The current problem with pvp - Proposals & Suggestions - WarpPortal Community Forums

Jump to content


Photo

The current problem with pvp


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 rekindledflame

rekindledflame

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 60 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 05:02 AM

Right now in night lipido, TK dominates. I have no problem with this. They hit cap first, geared first, and had better coordination. It's expected for them to dominate.

What I have a problem with in the current pvp system is two fold. The first being insta pots. Insta pots are far too overpowered for pvp. I know both sides use these, however, this takes away any skill required for pvp. It merely becomes a matter of who can pot the fastest, or who runs out first. This is a pointless system. Just die suck it up and realize you were beaten by someone better.

The second issue is mercs. Currently a cleric merc can hold rez scrolls. Even in 3vs1 situations, with mercs you can come out ahead, as the attackers have to worry about you and your merc. The merc will just respawn over and over and continually heal for rather large amounts.

My suggestions, are simple, ban instant pots and from putting rez scrolls on mercs. I realize some classes are at a disadvantage and I'm not suggesting taking mercs away completely, but your merc shouldn't be able to die 9+ times and continue to come back for such a cheap price. Maybe I'm the lone man out in thinking this way, but I feel both ruin what pvp is suppose to be like. Of course I could use instapots and mercs too which would even the playing field, but I would rather see this rectified than having to resort to such things.
  • 2

#2 Chigikogou

Chigikogou

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1778 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 02 August 2012 - 05:16 AM

Though you should have posted this matters to proposals / suggestion threads..

as a matter of fact, yes, TKs dominate currently.. but that was mainly because

#1, Most of the CBT testers (Temple Knights) are a "group" of people who play as a "group" (friends / mmo-groupies)
#2, The OBT Superior Guardian character / player amount control: Yes, we had this first, the most number of SG players compared to TKs that lead to SG character creation denials.. therefore to support this theory, the earlier to join = longer to stay = faster to level/gear up.

and again, about your last paragraph..

it should have been in the proposals threads.. way easier for the CM/Dev/WhoEver'sInCharge can see.
  • 0

#3 NinjaTivo

NinjaTivo

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 06:22 AM

I have ideas for fixes that are lets say..less harsh than yours...

The instant pot issue, put a longer cooldown on them.

The Merc rez issue, increase price of rez scrolls.
  • 1

#4 rekindledflame

rekindledflame

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 60 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 07:52 AM

@chigikogu Hmmm....yes, I understand why TK currently dominates. I think I summed up a few reasons in my very first sentence in fact. And you are correct it could have been posted in a better spot, thanks for pointing that out twice.

@tivo The only potential problem I can see with that, is balancing the price. While new players get quite a few rez scrolls for free, they should be able to afford more if they happen to run out. That's a hard balance to maintain and I'm not quite sure it can be done. The difference in capacity to earn gold is far too great between levels and certain classes. I do find your instant pot issue viable though, and a good one. Increasing the CD is the easiest and simplest solution. You sir are ninja of year clearly. =P
  • 0

#5 NinjaTivo

NinjaTivo

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 02 August 2012 - 07:56 AM

I have a fix for that too. Rez scrolls for 1-20 are X gold each. 21-40 are X gold 41-50 are X and 51-59 are X
  • 0

#6 Warnhal

Warnhal

    Jedi of the Sea

  • Customer Service Management
  • 90 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:32 AM

Moved to the appropriate section.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users