Anti PK Zerg Mechanics Re-posted**

[wreckognize]

UOAC had a similar system to this and removed it after a few weeks.. so why would we go down a road they've already found to be too rocky?

Being the professionals they are, right? I'm sure it wasn't coded the way I've detailed in the OP, which I would guess you haven't even read because the thought of such an incredible game-breaker like staying spread out a bit is way more effort than you're willing to put in for the sake of better quality PvP in a 20 year old game that you've already taken the time to reduce to one button on your mouse.

A good counter-argument here would be to ask why you would think it's wise to go down the same road uoforever drove off of, especially since 90% of their playerbase came to UO:F 2 years ago for the better mechanics that we had at the time, just to cater to the 10% that shit where they ate?

 

[stunoma.]

Dunno the reason I continued to play this game was the pvp mechanics. If you play your cards right you can get out of most Zerg situations. That's what is great about this game. There's nothing that needs to be changed other than certain attitudes amongst players. That is really the only problem with the UO is the community. People have too strong of egos and have to play the game certain ways whether it's zerging or cheetzzz. Either way the game is fine the way it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MrTodd]

Dunno the reason I continued to play this game was the pvp mechanics. If you play your cards right you can get out of most Zerg situations. That's what is great about this game. There's nothing that needs to be changed other than certain attitudes amongst players. That is really the only problem with the UO is the community. People have too strong of egos and have to play the game certain ways whether it's zerging or cheetzzz. Either way the game is fine the way it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ this

Sent from my mobile

 

[GluttonySDS]

. It looks like we've lost bobby, a player here, over the same principle that I am discussing now. It won't be the last time unless people get their heads out of their asses and do what's right for the shard.

Actually bobby quit because he got caught cheating and knew he would never be able to forum spam again... keep in mind his guild was one of the largest zergs on the shard, typically fielding 10+ people during euro time.

Stop trolling to be contrarian

 

[GluttonySDS]

It's true, most of the MMO's Ive played have one hit kills, coming from one player. Not like UO where you need at least two people to sync. 2v2's or 3v3's in UO is pretty fun. Actually I think a 5% damage reduction in a 3v3 is fitting, since it just means you have to be that much more skilled to get the kill. and when one player goes down, the other two are back up to max dmg, so they still have a chance to even the numbers, if they don't cave under pressure, that is.

Its hilarious to see you speak to 2v2 or 3v3 when you most likely have no idea how they actually work with decent players.... keep shooting arrows from your house though.

We're not talking about making one person able to stand up against 10 here, it's more like making 5 or 6 people able to stand up against ten, and it gets to the point where you probably just don't want to have more than 10 people on one screen. In reality people could still roll champs in a group of 20, and split offscreen into a few smaller groups so it's not like I'm trying to make people reform guilds or anything. Just trying to limit the 20 douchebags on one screen scenario that kills servers.

EQMS hasnt had 20 people online since march or april when faction base fights were still a thing... keep in mind theres video of us losing a 20v9 vs. tech9..... the great thing about UO is, if youre skilled enough you can easily beat newbs 5v10. How would you know this though when all of your PVP is done on the forums and not in game?

 

[MrTodd]

It's true, most of the MMO's Ive played have one hit kills, coming from one player. Not like UO where you need at least two people to sync. 2v2's or 3v3's in UO is pretty fun. Actually I think a 5% damage reduction in a 3v3 is fitting, since it just means you have to be that much more skilled to get the kill. and when one player goes down, the other two are back up to max dmg, so they still have a chance to even the numbers, if they don't cave under pressure, that is.

We're not talking about making one person able to stand up against 10 here, it's more like making 5 or 6 people able to stand up against ten, and it gets to the point where you probably just don't want to have more than 10 people on one screen. In reality people could still roll champs in a group of 20, and split offscreen into a few smaller groups so it's not like I'm trying to make people reform guilds or anything. Just trying to limit the 20 douchebags on one screen scenario that kills servers.

What makes the game fun, for me at least, is that in most, if not all, mmos, is the capability to run in great numbers and pwn anything that crosses it's path, if you don't feel like that, then uo isn't the game for you, or, you could go to a trammel server and never worry about pvp.

And let's be honest here, calling zerg on something is an excuse of one's poor capability to be social and make virtual friends, or even temporary allies...

Sent from my mobile

 

[wreckognize]

@GluttonySDS It's funny since the last 2v2 I entered was with some random no-namer and we still pwnd UO's finest players who were all present for said turny. I guess the most embarrassing part was how I played an archer and didn't move the entire time, as if I were standing on a rooftop shooting fish in a barrel. I never got the promised statue at the docks, but I still have the trophy if you want to see it.

@stunoma. I proposed damage mitigation with the intention of making group PvP more diverse and challenging for all these big talkers, while at the same time making things a little less challenging for newer players who suffer because of the harsh learning curve. The truth is the common UO player these days isn't looking for a challenge at all. Its nice you think the game is fine the way it is. I also remember 2 years ago when you paged the GMs because I dragged half the spawn in Khaldun to the entrance and you died. I never see any of you guys on the hard-mode oldschool t2a servers.. I guess the only way you'll log on is if somebody hosts a fancy UO:R based shard that caters to mediocre players who aren't looking for a challenge and has the exact same spell damage as it has for the last 10 years. Honestly if ebolt damage is 1 point higher or lower hordes of you newbies would cry bloody murder and quit that same day.

I don't see any reason why not to fix the noto changes so that blues can recall if they're getting zerged. Face it, the noto changes are nothing but a punishment for anyone who isn't ready to be red but still wants to learn to PvP and serves as nothing but a means of forcing people to only PvP in large group settings.

It's as lazy as simply adding HP to a mob to make it more challenging, and technically it *is* more challenging, and blue PKing doesn't get complained about as much because it's no longer the biggest issue, and people are now playing in larger than before groups so I guess all the changes are a 100% success and couldn't possibly have any downside just because the initial goals were realized.

 

[MrTodd]

I don't see any reason why not to fix the noto changes so that blues can recall if they're getting zerged. Face it, the noto changes are nothing but a punishment for anyone who isn't ready to be red but still wants to learn to PvP and serves as nothing but a means of forcing people to only PvP in large group settings.

This is the biggest BS ever. Period.

If a player have a count, it's because they are ready for pvp. There's no accidental murder count, since the one who got killed will be prompted for reporting the murder, so there's no such as friendly murder count.

And as stated before in another thread, 60 hours of actual gameplay in young status (without loot drop upon death, not being able to be attacked) is enough for someone to learn the game properly.

The main reason on the notoriety changes are: if you good enough to kill, you good enough to face the consequences. That's simple.

And the changes proposed by you only benefits the agressor, such as notoriety pkers, since he would kill someone, get flagged by more ppl, run away, wait for the aggressor timer runs and recall for safety, even after being flagged and being chased.

The thing is: you have 6 characters slots, make a red and deal with the risk of temporary stat loss, or, do like the most of ppl do, get 6 blues and have counts on them and recall if you sense danger. Or, whine about it on the forums.

Sent from my mobile

 

[Bromista]

What happened here is that you've been trolled. Hanes' comments are never to be taken seriously. This is a reaction thread and nothing more. While overall it has probably not went the way he hoped it to, as evidenced by the fact that this is the second time he posted it with 1800 edits GimpCent style, we need to make sure that any further replies trend towards a complete disregard for the suggestion and keep it as off-topic as possible.

I troll the shit out of people. But when it's time to get serious people reading my posts tend to understand that based on the language that is used, the presentation, and the thorough nature of the suggestion or idea making sure to not leave gaping holes so that it's difficult (for the most part) to form an argument against.

@K A Z bring back the Rick James av plz and ty.

 

[Deadpool]

1800 edits GimpCent style

Man I miss that. I'd love seeing the Last Edited thing change 20 times in an hour.

 

[Bromista]

I am pretty bad about it because I'm borderline OCD.

But god damn.