Proposed design: If you can't be attacked, you can't assist with buffs and healing

[_______________edict]

Originally posted by Cz
It shouldn't be a requirement to have high level friends around to take out any high level helpers the enemies might bring, should it?

No your dead right - it shouldn't! I like the idea's you've posted. This has happened to me and is just not fun.

However, its equally annoying to have a low level player healing a high level player that you can't attack.

Could we say that:

If a low level player heals/buffs a high level player s/he will become PvP enabled for all (yes and get ganked, but that is their choice).

A high level player cannot under any circumstances heal/buff a lower level character in LC areas.


Question: How is this handled for teamed low level and high level players? Currently it opens up the PvP fighting range - will it do the same for buffs?


If so this system is circumvented and a little pointless

Don't get me wrong, I definately want these wars to be fun for all. But my idea of fun is not being ganked/inturrupted by high level players/guilds.

Glad you said this is going to take some time - this is a sensitive area and could make or break LC/TNW, but I guess you know that anyway

[Snuble]

New rules and new border values give more people exploiting them.

*Personal opinion*: Tower is +130 business.

*Personal opinion*: Helping your low level friends is part of the social aspect of the game. And the level 50 toons will be lvl 100 toons in 14 days anyway... Unless they are pvp twinks or subway farmers.

Whats next? Can't enter a mission outside the range that you can pull?

There is plenty of design issues existing already that concerns players *within* the PvP range. Fix those first please!

[Snuble]

Oh and another thing. This change will favour:
1) The really large guilds
2) Guilds with a tight level range

It will discourage the orgs with a large spread in levels. Like my own (Vengeance of the Clans). Perhaps thats why I'm less then happy about this bad idea from your designers?

[____________Jannerik]

Originally posted by Cz
Jannerik, I said level 50s, meaning to indicate a group of them, not a single level 50 defender.

Chela, high levels might work well with that, but it would give a too high range at lower levels, and lead to the ganking of helpless people.

That makes it even better, Cz

So with a pvpflag they cant pick a single defender, attack and run back to zoneborder. Ok i know there is disgrace time now, but all you need to do is running FAR FAR FAR - when grace is over and you didnt hit ESC you can simply come back and do the same thing like before disgrace.

Gashogging/zoning is frustrating at highlevel - no need to mention that at lvl50 those fights lasts a way longer - which gives people more time to run away/zone.

So your idea about not being able to help in a fight is good. But make it perfect and consider a short pvpflag for attacking players.

My point is that it is not only the highlvl that helps his lowlvls to succeed in a fight. it's a general issue we are having so making it based on lvlrange doesnt fix it at all.

Regards,
Jannerik

[_____PrimeTechnocrat]

I realize that this could be a fairly significant problem but zoning out characters who enter a land-contol area above their level is definetly not the solution. At least on RK 1 there are far too many land-contol areas to expect people below their range to avoid them completely. And this is basically excluding large areas of the world to people solely because of their level. Besides the spying problem can't be that big really, since I haven't heard anything about the anti-yalm towers being used yet anybody could just fly above tower zones and spy to their hearts content.

[___________Atrocious]

Can't wait until this get's implemented, altho it might mean that my guild might loose our higher level towers.

Also I feel something needs to be done with guild having insanly low towers and attacking other guilds high level tower. Lets say guild A consists mostly of 150+(2 or three below, but all others above) they build a ql 20 tower in Clon****. Now they won't be PvP flagged when attacking other towers, but the other guild when they do find their tower discover to their dismay that they cannot under any circumstance attack. Since there is actually no members in the guild B(the attacked guild mounting a counter strike) in that PvP range.

So I would like a following system(or similar implemented):

In order to attack another tower the guild,organization/whatever need to either have no tower(ie fighting for a new tower) or have a tower either +- the ql of the tower they attack. It has been my understanding that controller towers come in very specific ql(250,200,150,100, etc.) so it should then be easy to say if you own a ql 200 tower you can attack ql 250 and 100 towers(if you have members in that level range). If you only own a ql 20 tower then you can only attack ql 10 and 50(given that those are the steps in towers). Now comes the good part, so lets say you are in Guild A above(all 150+ except for 2 twink level 20s) you cannot attack ql 100+ towers even tho this is your PvP range since you own a small ass tower. You then either have to demolish such a tower, and take the heat for it by being PvP flagged, or you get some more members/twink around 50 and take over a ql 50 tower, etc.

Because most guilds are at a disadvantage to power houses having really low towers. first of all most regular players stay at level 20ish(if they are in a decent guilf) for what 7 hours?

Another solution would be to flag attackers with PvP flag if they attack towers outside their level. This will mean that power houses cannot build ql 10-50 tower wreack havok for several hours and most likely not suffer any penalties. 1-2 hours of 25%/5% at your tower is not really a penalty. Unless the attacked knows where you towers is and can easily mount a sizable lowbie force.

A modification just came to mind that if you have a ql 100 tower you can attack 150 and below. So basically if your org has a ql 250 tower you can attack anyone you feel like(as long as the attackers are within the PvP range of the tower). Basically saying if you're willing to pay the price of defeat then go for it.

Just my $0.02...

[Darkbane]

In Land Control Areas, when gas is 25% or 5%:

If a player is outwith PvP range of another player, they may not:

a) attack them

b) cast nanos on them

c) use items on them

Being in a team should have no effect on PvP ranges, ie all PvP
determination should be based on an individual's level.

Towers will obey these PvP rules *except* when a shield disabler has been used on them, in which case they may attack *any* opposing player regardless of level (though that player must obey the PvP rules and so may not be able to attack back).

[Darkbane]

Originally posted by PrimeTechnocrat
Besides the spying problem can't be that big really, since I haven't heard anything about the anti-yalm towers being used yet anybody could just fly above tower zones and spy to their hearts content.

And get shot out of the sky by the turrets...?

[_____PrimeTechnocrat]

Originally posted by Darkbane


And get shot out of the sky by the turrets...?

If you mean just the standard turrets, I can't see their range exceeding the visible range of somebody flying above them. Those towers show up way before almost anything else.

[______________Insida]

Make sure that a high level MP heal pet cannot assist the low level too.

[______________Luxxan]

I still think this solution is the simplest and best solution out there. Some people have come up with interesting ideas as far as pvp flagging, and warping and other things, but ultimately, they're complicated solutions and I just don't think they cut to the heart of the issue. PvP rules should be universal for friend or foe, and that will clear up 99% of the problems.

[Jynne]

I think that we have to bear in mind that these fights are supposed to be fun, so far they mostly have been fun (with the exception of the lagfests) and their purpose is for fun.

Showing up to defend a guild and not being able to attack anyone isn't much fun. Showing up and getting warped away for not being in the right level range wouldn't be fun. Showing up and not being able to heal other Clanners who are dying won't be much fun either. Especially if said Clanners are my guildmates.

I know that we don't want high level people to ruin low level peoples' fun, and that's important. But we also shouldn't make it so that high level peoples' fun gets ruined, either.

I'm level 167. I'm not in an uberguild, we have people from level 30 to level 168. Why should I have to level an alt to help my lower-level guildmates or defend a ql 75 or ql 100 tower? Why should I spend precious time logging out, waiting for AO to free memory, and then logging back in as a lower level character just so I can participate in the battle and defend what's mine? If it's my guild's controlled area, I should be able to defend it regardless of my level. I should be able to just walk up and kill a level 70 guy attacking my guild's turrets in three hits. If my being there and my being able to heal my allies there and butcher lower level people attacking it means that a lower level, lower power guild can't ever take the spot over... that is kind of the point!

Why should a weaker (lower level) attacking force be protected from, and thereby be able to defeat, a stronger (higher level) force... on that stronger force's home ground? That's essentially what the current trend of pvp rules is going to create: a situation where victory will not go to the strongest fighters, or the most skilled fighters, but to the cleverest PvP-rules-manipulators.

Please have the designers consider this. If you're fighting on a guild's home ground, everyone in that guild - and only that particular guild - should be able to attack you and heal and buff each other, regardless of the other pvp rules. These are our bases. Let us defend them.

[Szentasha]

This is a critical design change. I think lower level guilds should be able to participate. I also think that high level guilds shouldn't monopolize all available tower spots when they really don't have active characters of lower levels to make good use of the spots.

One problem we have seen is a low level trader ransacking higher levels without any fear of death, this is a problem too.

One thought I had was what if you simply had a penalty to fighting in an area outside your range. Funcom has a tendency to polarize issues like this so it is all or nothing. I think it would be reasonable to give people fighting in a land control area outside their level range a percentage-based init and runspeed penalty, regardless if they are too high or too low. So if they are a little high, they have a minor penalty, and if they are twice as high, they will suffer a huge init penalty and can help but not turn the tides.

My belief is that in a low level battle, numbers and skill should make the difference, not help from high level friends.

[_____PrimeTechnocrat]

Originally posted by Jynne
I think that we have to bear in mind that these fights are supposed to be fun, so far they mostly have been fun (with the exception of the lagfests) and their purpose is for fun.

Showing up to defend a guild and not being able to attack anyone isn't much fun. Showing up and getting warped away for not being in the right level range wouldn't be fun. Showing up and not being able to heal other Clanners who are dying won't be much fun either. Especially if said Clanners are my guildmates.

I know that we don't want high level people to ruin low level peoples' fun, and that's important. But we also shouldn't make it so that high level peoples' fun gets ruined, either.

I'm level 167. I'm not in an uberguild, we have people from level 30 to level 168. Why should I have to level an alt to help my lower-level guildmates or defend a ql 75 or ql 100 tower? Why should I spend precious time logging out, waiting for AO to free memory, and then logging back in as a lower level character just so I can participate in the battle and defend what's mine? If it's my guild's controlled area, I should be able to defend it regardless of my level. I should be able to just walk up and kill a level 70 guy attacking my guild's turrets in three hits. If my being there and my being able to heal my allies there and butcher lower level people attacking it means that a lower level, lower power guild can't ever take the spot over... that is kind of the point!

Why should a weaker (lower level) attacking force be protected from, and thereby be able to defeat, a stronger (higher level) force... on that stronger force's home ground? That's essentially what the current trend of pvp rules is going to create: a situation where victory will not go to the strongest fighters, or the most skilled fighters, but to the cleverest PvP-rules-manipulators.

Please have the designers consider this. If you're fighting on a guild's home ground, everyone in that guild - and only that particular guild - should be able to attack you and heal and buff each other, regardless of the other pvp rules. These are our bases. Let us defend them.

Should your lvl 167 char be able to assist your guildmates when they are attacking a ql 75-100 tower? I can see your point on defending your guilds territory because the benefits are important to you too but this trend of higher lvls helping lower lvls is not limited to defense. Is it fair to the guild that spent time and money creating a ql 75 tower only to have it wiped out by an enemy force that they would have defeated if not for lvl 150 docs supplying constant healing?

[Jynne]

Originally posted by PrimeTechnocrat


Should your lvl 167 char be able to assist your guildmates when they are attacking a ql 75-100 tower? I can see your point on defending your guilds territory because the benefits are important to you too but this trend of higher lvls helping lower lvls is not limited to defense. Is it fair to the guild that spent time and money creating a ql 75 tower only to have it wiped out by an enemy force that they would have defeated if not for lvl 150 docs supplying constant healing?

Attacking is different. An attacking force can have high level players present there to fight off any high level defenders, but those high level players shouldn't be able to support their lower-level mates, in case there aren't any high level defenders. Defense should always have the advantage in terms of these rules and limits, because attacking is a choice, and can be well prepared for. Defending isn't a choice (Don't say, "Delete your tower if you don't like it." Get a mitt and catch a clue), and you don't have time to scout the attacker levels and tune your response accordingly.

'No buffing and healing for the attackers' by people who aren't in their range - both above and below - is good for this. It's just as stupid for a level 125 doctor to be healing level 200 players without being attackable by their level 200 opponents, as it is for a level 200 doctor to be healing level 20s. A level 125 doctor can cast complete heal with only masteries - or even self-cast it, if they are twinked to it.

[_____________Nalissa]

Originally posted by Cz

I don't think that helps the level 50s who just got attacked by another bunch of level 50s bringing three level 150s to heal them. They can't take on the level 150s anyway, so the PvP flagging doesn't help much (unless the high level cavalry arrives to take down the 150s).

It shouldn't be a requirement to have high level friends around to take out any high level helpers the enemies might bring, should it?

No it should not CZ.

However, it should also not be a requirement for high level players to have low level friends to take down those pesky grey (/mooning invariably) invaders either should it?

There is nothing more irritating than having a low level player standing in the middle of a PvP zone sending reports such as "They've got 2 traders, a fixer and .." "They are standing at the south side - wait! One's running over to check! Get him!" "Ok the fixer is standing at the east side - so make sure to get your anti-fixer nuke ready"

This is already ludicrous as it is - and is the equivelent of the US Army sending 10 year olds into Afghanistan because they are the ultimate intelligence operatives..

[_____________Nalissa]

Originally posted by Jynne
Attacking is different. An attacking force can have high level players present there to fight off any high level defenders, but those high level players shouldn't be able to support their lower-level mates, in case there aren't any high level defenders. Defense should always have the advantage in terms of these rules and limits, because attacking is a choice, and can be well prepared for. Defending isn't a choice (Don't say, "Delete your tower if you don't like it." Get a mitt and catch a clue), and you don't have time to scout the attacker levels and tune your response accordingly.

'No buffing and healing for the attackers' by people who aren't in their range - both above and below - is good for this. It's just as stupid for a level 125 doctor to be healing level 200 players without being attackable by their level 200 opponents, as it is for a level 200 doctor to be healing level 20s. A level 125 doctor can cast complete heal with only masteries - or even self-cast it, if they are twinked to it.

Actually, a lvl 125 doctor can easily cast complete heal using a massive cannon turret that adds 50/50 BM/MM.

In essence, this little godsend of a rules change will cause the buffs from Massive cannon turrets to become effectively useless. After all, once you can cast complete heal by yourself - umm.. Well we already know that skills have absolutely nothing to do with how well a heal works..

[_____________Nalissa]

And one more time:

Before you go forcing hackneyed rules changes through I ask you to THINK about it first FC. THINK. Every business has to do this why should you be exempt?

Personally, its not the higher level players healing nerf that bothers me - i've never done that. It is the lower levels being unable to heal the high...

THINK! I implore you.

[Jynne]

Originally posted by Nalissa


Actually, a lvl 125 doctor can easily cast complete heal using a massive cannon turret that adds 50/50 BM/MM.

In essence, this little godsend of a rules change will cause the buffs from Massive cannon turrets to become effectively useless. After all, once you can cast complete heal by yourself - umm.. Well we already know that skills have absolutely nothing to do with how well a heal works..

Yeah, Gaute must've been thinking of doctors under level 130 when he wrote in his article that the massive cannon turret would be popular with docs

[Darkbane]

Originally posted by Jynne
Attacking is different. An attacking force can have high level players present there to fight off any high level defenders, but those high level players shouldn't be able to support their lower-level mates, in case there aren't any high level defenders. Defense should always have the advantage in terms of these rules and limits, because attacking is a choice, and can be well prepared for. Defending isn't a choice (Don't say, "Delete your tower if you don't like it." Get a mitt and catch a clue), and you don't have time to scout the attacker levels and tune your response accordingly.

'No buffing and healing for the attackers' by people who aren't in their range - both above and below - is good for this. It's just as stupid for a level 125 doctor to be healing level 200 players without being attackable by their level 200 opponents, as it is for a level 200 doctor to be healing level 20s. A level 125 doctor can cast complete heal with only masteries - or even self-cast it, if they are twinked to it.

Hmmm. Interesting point...

However, lets take that QL75 tower for example. Attackable by players in the range 59-97 (approx). That means the defenders can be in the range 46-125 (again, approx), which means the attackers should be in the range 36-162, which means... even without being able to buff/heal etc, all levels *can* still have a role in offence and defence of a tower, just some indirectly.

Of course, if the attacker sends just level 60-70s, then a high level defender will be useless, but that's strategy

No, I think the simplest solution is just to block nano/item/pet use in LCAs based on the PvP rules. There is just too much variability in guilds for more complex systems to be useful.

Maybe once crowd control is implemented, it can warp people out based on trying to balance average levels between sides or something, but that's another kettle of fish altogether.