PvP realm: inherent problems and classic+ solutions

[Darkberry]

"I'll ruin your holiday anyway!"

If you're being hindered while leveling up, change your location. The world of WoW is vast.

[Crococto]

As someone who
a) doesn't understand the fun of killing gray players,
b) disapproves of it to some extent,
c) has been ganked several times in a low-level zone....

I also do NOT agree with you. Before suggesting something like that, try to think about the consequences. Here's just one example of why this change is terrible (and there are many more): one faction organizes a raid on the enemy capital, and their enemies use level one twinks as "human shield", making it impossible to use any AoE damage at all unless you're willing to accept the faction's hostility after the raid.

As has been said, there's no good solution that won't kill open-world PvP, otherwise it would have been implemented already. It's just stupid to try to come up with some kind of hack to make it safe to level up on a PvP server (lol), and at the same time kill high-level PvP in the open world, considering that leveling up takes a few days of playing on your character, and playing at level 60 takes years (lol x2)

[Computer]

I've been writing out some really cool ideas to somewhat mediate the problem of ganking and add some flavorful changes in the spirit of vanilla that make wpvp more exciting. I would love for the community to give feedback on it , it's not finished yet and not everything is planned out. But the gist is to encourage pvp and mediate some of the concerns about ganking. and that is all I can really say. I'll make a separate thread for it in the coming days and i'd love to hear everyones feedback.

- Microchip

[Dragoneye]

I've been writing out some really cool ideas to somewhat mediate the problem of ganking and add some flavorful changes in the spirit of vanilla that make wpvp more exciting. I would love for the community to give feedback on it , it's not finished yet and not everything is planned out. But the gist is to encourage pvp and mediate some of the concerns about ganking. and that is all I can really say. I'll make a separate thread for it in the coming days and i'd love to hear everyones feedback.

- Microchip

Yeah I would love to read your suggestions. Just take note that almost all of these people are from the same guild and discord. They don't want changes and they are incapable of having a civilized discussion, so you are bound to get bad comments.

[Vex]

I agree that ganking low levels can be really frustrating but when you moderate it to such an extent I think it starts to lose the fundamental dynamic of the PvP realm and sucks the fun out of it. Its fun sometimes to come to town and just kill everyone in sight including low levels. It sure sucks to land somewhere and get ganked and corpse camped but that gives you incentive to group up and retaliate which contributes to PvP. IMO I think like wanted posters/bounties could be implemented ingame ( I believe they were at some point in TurtleWow), paying gold to have camper killed/camped etc. That seems like an organic sort of way to deal with it.

[Dragoneye]

I agree that ganking low levels can be really frustrating but when you moderate it to such an extent I think it starts to lose the fundamental dynamic of the PvP realm and sucks the fun out of it. Its fun sometimes to come to town and just kill everyone in sight including low levels. It sure sucks to land somewhere and get ganked and corpse camped but that gives you incentive to group up and retaliate which contributes to PvP. IMO I think like wanted posters/bounties could be implemented ingame ( I believe they were at some point in TurtleWow), paying gold to have camper killed/camped etc. That seems like an organic sort of way to deal with it.

Yeah, wanted posters would be very good and interesting. But up the stakes and do it like this: if you want to gank and get onto the poster, then be ready to loose your own gold when killed. And wanted posters could be made for different kinds of achievements: most honorable kills, most guards killed etc.

And you see, my second proposal wasn't to punish the player that killed a low level once or twice, but if a same player killed 10 low levels in 10 minutes or something like that, he or she should be penalized. The details are important in this context: how to eliminate bad behavior without without eliminating the freedom of the player. The frequent killing of lowbies simply isn't what PvP is about, and it isn't fun for people who ever tried competing in anything in their life. And it simply makes the other side feel bad. It's fun for impotent forty year olds that feel powerful in their life only when they use outdated game mechanics and not for those who want to test their skills.

[Vex]

I agree that ganking low levels can be really frustrating but when you moderate it to such an extent I think it starts to lose the fundamental dynamic of the PvP realm and sucks the fun out of it. Its fun sometimes to come to town and just kill everyone in sight including low levels. It sure sucks to land somewhere and get ganked and corpse camped but that gives you incentive to group up and retaliate which contributes to PvP. IMO I think like wanted posters/bounties could be implemented ingame ( I believe they were at some point in TurtleWow), paying gold to have camper killed/camped etc. That seems like an organic sort of way to deal with it.

Yeah, wanted posters would be very good and interesting. But up the stakes and do it like this: if you want to gank and get onto the poster, then be ready to loose your own gold when killed. And wanted posters could be made for different kinds of achievements: most honorable kills, most guards killed etc.

And you see, my second proposal wasn't to punish the player that killed a low level once or twice, but if a same player killed 10 low levels in 10 minutes or something like that, he or she should be penalized. The details are important in this context: how to eliminate bad behavior without without eliminating the freedom of the player. The frequent killing of lowbies simply isn't what PvP is about, and it isn't fun for people who ever tried competing in anything in their life. And it simply makes the other side feel bad. It's only fun for impotent forty year olds that only feel powerful in their life when they use outdated game mechanics.

I think Bronzebeard has something similar in the sense of you activate the challenge where you enable pvp but also can lose items/gold, but thats something you can opt in or opt out, I might be wrong but something like that. The issue with implementing that into a wanted poster is when you are wanted, you would be involuntarily signed up to lose gold and items, and maybe you also don't even know you have a wanted poster up.

Concerning penalization you mentioned, keep in mind for example there are situations where there is city raid on stormwind or orgrimmar. This was a frequent scenario on Tel Abim. In that case, there is a high probability you would kill a ton of people low lvl and high level in a very short span of time, either willingly or through AoE spells unwillingly because city raids are chaotic and if you enforce the penalization you would be penalized for doing so which is why I don't think thats good.

[Dragoneye]

[/quote]

I think Bronzebeard has something similar in the sense of you activate the challenge where you enable pvp but also can lose items/gold, but thats something you can opt in or opt out, I might be wrong but something like that. The issue with implementing that into a wanted poster is when you are wanted, you would be involuntarily signed up to lose gold and items, and maybe you also don't even know you have a wanted poster up.

Concerning penalization you mentioned, keep in mind for example there are situations where there is city raid on stormwind or orgrimmar. This was a frequent scenario on Tel Abim. In that case, there is a high probability you would kill a ton of people low lvl and high level in a very short span of time, either willingly or through AoE spells unwillingly because city raids are chaotic and if you enforce the penalization you would be penalized for doing so which is why I don't think thats good.
[/quote]

Concerning the first issue: it is simple, players just need to be clearly informed that some actions that are considered bad or risky will result in consequences of being on a wanted poster.

Second issue seems really easy to evade as well. For instance, just make penalization work only in open world and not in cities, or alternatively, make low levels not being able to be attacked without them attacking first in cities.

[Computer]

I've been writing out some really cool ideas to somewhat mediate the problem of ganking and add some flavorful changes in the spirit of vanilla that make wpvp more exciting. I would love for the community to give feedback on it , it's not finished yet and not everything is planned out. But the gist is to encourage pvp and mediate some of the concerns about ganking. and that is all I can really say. I'll make a separate thread for it in the coming days and i'd love to hear everyones feedback.

- Microchip

Yeah I would love to read your suggestions. Just take note that almost all of these people are from the same guild and discord. They don't want changes and they are incapable of having a civilized discussion, so you are bound to get bad comments.

I have posted my thread with my first very rough draft of what I think would be a fun change for wpvp

You can view it here :
https://octowow.st/forum/viewtopic.php?t=396

[Vex]

I think few gold loss would be ok if the person who picked up a bounty kills you but idk. Maybe you get like a debuff: Wanted also so you know you are on a wanted poster in the first place.

You run into another problem here for penalization. Lots of these city fights start outside of city. For example: Alliance is coming to orgrimmar, people in world chat say "alliance is coming get ready", everyone gets out in front of orgrimmar. As you know, inside of orgrimmar is different zone than the front side. Front side would in this case be considered open world and if alliance killed low lvls defending (because lots of times low lvls join too to defend) then the attacking alliance would suffer penalization consequences. This is also why I think this is not implementable here.