Printable View
What we understand about the PvP ranking let us thinks that it's a kind a chess-like swiss-ranking system. Obviously all players are reaching a cap at Apprentice title and cnnot progress further.
We believe that the Seasonned and other Mobs title can be eventually reached by players.
Is this assumption right ?
If it's the case maybe the ranking system should be tweaked so as to let players progress further in it.
I'd be happy to have more insights here. :)
The list should feature the exact number of how many you have killed. So we can see who's at the top.
great. another excuse for griefing.
"cant lose my title.. "
"have to get back my title.."
"have to get to the top of the uber-ganker list.."
fighting from shop zone doors..
PKing people 50 levels lower than you..
grid-camping.. whompa-camping..
(grace period hasnt totally ended this)
titles only encourage the worst behaviour.
right now there are level 150,160,170 clanners
who are camping the aces camp where the
level100ish omnis are trying to earn XP.
they've been there every night for a week.
they log in, kill a dozen players, cost them all
a million or two XP and hours of work, and then log off. .
only to log back in an hour later and do it again.
they are title farming.
i've seen people with novice/apprentice titles
refuse arena challenges because they dont
want to lose the title they earned 30 levels ago . .
(probably from paying people to lose to them)
i'd like the title system removed completely.
then it doesnt matter if you die.
no need to run in and out of shops.
PvP for RP and fun and not some lame title.
besides, if you want to go around PKing,
why would you want to tip off other players with your title?
doesnt the element of surprise / opponent not knowing the odds
mean anything ?
So you are not griefing ?
I am really ROFL here. I guess I will start all my post now by : a) Stop griefing ! or b) Quit whining !!
It seems that they will get more weight this way. Or not ?
Shouldn't we just supress PvP ?
not sure I understand what you're trying to say gummi,
do you think grid-camping was fun even for the guys doing it?
i doubt it. they were title-farming.
is there really any challenge to level 150+ players
logging on, insta-killing a few dozen low level players,
then logging off in the same spot only to come back
and do it again after those players have earned back some XP?
no. it's 'shooting fish in a barrel'. again, title-farming.
now this guy suggests a website where the griefers
will be rewarded for this kind of behaviour with recognition?
I dont want to supress PvP. PvP is cool.
but the motivation and consequnces of a 'title/ranking' system
just doesnt seem to take basic human nature into consideration
and its effect on the overall PvP environment and what kind of
PvP it is encouraging. Perhaps this will change when FC gives
us more reasons / more places to PvP . . but i think those who
want the world to think they're uber will still be standing in the
shop doors, exploiting grace periods, and generally griefing.
Supress ranking, supress xp gain and PvP is dead.
If you don't know that in 25% and 0% you can be ganked, camped, rooted and toasted by players higher level than yours... then what can I say ?
These zones are dangerous and are trolled by a majority of players that just want to nail you. There is no chivalery or righteous duels here.
Play on the 'zek' EQ servers and you'll see the same type of playing. Play on other servers and none -I reapet none- is PvPing : none will switch to become a PK and none will duel, unless you are attending a fun guild event.
Does it mean that you have to go in this zone well prepared ? Yes.
Does it mean that you have to go in this zone full buffed ? Yes.
Does it mean that you have to go in this zone with as many friends as possible ? Yes.
Does it mean that you have to go in this zone and maybe die ? Yes.
PvP is the A in AO.
Outsmarting gankers and campers, is a part of the fun. Now if you really don't like dealing with small creeps that will try to kill you in every way possible PvP is not for you.
I haven't been really PvPing myself until now at 96. And I am just scratching it. Why ? Because I want to have a chance and that I need a lot of ressources and also when required a strong guild and some reliable friends.
It is often overlooked but PvPing is often a very social activity. Because you won't be able on you own to kill this pack of 10 campers that rooted you before the end of PvP grace period and that nuked you just after.
Do you think that in DAoC (that is supposed to be such a well tuned and balanced game) realm battles are any better ? No they aren't at all. If you are higher level and with a lot of friends to back you up, you are assured to insta kill lost lonely lowbies.
AO can be disturbing because at a given level, PvP is not really an option : you have to go in the 25% and 0% zones. Now if you just go in there for missions and that you don't want to PvP and handle the way it is done... well you won't be playing the game very long or you will reroll a new char to play it up to level 80.
I don't want to be too harsh in the way I put the things in this post, but I am really amazed to see so much whining and griefing about PvP because it's not really fair. No it's not fair and it's the essence of PvP. It's totally different than PvE.
Gummi,
I love PvP and fully support it.
I support capturing and holding territory.
I support more ways in which the geography
can force players to come into conflict with
eachother. I wish there were no yalmahas
in game so that we werent all safe from eachother
while traveling along the roads and thru the wilderness
to and from missions. I wish there were room for
highway robbery (taking that item you just missioned for
that isnt insured yet) in AO. All this stuff would be great.
what isnt cool is rewarding players for easy kills and exploits.
another idea:
instead of removing titles,
how about you only earn kills toward a title by killing
a player higher-level than yourself?
now there is a bit of challenge worthy of recognition.
and you wouldnt have level 160-180 players
area-nuking herds of lower level players just for titles.
I thought the premise of titles was based on a chess-like system. A level 150 enforcer killing hundreds of level 100 victims shouldn't be able to gain a title. That is very much like a grand master in chess beating up on rank beginners in a tournament.
I may remember incorrectly but I thought a player who plays someone more than 400 points below their level can't gain any pointsl. i.e., a level 1600 chess player plays against a level 1100 chess player. If the 1600 wins, he either gains nothing or even loses a point or two. If he loses, he'll lose a ton of points.
About shop ganking ... how come there are never any back doors?
Creol
the system probably does work in a 'chess-like' ranking system.
but apparently you can at least get to 'apprentice' or 'novice' by ganking anyone.
never seen anyone higher than that probably because the players with titles dont bother to fight anyone except lower levels they can 'own' and/or exploit to beat.
dont want any chance of losing your precious title . . .
(however i think the main reason is that most players
dont understand the concept of this kind of ranking system either)
one more thought. ..
it's hard to make a chess-like systemwork here,
because the level system just screws it all up.
eg. should a level200 freshman
really score a title point for killing a level75 novice?
if so, it doesnt solve the problem of highlevels
going to lowlevel hunting spots and just nuking the
hell of it because some percentage of those lower
players have titles. .