suggestion - cancel champ option

[shipwrek]

a way for the person who starts a champ to stop if he/she chooses.

This will discourage douche guilds from stepping in at the last moment and reaping the effort someone else put into it, and will make champs actually worth spending the time on again.

It's not my idea, but I thought it was a good one.

 

[Deadpool]

That could end badly, though, too, if someone started a champ and then decides to stop it right at the end, thus ruining the whole thing for people participating who aren't douches.

 

[shipwrek]

That could end badly, though, too, if someone started a champ and then decides to stop it right at the end, thus ruining the whole thing for people participating who aren't douches.

I'm willing to bet that would happen less than the latter. In the 3 months I've been on UOF I've participated in about 5 champs. Only got to finish one without it being raided right before it ended. In the last one, folks were saying people were cheating with something called multiclienting... which I have no clue about, but if true, sucks even more. Was just a huge waste of time.

 

[GluttonySDS]

Join a guild that does champs.... EQMS is always recruiting, not sure about the other ones though.

 

[Deadpool]

I'm willing to bet that would happen less than the latter. In the 3 months I've been on UOF I've participated in about 5 champs. Only got to finish one without it being raided right before it ended. In the last one, folks were saying people were cheating with something called multiclienting... which I have no clue about, but if true, sucks even more. Was just a huge waste of time.

Meaning they have more than one client open using multiple characters in the champ which they aren't allowed to actually do. I see what you mean, I'm also saying, though, it could be abused too. Never put stuff like that past people here.

 

[Arch Enemy]

Dislike. It takes 4 people to start a champ anyway. One person can't do it alone.

 

[[Legato]]

-1

You should have a fat enough group to complete a champ, and that also means defend a champ. reds exist for a reason. defend/defeat them. this aint trammel land

 

[Keltonator]

 

[shipwrek]

-1

You should have a fat enough group to complete a champ, and that also means defend a champ. reds exist for a reason. defend/defeat them. this aint trammel land

ah ok.. so before a guild can do a champ they have to be 'fat' enough to have enough pve'ers to clear the spawn levels, and have enough pvp'er capable of clearing the 2 or 3 guilds that jump in as soon as the boss spawns that clear the PVE folks.

or just resign yourself to the probability you will spend a hour or two clearing for some other group.

got it. Thanks for the insight.

 

[[Legato]]

ah ok.. so before a guild can do a champ they have to be 'fat' enough to have enough pve'ers to clear the spawn levels, and have enough pvp'er capable of clearing the 2 or 3 guilds that jump in as soon as the boss spawns that clear the PVE folks.

or just resign yourself to the probability you will spend a hour or two clearing for some other group.

got it. Thanks for the insight.

See, you're a quick learner. You get it /s

Some parts of this (end)game are more suited for larger groups of people. Thats the beauty of an open ended sandbox mmorpg. You cant predict what always happens. You want big rewards, you have to take big risks, which just might happen to be fighting off a champ spawn from a group of reds.

 

[shipwrek]

See, you're a quick learner. You get it /s

Some parts of this (end)game are more suited for larger groups of people. Thats the beauty of an open ended sandbox mmorpg. You cant predict what always happens. You want big rewards, you have to take big risks, which just might happen to be fighting off a champ spawn from a group of reds.

you are aware, this is a single server, with a small population, running a 20 year old game, right? I have to admit, this is the first time I've heard of lame douchebaggery as being "beauty". To each his own.

Just a suggestion. I didn't expect the tools that are used to jumping PVE folks for a low risk reward to like it.

 

[[Legato]]

If you cant see the beauty in an amazing 20 year old sandbox game, then maybe this isnt the game for you.

And the beauty i speak of isnt zerging but rather the freedom to do or not do whatever you want. I feel most here would agree.

 

[shipwrek]

If you cant see the beauty in an amazing 20 year old sandbox game, then maybe this isnt the game for you.

And the beauty i speak of isnt zerging but rather the freedom to do or not do whatever you want. I feel most here would agree.

Perhaps I misunderstood you but I didn't see it like that. To me it looked like you were all for the "endgame" burden of challenge being all well and good for the PVE folk doing the champion event, while protesting any change to the "easymode", low risk (high reward) opportunity for a pk group to wait for the mobs to be cleared then easily pick off some people not geared or skilled for PVP.

I'm just suggesting eliminate some of the easymode. Death to trammel and all that happy horseshit. You against that?

PKs still get to kill and loot the blues that stay and fight or can't escape, but they loose the free champ loot and get to deal with lvl one respawning. Great fun for all.

 

[The Gandin]

Not a good idea. Too many ways to abuse and champs shouldn't be limited just because. If reds want to show up and kill people, they can, that's the whole point. I'd concentrate more on learning how to defend a champ. It's not that difficult.

 

[shipwrek]

Never suggested keeping reds or anyone else from PVP or PKing.

I'm just suggesting a feature to let the person who started it, reset it.

Doesn't block invaders or prevent another group from taking over and completing the champ.... From level one.

Plus it would be a hoot to piss off the easymode reds, eh?