can i be pvp exempt

[______________Jypsie]

Funcom put alot of interesting thing in pvp zones, some good shop spawn too. Unfortunely, ganker kinda drive people away from these zones.

Read: Risk vs Reward. That was always the point of making "interesting things" in zones that are PvP. Making a switch ruins that concept of the game.

The Master Clan Assasin that runs around 4 Holes has nothing to do with PvP. He's a wandering NPC that is a pain in the @#$. I'm not really sure why you brought him up. As far as I can tell, he's for a nice shoot-out scene between NPCs. I've watched them fight.

[Checkbit]

I still have yet to see a reason -why- a PvP switch is a bad idea. So far, I've read points to the effect that the game's basic design was a "world at war" type atmosphere. There has also been mention or "Risk vs Reward". And??

The point I am trying to make is this: What effect does it have on the PvP community if such a switch (mind you, anti-exploit safegaurds in place such as a LONG timer between toggles) were put into the game? How is this hurting you in the slightest bit? I can only see good coming from that. I mean, do you PvP for the challenge of fighting another like-minded persons? Such a switch would pretty much ensure that those you could attack/be attacked by were of the same mindset.

Lets take this PvP switch a step further. Lets say, that if you have PvP on, then you are open to attack/can attack other PvP=on players even in the 75% zones. I dare say that would add a little ****e to the PvP experience.

But back to my original point... why is this so bad? The whole reason one plays MMORPGs is because it's an extremely flexible medium. The player can craft their own game experience. The "because that's not the way -they- intended the game" argument does'nt really hold up well. That's why there are multiple breeds, professions, and tradeskills. If I want to spend my entire life sitting in the BY, making jewelry until I puke, I should be able to do so. Or am I wrong? If I wish to travel to some other city (settled areas, not wilderness) wearing nothing but a pair of chilled plasteel boots and a smile, whistling the Honduran National Anthem.. then I should be able to. I paid my months "tithe" just like everyone else.

So again I ask... why is a PvP switch such a bad idea, and how would it hurt your game in anyway?

[Cosmik]

The idea of a PvP switch has merit, but there are no plans to include one. PvP is an integral part of AO and is there to be either used or avoided - you may enter the 25% and 0% areas as you wish, keep a safe distance, or hightail it out of there at the first sign of trouble.

Rubi-Ka has been designed so players can move freely about it without entering a PvP area and getting killed if they don't want to. A good thing for both sides of the discussion though - although we are building upon PvP (making it more exciting and interesting), we are also giving those players that do not like to hunt in PvP areas better places to hang out at.

[______________Leumas]

Originally posted by Jypsie


As far as I can tell, he's for a nice shoot-out scene between NPCs. I've watched them fight.

Yep, that's excatly my point here. This is what I called interesting things. It's a shame they put alot of content in a pvp zones and nobody is there to enjoy it. Why funcom waste resourse on something like this?

As you said, risk vs reward. It's a risk that nobody want to bear, expect for a few hardcore pvp fans. No matter how you put it, in the end nobody is there to enjoy the content. They might as well enchance some of the famous hunting zone instead of the pvp zones that is empty all the time.

MR. Cosmik, any ETA on adding new high level hunting ground that is not 25% or 0%? Also, did yalm rooting in the mid air are intent?

[_______________Raxle]

So like, can Funcom afford to hire Bionitrous?

Get this guy in a lead position over there right away!

For real, his posts are the light at the end of the tunnel.

[Nostra343]

>>Wake up people. There's a war out there, we're all soldiers in the war whether we want it or not. There's two different factions for a reason.

>>Everyone became a soldier from the moment they chose a side, picked up a gun or leet doll, strapped on thier armor and made the decision to walk into the political zones. There are no innocents in political zones.

sigh... why do people forget Neutrals so easily? I know FC didn't predict them, I know most people don't have a clue of our ideology, but dammit, we are here to stay.

I am neutral for explicit purpose of NOT wanting to get involved in the war. I am an Ideological Neutral, I do not support either side's simple-minded, mass-mentality, no-free-will picture.
I am paying my $12.95 a month, and I don't want to PvP. Simple as that. The game offers an extremely rich world I enjoy exploring, and PvP is at best a minor part of it, and a nuisance at that. It is dominated by very few people who dedicate themselves to it.
There are people who LIKE PvPing. I will even, following my principle of giving Benefit-of-doubt, extrapolate that there are people who PvP who are NOT perverted sadists (although of course I haven't met any yet personally).
But, if there are really reasonable PvPers who are in it for Honour or Fun or whatever, then why are those people so insistent on killing guy who doesn't want to fight? Why not just do it between yourselves? :-/
If PvP is indeed such a fun, meaningful, reasonable activity, then surely there will be enough people who would keep the PvP switch on. You could have all the PvP fight you want to - without irritating people.

And sure, in the Game as in RL (the fact of which I have unfortunate first-person experience), the Neutral guy not wanting to get involved gets screwed by both sides. I get marked as "Enemy" on targetting list of both sides, and I get killed by morons (sorry; but that's how I think of them) even when I very clearly show that I have no wish to engage in fight.
But that doesn't make it *right* - in game as in RL.
When somebody takes 45 seconds or more to kill me and sees that I am not defending, I can offer *no* possible explanation for that person's actions, except pure sadism. I don't have a title. I am neither Clan nor Omni - so no RP BS please; you cannot possibly have an RP excuse that you were helping your side by camping the grid-point and killing a passing neutral.
In Game, as in RL, a person who shoots an innocent Neutral passing by should be shunned by any reasonable, intelligent person. And a person who camps Grid exit in Meetmedere (a neutral zone), occasionally spouting intelligent slogans like "JOING OMNIE/CLAN or DIE" [sic], is in my opinion a degenerate moron. Sorry for the mass-flame I am committing, I usually try to keep discussion on a higher level, but I cannot explain that behaviour differently, no matter how hard I try. :-|
I don't *care* if this is just a game. That person gets some pleasure out of it, and that persons KNOWS that s/he has just hurt an innocent person not looking for a fight - whether s/he thinks of me as a Neutral citizen of Rubi-Ka, or a player behind the keyboard trying to save his hard-gained XP's, does it make a difference? If it does - well, then subsitute me considering your Clan/Omni soldier a moron, if it helps you.

Sure, people who do it try to rationalize it. But that's all that it is - rationalization to enable them to live with themselves. I do not know how they do it, but then again, there are enough jerks in RL as well, and I don't know how they do it either. It is simply a mentality beyond my intellectual reach .


>>I think the grace period finally works right (at least I've not noticed it *not* working anymore

Think again. Shot in Meetmedere 3 nights ago. There isn't enough time for a guy on foot to drag himself through the ruins if he makes even a tiniest mistake.

... And the "don't go there" bit regarding 25% zones - that's like saying a Woman entering a dark alley was inviting misfortune upon herself, and the criminal had all the right to attack her.
Well, yes, you're absolutelly correct - the Woman should've known not to go there; it is a dangerous part of the world.
But, consider - does that make the criminal's act justified? :-/
Can the Criminal rationalize his actions away? Dear Gawd I hope not - yet, the evidence is in this thread itself.

-----
Bio, Inhibit: I enjoyed your posts immensely. Nice to see somebody debating a point reasonably and argumentatively.
I am too emotionally involved in the issue myself, I fear .
I am just failing to understand how somebody can have so much pleasure in reducing my own fun, and insists that I should just accept it (i.e., no PvP switch). By Default, somebody who argues against PvP switch is somebody who wants to kill defensless people (as the switch, obviously, wouldn't prevent those who enjoy it from killing each other at their will).
I do not comprehend this at all .

[Nostra343]

Cosmik:

Thank you for posting in this thread. At the very least, the info on FC's current plans helps us immensely.

However, some of the advice/reasoning you laid out, I do not find too realistic or helpful ...

>> hightail it out of there at the first sign of trouble.

as if that's EVER an option. Being rooted is without EXCEPTION always the first sign that I'm being attacked at all. This again shows the mentality of the attacker - they are perfectly aware before the first shot is fired, that I do not want to engage into battle. Hence their first step is to ensnare their helpless victim.
Also, Grid interface does not work in battle.
So "hightail it at first sign of trouble" is misleading at best - and it hasn't worked for me once, though it would've been my prefered way of dealing with the issue .
The best I can do is /terminate, but I am not sure if they still get whatever it is they get out of PvP encounters...

>>keep a safe distance
No such thing. Proof enough in here already.

And obviously, as an MP, I have no chance of defense. Sometimes I'm killed in Yalm. And if I happen to be out of yalm - by the time I self-buff to cast my pets, or they finally arrive from trailing 500 meters behind me, I'm dead 3 times over. I have been in *one* fair fight in my life, and that was when I accepted a challenge and went to Arena. That kind of PvP I can appreciate and respect - it is a duel of skills and knowledge between willing participants.
What I usually experience is just a sadistic, patently unfair, murder.

As for good areas - As a neutral, pretty much the only reasonable place to hunt at levels 15-35 (if memory is correct), is the Rhino's cockpit. It entails two separate 25% zones - the Meetmedere, and the bridge. If you wanna hike all the way from NL City, you can avoid one of them. Can't avoid the other.

But shucks, that's just one of many specific examples. Forget specific examples - let's look at the big picture:

Sure, I *could* spend 150 levels without entering a 25% zone. It is possible. I won't argue that. I'm sure it's possible to advance 50 levels with nothing but a Kryss knife.

But...
while I personally *enjoy* the challenge of being a neutral, and do not consider it a "sacrifice" as most of my fellows, nevertheless, come *ON* - am I not Challenged *enough* already?
Trying to play this game always worrying am I entering a 25% zone or not... ugh. This cannot possibly be a serious suggestion. The amount of thinking and planning and messing around and worrying required will reduce the fun factor (anybody remembers that? the FUN that is supposed to be playing a game? ) considerably. Not to mention that the suggestions amounts to "sure you're paying $12.95 like everybody else for the privilege of access to this world, but here's piece of advice - limit yourself to only 60% of that world".
Constructive it is not.

At any rate, though FC doesn't plan a switch or separate servers atm, I presume this is different from saying they will never consider it.
Trying to take the democratic process by the reins, I will be sending an e-mail to feedback suggesting the PvP switch. I urge like-minded people to do the same .

Cheers,
Nostra

[FireC]

Originally posted by Nostra343
>>Wake up people. There's a war out there, we're all soldiers in the war whether we want it or not. There's two different factions for a reason.

>>Everyone became a soldier from the moment they chose a side, picked up a gun or leet doll, strapped on thier armor and made the decision to walk into the political zones. There are no innocents in political zones.

sigh... why do people forget Neutrals so easily? I know FC didn't predict them, I know most people don't have a clue of our ideology, but dammit, we are here to stay.

I am neutral for explicit purpose of NOT wanting to get involved in the war.

I never forget neutrals. You chose to be neutral understanding that you are in between two factions in war with each other, both can either think of you as an possible ally or possible threat. I rather go for the latter even if, like I have said repeatedly, don't do PVP. You are on a planet in war, no matter what you do you *are* involved in things some way.

>>I think the grace period finally works right (at least I've not noticed it *not* working anymore

Think again. Shot in Meetmedere 3 nights ago. There isn't enough time for a guy on foot to drag himself through the ruins if he makes even a tiniest mistake.

... And the "don't go there" bit regarding 25% zones - that's like saying a Woman entering a dark alley was inviting misfortune upon herself, and the criminal had all the right to attack her.
Well, yes, you're absolutelly correct - the Woman should've known not to go there; it is a dangerous part of the world.
But, consider - does that make the criminal's act justified? :-/
Can the Criminal rationalize his actions away? Dear Gawd I hope not - yet, the evidence is in this thread itself..

Well at least I get the same 15 seconds to get to the grid in MMD. Yes I lag there a lot but now I actually get that whole 15 seconds.

*sigh* When will you people stop dragging extreme *real life* examples into discussion about *game* mechanics.

In the GAME, don't go to the 0-25% zone if you are not willing to take the risk, and there is ways to avoid the more crowded areas in 0-25% zones as well if you think about it hard enough .

In the REAL LIFE, well hell yeah I avoid dangerous places at night time - see I know it's possibly dangerous so I choose not to go to places like that. See there's the difference. There is always people who will hurt you if they get a chance, both in real life and in the game world - of course that kind of acts are never justified but in this game we have war going on, nothing to with real life silly women in dark alleys.

PS. I have never said PVP switch is a bad idea nor am I against it, I just think it is not necessary. And please do make it show who you are quoting when you do quote, ok?

[Nostra343]

peekaboo>>please do make it show who you are quoting when you do quote, ok?

um... ok, sure thing; I argue ideas, so I am not sure it's entirely relevant, but if it helps in any way, I'll try do that in the future.

(At the same time, I can't help notice that in your last post, the 2nd quote is not attributed either)


peekaboo>>*sigh* When will you people stop dragging extreme *real life* examples into discussion about *game* mechanics.

not any time soon. I use analogies to help illustrate ideas. (Whether I'm successful or not - that's a whole other issue)

because...

peekaboo>>In the GAME, don't go to the 0-25% zone if you are not willing to take the risk, and there is ways to avoid the more crowded areas in 0-25% zones as well if you think about it hard enough .

In the REAL LIFE, well hell yeah I avoid dangerous places at night time - see I know it's possibly dangerous so I choose not to go to places like that. See there's the difference. There is always people who will hurt you if they get a chance, both in real life and in the game world - of course that kind of acts are never justified but in this game we have war going on, nothing to with real life silly women in dark alleys.

we have wars in real life as well; hence my attempt to use analogies to show that their behaviour is still neither honourable nor should be acceptable.
Anyhoo, I am saying - do we really have to leave such huge and interesting areas of the game world to the 0.5% of the population that chooses to terrorize their fellow players? Is this truly a constructive piece of advice? :-/

I still believe, as elaborated in my other posts, that it's pointless, obnoxious and hurtful when a ganker attacks me. I hold NO respect for them (as opposed to those PvPers who engage in consensual duels), and I hold very, very low opinion of them.

[FireC]

Originally posted by Nostra343
(At the same time, I can't help notice that in your last post, the 2nd quote is not attributed either)

Because it was all by the same person where as you never made any effort to show who said what.

peekaboo>>*sigh* When will you people stop dragging extreme *real life* examples into discussion about *game* mechanics.

not any time soon. I use analogies to help illustrate ideas. (Whether I'm successful or not - that's a whole other issue)

we have wars in real life as well; hence my attempt to use analogies to show that their behaviour is still neither honourable nor should be acceptable.

Yes and my point is that real life should not be mixed with the game. If you absolutely have to use a real life example pick a one that actually fits the subject. You think people in real coutries during civil wars are able to walk into the warzones safely?

Anyhoo, I am saying - do we really have to leave such huge and interesting areas of the game world to the 0.5% of the population that chooses to terrorize their fellow players? Is this truly a constructive piece of advice? :-/

I think I did say earlier that most of the 0-25% areas are empty, totally and completely empty of players. Only some certain KNOWN PVP AREAS might have people around waiting for someone to fight with.

I still believe, as elaborated in my other posts, that it's pointless, obnoxious and hurtful when a ganker attacks me. I hold NO respect for them (as opposed to those PvPers who engage in consensual duels), and I hold very, very low opinion of them.

If the PVP system here was based on duelling I'd agree with you, but as it's not... I'd actually like to see more teams doing PVP, getting a PVP title by "ganking" or dueling is not the begin and end of all PVP.

[Nostra343]

peekabo>>you never made any effort to show who said what.

Again, My apologies. I try to look at ideas based on their own merit - as often as not, I don't really care who specifically put them forth...


peekabo >> getting a PVP title by "ganking" or dueling is not the begin and end of all PVP.


Well, perhaps it's not - but getting a PvP title by "Ganking" is all I've ever witnessed, and my friends and I have been on receiving end too may times. As I say, benefit-of-doubt wise, I'm sure there are more honourable PvP methods and players out there; with those people, I have no particular beef.
To me the basic difference is *concensual* vs *forced*.

PvPer voting against PvP switches is forcing his method of play onto me.
non-PvPer voting For PvP switch is still allowing PvPers to do whatever they want to - between people who agree on that particular method of play.


... heck ... if PvPing ever becomes what I thought it would be when I started AO, I might resurrect my Clan char out of the moth, and help in the Epic battles between Clan and Omni on a battlefield somewhere!

As it is though - I want NO part of it, and as my wishes are hardly respected by that minor percentage of players, I'd like FC's help in ensuring my safety - that's all .

[FireC]

Originally posted by Nostra343
peekabo>>you never made any effort to show who said what.

Again, My apologies. I try to look at ideas based on their own merit - as often as not, I don't really care who specifically put them forth...

In the forums you *are* answering to one specific person when you quote what they've said. If you do not take care and look who said what you might be completely forgetting what that specific person already said and making them repeat themselves or seem that they said something they did not.

peekabo >> getting a PVP title by "ganking" or dueling is not the begin and end of all PVP.

Well, perhaps it's not - but getting a PvP title by "Ganking" is all I've ever witnessed, and my friends and I have been on receiving end too may times. As I say, benefit-of-doubt wise, I'm sure there are more honourable PvP methods and players out there; with those people, I have no particular beef.
To me the basic difference is *concensual* vs *forced*.

One more tip. Do not quote one small part of something someone said and then answer to that, be my guest answer to only a small part of something but do quote the whole thing.

What I said was "... I'd actually like to see more teams doing PVP, getting a PVP title by "ganking" or dueling is not the begin and end of all PVP." Which gives you an option of what PVP could be if everyone did not whine about honour and duelling and getting PVP titles, eh? Considering the system does not base on duelling why would I not be allowed to come with my team and kill you (or any other single person not on our side) in a warzone. Arena should be the place for fair duels (if it just could be made work too), 0-25% zone is free for all.

Again, I do not do PVP, but somehow... this thread makes me feel like trying it out again.

[Nostra343]

oook... I won't be quoting you, I don't dare anymore, but may I humbly ask that you clarify what exactly you meant with your last post?

To answer the question, to the best of my knowledge, currently there's nothing at all preventing you from ganging up on whoever, and (my own fault here probably), I wasn't quite sure if you were advocating it or using it an example to support some other point...

--------

As to the first part of the post and the quotations issue, I really was *not* answering to any particular person. Sometimes I do reply to the person in particular, sometimes I don't. The sentiment expressed in the parts I quoted is shared by a great part of the Rubi-ka population, I am not even sure if both quotations came from same source or not - certainly, in respect to neutrals, they shared the same point, so it didn't really matter whether they came from one person or 3. The quotation was there to give me some context. I was replying to the ideas expressed in those quotations, not merely to the person who postulated them.

[FireC]

Originally posted by Nostra343
oook... I won't be quoting you, I don't dare anymore, but may I humbly ask that you clarify what exactly you meant with your last post?

To answer the question, to the best of my knowledge, currently there's nothing at all preventing you from ganging up on whoever, and (my own fault here probably), I wasn't quite sure if you were advocating it or using it an example to support some other point...

*lol* The point was if all the people would take the PVP system as it is and did not expect it to be all fair and based on duelling (as it isn't that) it might actually work a bit better. Sure you won't get it to affect the game world still but once you stop asking people to be "fair" and not to attack you in the warzones it will seem to make much more sense. Realize that you are expecting PVP system to be something is was not designed to be.

EDIT: anyway, is "postulated" a real word *lol*? As a non native english speaker I keep getting caught up on funny words.

[Checkbit]

Yep. It's a real word =)


pos·tu·late Pronunciation Key (psch-lt)
tr.v. pos·tu·lat·ed, pos·tu·lat·ing, pos·tu·lates
To make claim for; demand.
To assume or assert the truth, reality, or necessity of, especially as a basis of an argument.
To assume as a premise or axiom; take for granted. See Synonyms at presume.

n. (psch-lt, -lt)
Something assumed without proof as being self-evident or generally accepted, especially when used as a basis for an argument: “the postulate that there is little moral difference between the superpowers” (Henry A. Kissinger).
A fundamental element; a basic principle.
Mathematics. An axiom.
A requirement; a prerequisite.



However... using a quote from Harry Kissinger may not be the best example of proper usage of the language. =)

[____________Valerian]

Cosmik quote:

The idea of a PvP switch has merit, but there are no plans to include one. PvP is an integral part of AO and is there to be either used or avoided - you may enter the 25% and 0% areas as you wish, keep a safe distance, or hightail it out of there at the first sign of trouble.

PvP as it has been implemented in AO is a failure. The xp scanning that costs as good as nothing and safes your chara whenever you want, in combination with no level restrictions for 75+ in PvP makes it into what FUNCOM claimed before release it would never be: a gank fest!
The possibility to kill other players without risk brings out the worst in alot of peeps. FUNCOM has invested so much time since release into changing and nerfing game mechanics just to solve the PvP problem and its still a complete joke. For sure not "an integral part" of the game!
There is no clear concept here at all. Just look at the Rhino cockpit outpost! They put neutral (read: usable by all) scanner, health and weapon shop, mission terms and a bank there....and made it PvP! An ideal place to intercept and gank players who dont give a damn about PvP, especially as nearby is a great hunting spot around level 30. You dont have a yalm at 30 and that place is far away from any other scanner. Its like designed for grief play. Later FUNCOM added a safe terminal just 100 m behind that outpost to "solve" the problem. Now there are tons of ppl around that scanner, hunting at the lake and the outpost is empty....
Stuff like this is just silly. There is no war just gankers and a couple of arenas! When there are more then 6 ppl fighting in one spot your'e lagged to hell anyway.
Ppl will vote about PvP with their wallets when SWG comes out. I know I will.

Val

[Destractor]

Has anyone made a world map of Rubi-Ka showing grid points, invisible walls AND 25%/0% zones

cos I would readly like to see it.

Almost all the useful grid points are 25%, I can normally excape from them if I'm in a yalm and on my toes (I still get rooted 1 in 80 probably) but there isn't much you can do returning to the grid

Even if you know the exact possition of the grid point and dive down you still get the risk of being rooted and shot.

I think I really need chaffs or flares to be shot out of my yalm as I head for the grid.

and don't tell me the people who hang around grid points are doing this cos of the war, they do it cos it is easy to get their ranking. I hope that the changes to PvP making it interesting will draw people away from the grid points.

[Laeni]

Peekaboo you obviously approve of ganking. I don't. You don't think pvp should be fair in this game fine. You like being able to murder people several levels lower than you, well that's your right.

Just don't expect anyone to respect you. Cause any pvp title you have isn't worth the pixels displaying it.

We don't have pvp in this game. What we have are a bunch of bullies murdering players several levels lower than them. If there is even a smidgeon of a chance that the player can fight back and win, the ganker runs. And sorry Cosmik but if this is what Funcom wants well I guess the 25% zones will just have to be mainly empty most of the time.

[Bionitrous]

PvP'ers think there is a war going on. There isn't. Never seen any declaration of war by either side, CoT or O-T.

The reason Omni people's go to Mort to murder Clan citizens is unclear other than 'they can'.

The reason Clan people's go to EFP to murder Omni employees is unclear other than 'they can'.

The reason that people murder Neutral citizens anywhere they can is not clear other than 'they can'.

Killing should always have a reason other than simply that 'you can' or 'the game let's me do it'. Perhaps that's why so many sane individuals want the game changed so the game doesn't let you do it.

Killing as a part of a supported army always has a purpose. The killing in AO right now has no purpose and achieves no stated objective other than to satisfy a bunch of 12-yr old's hormone/chemical imbalance problems. That's why so many people despise it.

Most of the mature players of the game who wish for meaningful PvP won't touch it in it's current state. We signed on for campaigns where we fought as part of a regiment to achieve a goal. This is not possible in AO now. Even in the future when they implement territory-capture, we won't participate unless the capturing of the territory is part of the story and not some stupid 'capture the flag' game where the outpost changes hands every two days like DAoC fortresses.

The lack of Story permeates this game from top to bottom in negative ways. Why are people ganking each other? Why am I doing this my millionth mission? Why am I here in this Cyborg Dungeon? Why am I attacked by guards if I'm Neutral? The list goes on an on.

When PvP has a reason to do so more than simply because 'you can', then yer gonna see people doing it. Until then, I'll stick to the hidden 0% zones with my guildies for testing my elite skillz.

[FireC]

Originally posted by Laeni
Peekaboo you obviously approve of ganking. I don't. You don't think pvp should be fair in this game fine. You like being able to murder people several levels lower than you, well that's your right.

Just don't expect anyone to respect you. Cause any pvp title you have isn't worth the pixels displaying it.

Will you at least read what I wrote before going off *lol*. Let me repeat myself once again: I do not do PVP, I do not have PVP title, I do not want a PVP title. I have never killed any other player - ok I guess my friend would now like to remind me of the time we were all very tiny and were messing around in the arena one day but it was sooo long time ago and not really PVP, only some gun testing on each other and then I repetedly got killed by a trader which thought me the importance of the duck skill.

War isn't fair was my point. Duel all you like but there is nothing to stop you or the person you fight against having a friend to help you in the PVP system - it was designed to be that way it seems. Arena should be the place for fair duels but it unfortunately does not work that way there either (I hope they'd fix it). Sure PVP should be fair, better and all that but it isn't in this game, and they've said it's not going to change so why not try to play with what you have, eh?