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

[Jynne]

Originally posted by Darkbane


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.

I should never, ever, ever have to be at a ql 75 base owned by my own organization, and be unable to attack someone who is damaging my guild's towers. Ever. I should be able to fully defend a level 10 base. I don't care if the attackers are level 1 and I'm level 200. If they've done damage to my guild's towers, I should be able to attack them. All my towers should be attacking them, too.

What you're calling strategy, I call exploiting the system. Look at your signature, Darkbane. You gain a benefit (being able to destroy turrets without interference from defending players) from a game system (the PvP level brackets) that the designers can't have intended in creating that system. Under the proposed limits that Cz brings up, and that you are seeming to endorse, being high level is a liability, not a benefit, for defending your own bases. That is just ludicrous.

This especially applies if the base is around QL 100-150. Or even under QL 201, because there is a huge difference in power between a ql 200 and a ql 201 turret - the same as with mobs. Level 120 players in a team with a level 120 doctor could probably assault a level 200 turret with very high degrees of success thanks to the 40m range limit on the turrets and their protection from higher-level defenders - ie, the people who built the base.

[Aqua]

Originally posted by Cz
During land control battles we often see people outside the level range of the combat (e.g. level 200 buffers in a battle of a level 40-50 area, or level 125 Doctor healers in a 200+ area) participating as buffers and healers without fear of repercussions due to being outside PvP range for the combatants.

The healing issue is bad but so is players outside of your pvp range attacking you cause they are teamed with a lower level you attack (might not be how it works but I know I am getting attacked by people outside my pvp range usually while I am attacking somebody at my level). Since it seems you are able to reconize level diffences in teams since you get the no xp clicky when you join a high level player can't you also make it so a team with a high level and low level players can't PVP. There are legit reasons in PVM that a high level player would be teamed with low levels can't really see a good one for PVP cept easy kills.

~aqua

[_______________Hypos]

Is it the designers intent that a player should not build towers that are too high or too low relative to thier level? If this change goes in, a level 120 char would not be able to defend either a level 200 or a level 50 tower.

The solution to just about everything in this game is to level. Level for more IP, nanos and higher skill caps. Now you're talking about penalizing people for levelling. My friends run off to defend their tower and I can't help. That's also not fun.

[Paffy]

It just creates too many "rules" when the rule in everything from 25% and less should be that you are free meal.

Or perhaps some very broad areas like:

200-100 can fight
150-50 can fight
100-0 can fight

The point where you really start to make difference in big fights is about 150+ in my opinion and nothing under 100 really make the difference anyways so it dont really matter if they are there or not (except for the lag).

So I think the new level guides suggested above would solve most of the problems you are now wondering.

What you think?

Zarch and da chars from 30 to 177

[Dudicas]

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.

Everything she said goes for me and atleast 50% of the rest of the guilds on Rubi-ka. Every guild I spend time with has levels from 20 all the way across the span. No way in hell should I have to watch my towers get blown away because the majority of my guildmates are lower level than me and we couldn't put up a controller in my pvp range.

[Aqua]

Originally posted by Kinkstaah
If you heal, attack, or buff anyone, in any political zone, you get PVP flagged for 30 minutes, with said side restrictions of the zone. (ie, if omni1 (sitting in 75% zone) heals omni2 in a 25% zone, omni1 gets flagged as pvpable for someone of opposing faction. Assuming omni1 is in a fight as well, he would be flagged because he is attacking someone.)

Make sense?

End.

I like this idea make the healer attackable 30 minutes seems a bit harsh thou how about after they cast a heal the 1 minute disgrace counter starts? The other problem is a lv 200 healer can chain cast a heal that is a CH to say a lv 50, thats not right either (probably gonna get flamed for this but) in PVP situations and ONLY pvp when healing outside of the healers pvp range could it be made so that doc heals would only heal 1/3 or 1/4 of the hp of player they are healing per cast?

~aqua

[Sheffy]

I would be ok with this if I could defend my own towers.

If I put up a QL150 tower and a lvl 148 Trader attacks it, I can't fight back (which in and of itself is humorous since he technically could gimp me to hell and back).

I understand why, you want PvP to be "more fair" and give the lower lvl players a chance, But um, when a group of attackers ranging from lvl 130-200 come to attack our base and I can only attack half of them (150+) it makes "war" simply a joke. I have to shout on guild chat for lower level guildies to attack somebody attacking *my* tower with a mixed onslaught of people.

Then assuming a lvl 149 guildie comes to attack that lvl 148 character attacking *my* tower, I can't buff or heal my guildie? Sure I suppose it can make it more "fair" so I don't slaughter a lvl 148 player or unbalance their duel (heh). serious important part : But you know, I think the rule should be changed so that anybody attacking a tower which is defendable by you (lvl 150 tower is within range for a lvl 200 player), that player should be open to attack by all who can also defend that tower.

In other words, if I place a lvl 100 tower and a level 120 Omni goes to attack it, I don't expect to be able to fight back as the lvl 100 tower isn't even within my pvp range.

The 150+ FFA PvP rule I can live with outside of land control, but don't leave us totally unable to defend against attackers.

This is a different issue entirely, though it is related.

[Obstructed]

Cz- I didn't really have to time to read all these posts, so I can't be sure I'm not repeating anyone but-

It sounds like a fine idea, as it puts someone at a great disadvantage when their oponent is getting healed by someone that you can't attack and kill. I hate it when that happens,

BUT If there is a lvl 125 Doc healing my lvl 180 advesary, then all I have to do is call in lvl 125 peeps from my guild right? This is fair and a good strategy, if you want to protect yourself, then make sure you have lowbies in your guild.

The other side of that coin is what happens if your are a noob guild and the highest person in your guild is lvl 50 and they ahve to fight peeps who are guarded by lvl 200 Docs? Well, tough really. You are the small fish in the pond, go gain lvls and re-enter the areana when you and your guild are bigger. That's what I say.

My vote is no, don't change the way it is. If a lowbie doc is healing my opponent it forces me to call in lowbie attacker, this increasing my social interaction with lowbies. See? Lowbies benifit from it. I may even pay some of them to be on-call durind battles. Or jsut start twink alts...

[Ulltima]

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?

I agree! I've been on a raid to a tower close to my level recently, and we got wiped by the high level guards in the area. We had to grab a binch of higher level buddies to hold them off. To make things worse, our cavalry left us to trash the towers (and get trampled by the 150+ free-for-all PvPers that showed up later).

I have a proposal: Get rid of the free-for-all PVP rules in land control battles. Everyone can attack only their normal PvP range.

A bit heavy-handed, but it's a solution that would help all of us lower level NW participants.

[_____________Nalissa]

I certianly agree that low lvl players should not be forced to have high level backup to have a fighting chance. However, I don't think it is then fair to expect high level guilds to have low level backup to defend their base either.

Is there a compromise solution somewhere?

Let's brainstorm:

1: Do not allow lower lvl players into high level tower zones, or high level players into low-tower zones.
Problem: A large guild spanning all levels cannot play with their lower level guildmates on the same playfield.

2: Disallow healing of low level players by high level players.
Problem: If a lvl 120 is defending a guild base his level 190 guildmate has to watch him die during an attack. Sound fun? Not to me.

3: Allow players to heal and attack whoever they wish PROVIDED they are in a tower-zone within their level range.
Problem: High level players cannot assist in the defense of a guild base below their requirement. It is possible that this is not really a problem - some feedback is needed from the low-high lvl combo-guilds. Personally i believe this rule might solve another issue in the game as well: High level guilds using low-lvl (10ish) bases as a cheesy way of getting out of PvP-flags when they attack other guilds.

4: Distinguish between attack and defense - and apply rules as proposed in this thread ASSUMING the force is on the attack, and apply no rules when on the defense.
Problem: This works, except that the programming end of it might be very difficult indeed. That is up to FC to decide.

[_______________Hypos]

If you implement this idea, it's a big bonus to the attackers. They can have their high level helpers just outside the land control line. They run in, try to score a kill and then run out to get healed/rebuffed.

The defenders have to sit in the middle of the land control area to protect and get benefit from their towers. If they retreat outside the area to get healed, a tower could fall.

[edit] If you really believe that this is the only fair way to do things, then the rule has to be applied universally even in 100% zones. If not, then you have people getting a potentially unfair advantage by getting better buffs than their opponent may be able to access.

[Jynne]

I'll emphasize it again.

You should always be able to defend your own towers against any attackers, regardless of your level. If you are in your guild's area, you should be able to attack anyone of any level whose 'side' according to the suppression gas would aggro your towers. You should be able to heal and buff anyone of any level whose 'side' is considered friendly to your towers.

Otherwise this level-bracket limitation on helping your friends plays out as a major and unfair advantage to attackers, and turns leveling into a liability.

[______________Insida]

I think its great. This will allow ppl of all level to play fair.

[_______________Hypos]

Whitesand made an interesting point in that not everyone has loads of IP to spend.

posted by Whitesand in The stilleto (the impossible dream?)

I as a lvl200 soldier don't have any ips to spend
...
And when I now have to spend ips too in skills I never require to have a personal tower in NW too?
...
It's sad that I as a soldier never will have a new car like a manta or a stilleto cause I don't have enough ips at lvl200 and it is also sad that I as a soldier never will have a high ql tower or a high ql personal tower cause I don't have ehough ips at lvl200.

So what if a char can't come up with enough IP to raise a tower in his level range? Is he simply locked out? Or should he only build towers that he's not allowed to defend?

It's bad enough having to stand around in PvP areas while lowbies /moon you. Being forced to stand there while they kick down your tower is just over the top.

[edit] fixed hyperlink
[edit 2] added to quote

[Brutal Truuth]

I agree with sheffy , Why cant I attack people who are attacking my ql 150 base ? so now i just let them ? If i could set up 2 ql 200's instead of 1 ql 150 and 1 ql 200 i wouldnt biatch , but as it stands people are going to get screwed if they put up a ql 150 base and cant defend it .

[Jynne]

If this proposal goes live:

[Org Chat] Jynne: Well folks, we just lost our Nascent Nifty Notum Drilling Field base.
[Org Chat] Someone_Else: What happened? I thought you were there helping defend it Doc?
[Org Chat] Jynne: The attackers were under level 100 from a twink org, so we had to just sit there and watch them fight our towers. Level 200 chars from the main org stood outside in the 75% zone and gave them HE, mochams, RRFE, and some other buffs; when they got hurt they ran out for a bit and a high level doctor CH'd them. We couldn't touch the people doing the buffing, and we couldn't touch the people attacking our base.
[Org Chat] Someone_Else: Boy that's a crock. I wonder if EBgames.com takes returns on these booster packs?

[Sheffy]

*sigh* That blows, and is a perfect example of what will happen if this change is implemented.

[Dreamshadez]

How about a server upgrade? It seems to me that anyone with a decent computer can keep up with all the comotion, but the servers cant... Anyone who was involved in the massave war in Newland desert on Rimor a few days ago, knows what I'm talking about. 28Fps and 4,000 ping. Come one now.

If your car is really slow, get a new car, dont move to the top of a huge hill, and start skipping breakfast everyday.

[Darkbane]

I have to admit, I'm coming round to Jynne's view on this... it definitely needs more thought...

Whilst we all agree there is a problem, it does seem that there is no simple solution to it that doesn't create other problems...

Ok Jynne, you win

Part of the problem is the gas itself. Its an interesting idea, but is clearly showing the strain when applied to towers and this type of PvP.

[_____________Nalissa]

Jynn is dead on target. Pefectly right.

You should always be able to defend your land to the fullest.

If a high level (or broad level range) guild builds a ql10 tower they should be able to defend that tower with every resource they have. A low level guild should not be able to waltz in and destroy your base simply because you can't shoot back at them. Additionally, you should be able to heal any member of your guild you please at the very least if they are on your own land. This is land you own, there is no reason to limit your effectiveness on it.

The next thing you know they will be giving large guilds minuses to their abilities for simply existing, just on the idea that it is no fun for the poor small guilds. Or even worse, the individual will have the best abilties when guildless, simply because it isn't fair that being in a guild should make you better able to win in a fight. And eventually when continuing this line of reasoning we will have to disallow team-pvp, because it isn't fair to a lone warrior to be attacked by 6 people at once.

bottom line: This is a complex issue. Complex issues take complex thought to sort out. If it is thought that 15 minutes of thought and a quick discussion over a cup of coffee will solve the issue, then someone is sadly mistaken.