LuxunS

Thanks for the shout-out.

You right. I haven't been in RV since my ladder team fell apart almost exactly a year ago to the day. There hasn't been a single change to PvP (change or bug fix) since I stopped playing, so what's the point?

A properly built VEAT should provide disruption, while still contributing on spikes in a team setting. Leading with shatter armor on a spike is hell to heal through if properly timed.

If this is true, unless the IOs work exemplared down to their original level or their full normal level range, it's a silly oversight by the developers.

What of the people who build characters to be functional at level 30 or mid-range? If boosters level IOs, they would ruins those builds. Their only usefulness in that case is to only use them on purples, if that's even possible.

This guy knows his stuff.

Slash followed by Shatter armor. Unless something has changed since I stopped pvping, Shatter armor doesn't crit from hide.

Which at this point looks like its never going to happen; two rounds of incarnates and we haven't been asked how it's affecting PvP at all. If they were going to do it, they should have done testing after alpha was released and again with the next 4. Broad, sweeping changes worked so well the first time....

Pessimism aside, an open PvP server would be awesome and perhaps breath a little bit of extra life and flavor into a repetitive game. If this idea ever was on the table, there are a few issues that have to be overcome for it to be successful.

1. Size of the game world vs player population. Currently there are 3-6 zones in each level range where someone could do missions or street-sweep. This would have to be consolidate to get any actual pvp going.

2. PvP ruleset kills PvE. Unfortunately I13 pretty much killed any chance of mixed pvp/pve content. By essentially splitting pvp and pve into 2 separate games, it would be difficult to bring them back together.

3. PvP rewards are not good enough. For a PvP server it should be a viable option to level through PvP. That's pretty much impossible with the way the reward system works.

Ideally if I had the power, this is my version of a PvP server...

- Everyone has to make a new character, upon character creation you choose one of 3 sides to fight for. (Resistance/Hero, Villain, or Loyalist) 3 sides instead of 2 because in my experience 3 sides find a better balance among player numbers; any less usually ends up lopsided, any more diluted.

- All characters start and progress through the same zones to encourage PvP and prevent spreading of the population. A good progression might start in the new galaxy city, followed by the hollows, then Praetoria to 20, Faultline to 25, Dark Astoria to 29, St. Martial to 34, 35-39 RWZ, 40-44 Grandville, 45+ Peregrine. The level range in a zone should be locked, ie you can't get into a zone until you're within the proper range, and exemplared if you're above the range. These zones were chosen for their appropriate size, story-line significance, or cool factor. Zone selection doesn't really matter, as long as it's limited.

- There should be 3 safe areas, Pocket D and Ouroboros, and your SG Base, that's it. Some other mandatory ones are hospitals should be like the villain one in WB, and that no power room in the AEs. Remove any drones from the other areas. This way the population polices itself. There is AE if you want to pl someone or farm, but there can always be someone waiting for you.

- Strike and Task forces should be added to the LFG tool. Any mission that requires a zone not available on the PvP server should be accessed through ourobors crystals. Any hunt missions on TFs should be removed, because they're pointless anyway.

- Add a PvP queue to the LFG tool. This allows a chance you'll randomly be ported into someone else's mission. PvP in this manner should always consist of equal numbers; if you're solo, you'll only get a solo player in your mission, etc. If you defeat the mission holder, you are teleported out of the mission. If you are defeated within your own mission, you will not have another random player enter during that mission (to prevent griefing but not making mission soloing a completely safe route). The same rule applies per mission in a strike force. If random enemies enter your mission, the mission cannot be completed until those enemes, or yourself are defeated.

- Killing a player should net rewards equal to a mission completion bonus. This makes leveling through PvP viable.

- The current PvP ruleset would have to be heavily modified or removed to allow for fun play. Also, until its properly tested and balanced for pvp, incarnate abilities/powers should be suspended.

At least, that's what I think. But i'm a noob.

I'll never be on your level :/

The reason they are not labeled as pvp changes, is because... most of them aren't PvP changes. They are PvE changes that trickled down. Not meaning to be negative, half of the decent changes came with silly ones that negated their benefit. Bug Fixes: A few months back the immobilization protection was fixed on Widow's IW, it no longer suppresses while being held. Awesome! Except that it was never immobilize protection that mattered it was the knockback protection; the toons still get destroyed by anything mind/. Defenders get hibernate - Great; except now scrappers get it too? Incarnates, don't even talk about them in pvp. AFAIK no PvPers were invited into closed betas to test the affects on these things. During i18 closed, there wasn't even enough PvPers to get together to test any of it (if you don't believe me, how did the damage of kinetic melee get overlooked?). I saw one other person who regularly participated in PvP while I was in closed beta. Same goes for i20, except now theres going to be 4 more incarnate slots opening up. None of this stuff has been tested in PvP and I wouldn't be surprised if some if it is terribly broken.

DR numbers are not cryptic, there is a nice guide that explains how it works. A better word is abstruse; 3 minutes of searching can net you an explanation, its comprehension where the problem lies. Its amusing that you mention you like the way mez works and how there is skill in managing inspirations in the following sentence. Kinda like how you used to have to manage break-frees against mezzers, but now they do absolutely nothing? There is no skill to using heals when HD is on, its simply a matter of counting out loud to when your heal will be effective again, that's not considered a skill past kindergarten. Effective healers don't just heal when its recharged. An Empath that APs simply because it recharges is a dead Empath.

This is wrong wrong wrong and I've called you out on it before. You not wanting to step up in the community is your own problem; don't act oblivious to the people who have previously and still are. In the past year there has been a league, a ladder, and now another league, all organized and run by the community. Where were you during any of this? Don't fall back on the "I'm not a hardcore PvPer" because last year's league had a d6 team for non-hardcores/newbies and people interested in learning PvP.

You accuse the community of waiting for someone to fix it? There have been many posts and discussions about how to fix pvp. There is a thread containing many of the bugs. People fill bug reports constantly in-game, and its all been ignored. You say that the community only projects their own wishes? Do you really think we all want to be playing psi blasters? The reason all the things I mentioned previously happened is because we want something more in line with balance. Whether you want to acknowledge it or not pre-i13 was more balanced than the current system. You speak of being able to make any toon 'work'; that was more possible before the PvP changes. Maybe you don't know because you're not a numbers guy, but you can't be completely ignorant as you mentioned your ill/ff. The damage mitigation offered by defenses is far behind resistances, shield and mez protection buffers have little use. With HD on healers have little impact in organized team situations. You say that you can start with a concept and be effective, how is that possible when 1/4 of the game's powersets are now ineffective in PvP?

Real Talk?

Get over yourself. Your ideas about what works and doesn't work in PvP are not ground-breaking, inventive, or ingenious. Many of the people here spend hours upon hours leveling toons, equipping them, and testing them in different mixes of powersets, archetypes, and team makeups. People aren't locked into these few PvP fotm builds because they're not creative, they do it because its most effective and at its core PvP is a competition.

You constantly insult members here. Many of these people are better players than you or I and several of them (myself included) have a far better understanding of game systems than you do. You say you'll be happy to discuss your views in other threads, but often you come and attack on the grounds that we're closed-minded and can't see the beauty of these changes. But you never bring any facts with you, its just talk. You haven't made any meaningful contributions. The real fact is, the community here is what has been keeping PvP alive. There was good feedback given during the i-13 beta, and after it was released people still pushed for changes that would benefit the players. Contributors want and have always wanted a balanced fun, experience. Even the veteran players who have been jerked around for years and the more 'discordant' members of the community have given some decent feedback in Z's threads.

I have no idea what those guys are talking about.

Forts were never at a disadvantage from willpower scrappers. Not during i12, i13, or now. When i13 was released I could roll my face on the keyboard and kill a willpower scrapper. I think you meant Ice/SS Tanks. They had roughly the same defensive and offensive capabilities as forts, but had a lot more hit points, a self heal, an end drain, a taunt with -range, and hibernate built into their primary/secondary sets.

As per my understanding, elusivity was your idea, and subsequently I bow to your knowledge of how it was proposed and should have been implemented. My number was simply suggested as it would bring the damage mitigation of defenses more in line with those of resistances. Also, it is a change that developers might be willing to make, as the value has already been changed in the past; it would be less work that completely redoing the mechanic as you suggest. Ideally your proposal seems a much better route, but I'd imagine would require more development time invested.