Each Resin does the same thing and stacks with whatever existing effects are already being given by the piece, and all rise and drop at the same time based on the same rate. So it is possible that you could wait until you were an Overseer to buy them all, greatly enhancing your abilities, but I doubt you’d be able to do that if others bought them one at a time and worked them up.
Each Resin costs 75 Discord tokens, 250K status, and 5p, as well as fulfilling the prerequisite of being at 50% of max fame obtainable.
More than likely you will have to reset the fame for this, so everyone has a chance to build up to it equally. It may require a bit of tweaking the gain per kill, but if you do it loosely based upon a chess type rating system as follows:
I have 1500 fame, the opponent has 1600 fame, if I win, my new fame is 1522, opponents fame is now 1578.
If the opponent wins, my new fame is 1489, opponents is 1611.
Ultimately, you will have to fight people at your own fame level to make any real progress upward, as it was in the old days.(Or kill 10000 hunter ranks… lol)
Max fame is 100000 points. Decay for fame of being logged out is 10 points per hour.
That is really about all I have to add. I think those simple fixes would be powerful enough to balance out pvp a bit, and turn it back to what it should be, and give appropriate incentives, as well as push down the zergfest and afk leeching to a minimum, while making PvP what it should be, a battle of tactics, and skill, and being rewarded for superior performance with fame. (Obtaining better gear than your opponent is a tactic, seriously. How do you think the Romans built the empire? Their equipment and tactical skill with that equipment. How did the Romans fall? Their conquered opponents sought to exploit them from the inside out, while using their own gear as effciently or more efficiently than them. Sound familiar?)
Oh an knock off the flaming about Seliri, not needed, not appropriate, and not wanted. Seliri is one of many making a major contribution to the ongoing problem of PvP and helping to correct it. If you are not part of this discussion and/or solution, then by process of elimination you are not part of this discussion, and/or part of the problem.

Seliri@Nagafen wrote:

These 5 points should SPECIFICALLY be addressed before a fuller revamp to unique warfields objectives, warfields rewards/victor bonuses, and faction balance.
If the sheer workload of revisions is supposedly too daunting, then these areas, I think, could be addressed with less development time than the three I suggest be reviewed later.

(P.S. Dudoes, no, I'm talking to everyone. Try posting something contributory to the topic at hand.) n_n

Are u really talking to urself on ur other account.....

Your heinous accusation is impertinent and digressive.
Bosconi, however, raises high dollar concerns.

holy crap oly , thats alot of info to absorb .... i must admit i didnt read it all with the quotes and font color codeing. But I really like the info/Idea's and format it was laid out upon.
Being a long time pve player that is new to the pvp scene ... Im probably not aware of some of the long time problems in pvp. But most all of what you stated (especially war feilds) rings true in the current problems.
It makes total sense to split them up per tier , or a few teirs. But lets not forget the fun in a group of greys taking on a deep red.
Fame and noriety I have no use for ... but it has been a long time gripe Ive been reading about. So I digress to those that know more than I. I would however like an option to turn all the FrEaKing prefix and suffix titles off. Its to damn confusing. Or maybe a different method of display ...... how bout the epic horns???
And I know this should probably be in a different post .... But how bout allowing transfers To>>> PVP ... I think that would in itself revitalize pvp. Lota bored bluebies in their raid gear just waiting to get pawned.
And O~kay we might as well let you bored pvp'ers go hang out with the AB crowd

Here is Impawster's 2 bits.

I agree with Seliri on the WF, put the lower classes in a different wf instance and as much as i enjoy blowing up a full group of blues i think the t8 and t9 should be seperate too. WF timers and locations need to be be in our interface somehow, A WF tab in our zone timer UI seems to be the best answer. AFKers in WF should definitely not get a free ride, see my immunity ideas below. Also there obviously needs to be some sort of reward for actually winning a WF otherwise there is hardly a point to it except for the concentration of pvp which is really the only reason i go now.

Fame: I cant tell you how long i've been a champ and yet i kill overseers and masters all the time and it doesnt effect my fame. kinda dumb imo, also the decay system is a bit harsh, maybe give a day before decay starts in. also a way to monitor your progress is way overdue.

Immunity: here is my idea, No immunity in open zones except for the cities like paniel and Moors dock. the problem lies with evac and revive immunity. so i think there should be a timer on immunity of perhaps 5 min. enough time to grab a beer or bio but not enough to sit there forever and lag the server out. not sure what to do about dirt nappers, maybe a revive timer of 5 min. If you are immune or afk you don't get credit for WF.
WTB new BG TBH.
See you out there.
Impawster

OP, do you sit down to pee, cause you sure do behave like a little girl.
Your whole spill was more or less about what you want out of pvp not what the server wants out of pvp.

Leave immunity the way it is.

Titles mean nothing, so who cares how you get them. Sony won't change the title because some people care about the title and if they make the title decay daily people will continually log on just to keep there title from decaying.

And hey moron. Sony does care about money. They have to make it in order to make changes.

Thank god this isn't real life pvp, if it was you would already be a corpse.

Jacksalot wrote:

LOL @ you letting petty pride and bias about who I am as a person completely compromise your ability to offer constructive feedback that considers the collective over the individual.

If you think this is somehow "just my pet project", you're completely ignoring the NUMEROUS other threads that have popped up, before and after my thread, on:
· destroying carebear immunity that lets leeching AFKers profit while not helping secure victory.
· removing fame decay, reinstating fame loss for those ranked above/below, or on par with your rank
- to return to a player controlled, cyclical objective and PvP-based commodity
- rivals, ambushing, and extreme focus on situational awareness returns
- players are given freedom to enjoy accruing titles that represent skill in situational awareness on alts, because their titles won't be meaningless because of decay
· eliminating lag from warfields by splitting them into tiers
· people laughing about there being no reason to win
· the x8 vs x8 raid PvP in cities that COMPLETELY DISAPPEARED after they WRONGLY put a cap on players per warfield instance
- bypassed by inviting people to the warfield instance (still not identified clearly as an exploit or not)

My points address ALL of the above in a critical, point-by-point method that focuses entirely on expanding content for a near infinite lifespan, in a way that draws ALL types to engage, and in a way that establishes novelty for each tier.
Supporting a "do-nothing" paradigm is completely out of line if the sentiments of our PvP society are to be successfully studied for creating a PvP environment that will be immensely attractive to a larger consumer base, should EQ2X prove beneficial.

If YOU THINK YOU care about SOE making money, maybe you'd consider how SOE would best implement EQ2X membership plans, instead of sitting idly by as they thoroughly and categorically disrupt the presence of the trial on live servers, while offering options entirely unequal to current subscribers.
IMO, copy and pasting LOTR/DDO's model isn't something SOE should risk, given that those are actually, fairly mainstream franchises that might otherwise summarily trump the advertising power of Norrath.
See a critique of such at...:
EverQuest II Extended: Redeemed <- EQ2 forums
EverQuest II Extended: Redeemed <- EQ2X forums
Also keep in mind that they're, for some reason, defaulting to the streaming client, which has WIDESPREAD reports of being totally unreliable, choppy, and far too spotty and time consuming for consistent group play.
Instructing newbies to let it download overnight, and default to the all-in-one client, is likely the best route.

I agree with many of serili points : wf in different zones depending on tiers, incentive ones (with rewards, not charity tokens), changing immunity rules etc. One very simple and fast change that could be made (although not completely satisfying) : let buffs be negative in ennemy zone and positive in ally zone, and let next WF set up automatically in previous losers zone. That way, when your faction lose a warfield, you're sure you will be individually be more potent next WF.

Oh and btw, now that we have 30 mins battleground, is it reasonable to cap power regen at 135?

Since this is one of your more long-winded of posts, here is where I am posting the information you requested.

Found here is some information on how to make your posts stop hurting people's eyes, though it is actually about powerpoint presentations, the information is still valid for Seliri's posts. Here are the quickies:

"It is good practice to have only a few lines of text, or bullet points, on a slide, ideally no more than five to seven and only about five or six words per line, justified left. There must be enough space between lines to prevent ‘crowding’ effects during reading.
Text must be large enough to be read by most low vision people in the front of the audience and by people with normal vision in the back of the hall. Therefore, we recommend a size of 48 point, unless more space is needed for long words, but never less than 32 point.
It is helpful to use mixed upper and lower case letters which are easier for low vision participants rather than all capitals."

"Please use sans serif font types such as Helvetica, Arial and Verdana rather than font types like ‘Times New Roman’, because low vision people have difficulty with reading text in font types with serifs.
Avoid the use of italic font style because this is also difficult to read. Try not to use more than one font type per slide. If you want some text to pop out, use a larger font size, or use bold style, for that text, to attract attention."

"There are two types of contrast – brightness and color. The highest brightness contrast is between black and white. Objects have the highest colour contrast when they have complementary colours. Examples of complementary colours are red & green and yellow & blue.
Be aware that contrasting full colours have no brightness contrast and thus cannot be discriminated by colour blind people. So the main contrast in a slide must come from brightness and not from colour.
Note that many people suffer from glare, so try to apply dark background colours (low brightness) and use bright colours (high brightness) for the text to please low vision and elderly people. A white font on a deep blue background is a very good combination.

Text with high colour contrast without brightness contrast cannot be read by color blind people. In particular, they have difficulty with red-green perception. These people have difficulty in reading green text on a red background. So when it is important to have a red background, it would be helpful to use dark red and apply white fonts. Be aware that many colour blind people are less sensitive to red. So we suggest not using a black font on a red background or red text on a black background."
STOP BEING BIASED TOWARD THOSE WITH LOW VISION/COLOR BLIND SELIRI! All in good fun of course.

1.) Warfields: Something needs to change. Its a token farm and never balanced. The ability to get tokens just for being there should be removed.
2.) PvP Titles: Pointless, they prove nothing about the individual
3.) Faction Balance- I dont have anything to comment on that, really
4.) Immunity- its fine the way it is for an open world pvp server
5.) Items- EQ2 is a tough game. Especially if you dont have a lot of back up for pvp, itll take forever to get items. I dont think it should be any "easier" exactly but it should require less tokens, maybe to give a more fair chance to people who solo more, dont have a pvp guild. have bad luck