Forums

Broken PvP mechanics

Quick find code: 322-323-229-66012020

of 9
Fenforge

Fenforge

Posts: 2,556Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
FisherGaming said:

Answer my question: How will having allies help if they aren't allowed to defend you when you're already under attack by another player?

Your allies could be harvesting resources from the same spot & attack the other player's allies.

It basically breaks down to players hiding behind a npc to avoid PvP combat.

As stated before, magic could override this in Classic, even if both players were in combat with a npc, they could still cast magic on each other.

Magic does seem to be a fair trade, it's not O.P with its hits & requires runes.

Players are always asking for magic to be buffed, & this does seem like a better trade off, rather than magic hitting 65+ dps.


In Classic to, players couldn't teleport whilst in combat, this also had the 10 ticks cool down timer.
MP1 ... ?
Cancer Cure Hits the Market! Car-T Cells Youtube.

31-May-2018 11:30:58

runeage111

runeage111

Posts: 3,084Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
These are not broken mechanics. These are strategies that have actually been voted on. What you are saying is that if a person in the wild and a pker attacks, they should not have any way to get away from you. That is not the way the majority wants it. Why should the game be centered around a tiny minority.

15-Jun-2018 14:44:22

Nikolas10181

Nikolas10181

Posts: 4,486Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Being able to avoid PvP in the wilderness is pretty stupid just because of boxing.

If somebody is hitting 0's consecutively I would say 5 then other players should be able to interrupt them as they are clearly abusing boxing and avoiding the main purpose of the wilderness which is to PvP.

The override I can support but the other things seem like they would cause too many problems.

15-Jun-2018 17:20:05

runeage111

runeage111

Posts: 3,084Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
So you believe that if someone is in the wild he can not have any hope of not dying to you, no matter what. You do not believe anyone should have any strategies that can stop you? Too bad pkers are a tiny minority. Your word is not law.

15-Jun-2018 19:14:37

FisherGaming
Feb Member 2019

FisherGaming

Posts: 4,101Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Nikolas10181 said:
If somebody is hitting 0's consecutively I would say 5 then other players should be able to interrupt them as they are clearly abusing boxing and avoiding the main purpose of the wilderness which is to PvP.
It's not "abuse." That's just the way the game mechanics work.

So a streak of unlucky hits, five 0's in a row, and suddenly single-combat areas mean nothing? Why even make the distinction between single-combat and multi-combat zones if players can just ignore that distinction?

If the main purpose of the wilderness were to PvP, you think there'd be a single bit of PvP content in there, yet everything in the wilderness is non-PvP content (exception for Bounty Hunter, but that's its own world).
There'd be no need for 3rd party clients if the default one was decent. I vote no to all non-PvP Wilderness updates, and yes to all PvP Wilderness updates. If you want to revive the wilderness, encourage players to PvP, not lure them to the Wilderness to be victims.

15-Jun-2018 20:00:08

Nikolas10181

Nikolas10181

Posts: 4,486Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
FisherGaming said:
Nikolas10181 said:
If somebody is hitting 0's consecutively I would say 5 then other players should be able to interrupt them as they are clearly abusing boxing and avoiding the main purpose of the wilderness which is to PvP.
It's not "abuse." That's just the way the game mechanics work.

So a streak of unlucky hits, five 0's in a row, and suddenly single-combat areas mean nothing? Why even make the distinction between single-combat and multi-combat zones if players can just ignore that distinction?

If the main purpose of the wilderness were to PvP, you think there'd be a single bit of PvP content in there, yet everything in the wilderness is non-PvP content (exception for Bounty Hunter, but that's its own world).


Splashing was how the game mechanics worked yet we changed that because it was being abused just because it's how it is in the game doesn't mean it isn't screwed up. You must not PvP because you will never hit five 0's in a row unless you're boxing. Black chins wouldn't exist if they weren't in the wilderness they were put there to encourage pking over something if it was non PvP content it would have been outside the wild, but it's not.

I honestly would love it if the wilderness got content that was actually for PvP because right now in its current state PvP sucks the only reason to do it is money and PvM destroys pking for that and it's almost entirely risk free. I always wanted to see a player killcount so pkers could actually brag about something and have a reason to go after everybody they see it's little things like this that add to the fun.

15-Jun-2018 20:12:12

FisherGaming
Feb Member 2019

FisherGaming

Posts: 4,101Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Nikolas10181 said:
Splashing was how the game mechanics worked yet we changed that because it was being abused just because it's how it is in the game doesn't mean it isn't screwed up.
Difference being splashing was being used to gain experience while actually AFK for extended periods of time. That's when it became a matter of game integrity -- REAL integrity, not the kind of "integrity" PKers like to talk about.

Besides, splashing itself was not removed, so that's not exactly a good example.

Nikolas10181 said:
You must not PvP because you will never hit five 0's in a row unless you're boxing.
You don't tend to "box" against another player.

Furthermore, considering the random nature of the game, it is entirely possible you just fail to hit the monster five times in a row, and then a player can just attack you, even if you weren't trying to "box."

To say "you will never hit five 0's in a row unless you're boxing" is inaccurate. What if, for example, you were attacking a Defence pure with Dinh's Bulwark and full Jisticiar? You would easily hit five 0's in a row.

Also, I like how you ignored the actual point of what I said, which is:

Why are you trying to remove the distinction between single-combat and multi-combat zones by allowing players to just attack someone who is already in combat?

Why make the distinction between single and multi-combat zones if players can just ignore it?

Nikolas10181 said:
if it was non PvP content it would have been outside the wild, but it's not.
Are black chinchompas players? No? Then it's not PvP content.

Being in a zone that allows PvP doesn't make the content itself PvP.

Nikolas10181 said:
I honestly would love it if the wilderness got content that was actually for PvP
Me too. This isn't it, though.
There'd be no need for 3rd party clients if the default one was decent. I vote no to all non-PvP Wilderness updates, and yes to all PvP Wilderness updates. If you want to revive the wilderness, encourage players to PvP, not lure them to the Wilderness to be victims.

15-Jun-2018 20:23:58

Quick find code: 322-323-229-66012020Back to Top