Profile: Kruniac
Send PM  Forum Posts  Forum Topics 

Recent Forum Posts [more...]

• • PvE/PvP death penalties

  • Im going to take a guess that if you die in PvE, you need to make a corpse run.

     

    If you die in PvP, dont bother making a corpse run - all your sewing kits are belong to us.

  • Posted: 4/22/08 9:17 AM
    Darkfall
• • World PvP?

  • Originally posted by Laserwolf
    

    With all the negatives I keep hearing about, the only thing keeping me hopeful is PvP FFA. Personally I can't stand RvR and see it as nothing but a "Gank-Fest". That's right, FFA will be a hell of a lot less of a "Gank-Fest" than RvR. In every game I've played where anyone could attack anyone(Unfortunately very Few Games have this) people would usually just leave you alone when they came across you out in the wilderness. Sure there are those who do nothing but kill others, but the majority likes to play by the golden rule.

    However with games like WoW with RvR, anytime you got anywhere near someone from another faction they would come after you 100% of the time if you were of equal level or lower. I honestly can't remember having a Horde player ignore me. Even if he was obviously on his way somewhere and I was trying to hide and let him pass he would chase me down and kill me if I was in his Realm or somewhere Neutral. Didn't matter if I was level 5 and he was in the 40s.

    Also, I see much potential with FFA PvP. I'd much prefer that the game include the possibility for Crafting-Only Professions so that it included truely innocent and helpess players for us to play the "Hero" with, but even without this, I look forward to spending time protecting those who are lower levels either by myself or in a guild.

    Quoted for truth. Finally someone with some damn sense. PvP Anywhere is the ONLY way to have an MMO. You have massive carnage from time to time, but mainly you have "Oh snap, I had better jack that guy over there!" In RvR, its a gank fest. Mass nukes for the win. Faggotry.

     

    Not that I HATE RvR - WAR will have good RvR since its supposed to simulate massive gank fests anyway (Warhammer mass combat :P )

     

     

  • Posted: 4/22/08 9:01 AM
    Age of Conan
• • So...I Like Monster Play

  • Originally posted by rev_lazaro
    

     

    Originally posted by Kruniac
    

     

    Originally posted by Wrymstrum
    

     

    Originally posted by WSIMike
    

     

    What makes it even more fun is when  you find out the creep you're hunting with is someone you've quested with before... Or someone you've killed, or been killed by, when they were on their main. Of course, once that realization is made, you each become "standard" targets to each other.. almost a way of saying "Hi!"

     

     

     

    Very true.  I love that aspect. 

     

    The reasons people slam PVMP is as follows:

     

    1)  They don't understand what it is.  There is this misconception that when you do monster play you just take control of some random temporary npc.  This might have been the initial concept for pvmp, but it's certainly not what we have now. 

    2)  What they really want is a symmetric, dual faction pvp game where you have two equal sides.  Sometimes it's partly because they like playing the "evil" side, but in general they just think that's the way MMO's should be.  However this type of design really limits the pve content, so I'm extremely happy that LOTRO didn't go that way. 

    3)  They want PVP anywhere, anytime.  Turbine made a strategic decision to not do this.  I understand some of the reasons for wanting PVP anywhere, but there's also some benefits to keeping pvp limited to certain places.   Having pvp be anywhere dilutes all the action.  Concentrating the fighting is one good thing about lotro's approach. 

     

     

     

     

    MP is nothing more than an arena you can jump in to so you can get some PvP. You then use what other games would consider high end content (realm points more or less) to "level" your monster.

     

    Its fucking weak, and thats the end of it. The monsters need to be balanced to be on par with the freeps, and  not the other way around (that way carebears can still enjoy the PvE, and PvPers can get a decent run with MP).

     

    There is no reason we shouldnt be able to have a 1-50 "normal" monster playing feature. Do quests, get loot, level up, etc. All of the satisfaction of leveling a normal character from 1-50 should be ours in monster play. Instead, we are handed a level 50, and we just hope the freeps are in the area. What rubbish.

     

    This is what happens when carebears make a game. People who believe in a happy world where darkness overcomes the light. I shit on that.

     

    End venom.

     

    LOL you're so hardcore bro!

    Besides, if everyone was given a chance to level their monsters, "hardcore" players like you would cry about having to do PvE shit to get to the PvP end game.

     

    No, I would enjoy the extra content. LOTRO is a halfway solid MMO, and adding that extra aspect to the monster side of things would really open up more playerbase. I dont mind PvEing, provided the quests would be as epic and immersive as the FREEP's side.

     

     

  • Posted: 4/21/08 10:36 AM
    Lord of the Rings Online
• • So...I Like Monster Play

  • Originally posted by Wrymstrum
    

     

    Originally posted by WSIMike
    

     

    What makes it even more fun is when  you find out the creep you're hunting with is someone you've quested with before... Or someone you've killed, or been killed by, when they were on their main. Of course, once that realization is made, you each become "standard" targets to each other.. almost a way of saying "Hi!"

     

     

     

    Very true.  I love that aspect. 

     

    The reasons people slam PVMP is as follows:

     

    1)  They don't understand what it is.  There is this misconception that when you do monster play you just take control of some random temporary npc.  This might have been the initial concept for pvmp, but it's certainly not what we have now. 

    2)  What they really want is a symmetric, dual faction pvp game where you have two equal sides.  Sometimes it's partly because they like playing the "evil" side, but in general they just think that's the way MMO's should be.  However this type of design really limits the pve content, so I'm extremely happy that LOTRO didn't go that way. 

    3)  They want PVP anywhere, anytime.  Turbine made a strategic decision to not do this.  I understand some of the reasons for wanting PVP anywhere, but there's also some benefits to keeping pvp limited to certain places.   Having pvp be anywhere dilutes all the action.  Concentrating the fighting is one good thing about lotro's approach. 

     

     

     

    MP is nothing more than an arena you can jump in to so you can get some PvP. You then use what other games would consider high end content (realm points more or less) to "level" your monster.

     

    Its fucking weak, and thats the end of it. The monsters need to be balanced to be on par with the freeps, and  not the other way around (that way carebears can still enjoy the PvE, and PvPers can get a decent run with MP).

     

    There is no reason we shouldnt be able to have a 1-50 "normal" monster playing feature. Do quests, get loot, level up, etc. All of the satisfaction of leveling a normal character from 1-50 should be ours in monster play. Instead, we are handed a level 50, and we just hope the freeps are in the area. What rubbish.

     

    This is what happens when carebears make a game. People who believe in a happy world where darkness overcomes the light. I shit on that.

     

    End venom.

  • Posted: 4/21/08 9:38 AM
    Lord of the Rings Online