Drks in PvP?

[TeH-Magus]

yeah its gonna b more like Helbreath, where its nation vs nation


thats fun too (i played HB)

[Reneir]

Ok, so i understood that it was nation vs nation but what exaactly does that mean? Indirect competition? Or can we please please please fight other players on occasion?

Still clueless as to hate, but i shan't whine about that again...

[Thylteev]

Oh, it will definitely be against other players, hence the PvP - player vs. player.

[Boogie]

From what I have read, hate basically means who the monster is attacking at the moment. Whoever is doing the most dmg they get hate and the monster will attack them.

[kenoshi]

Sigh.

PvP != PK

As in, Player versus Player does not equal to Player Kill/Killing. They specific said there is NO PLAYER KILLING.

Those are two different things. Its just assumed in most MMORPGs that PvP = PK.

Blame Everquest's misuse of the original term.

There is no Player Killing, only Player vs Player, so those of you looking forward to actually killing another player, forget it.

I doubt SE would want to do that anyway, because the classes are seriously unbalanced for PK. As it is, most of the popular melee class combos wouldn't last if it comes down to that, they'd get seriously, seriously owned by mages and beastmasters.

The story line wouldn't allow for it anyway. If anything, I'd bet its an extended version of the conquest system, with more tangible rewards.

Anyway, I guess we'll just have to see.

[Thylteev]

Well, just as mages would hit melee attackers very hard, melee attackers would hit mages just as hard. Mages have high magical defense and low physical defense. Melee attackers have high pysical defense and low magical defense. I don't see the imbalance. It's been stated at the press conference that the PvP will be tied into the conquest system. My friend translated part of the Japanese news site for me. It said that you would fight using Burning Circles and that you'd only be able to fight somebody your level (or near, I'm supposing).

[GraveCross]

DRK would do alright in PvP, but it would hardly be the best I think.

Best would be BLM, Ranger, and Beast.

BLM has insane nuking power, although he can't take too much damage, and has to rest every so often, he can kill guys from range without much problem.

Ranger is like a BLM, except maybe even stronger. While he probably won't kill as fast, he will be doing more damage then any other meele, at a range farther then them, plus he doesn't have to rest to recover MP (like a BLM) because shooting arrows only requires arrows. Probably the strongest PvP class.

Beasts are strong because well, they have Beasts with them, making them two effective fighter units out on the field, which means instead of just one guy, you need to deal with 2, which is pretty damn hard in a 1 vs 1 situation.

Like DAoC though, when/if PvP is implemented, it will probably consist of Parties vs Parties, rather then just 1vs1 combat. Because when a Party encounters that solo guy on the playing field, that solo guy has almost no chance of survival.

[Razz]

Supposedly leaked info from a supposed GM said it's only 3v3 or 6v6. Anything more and it's really difficult to keep it balanced.

[zokathra]

To the daoc single vs party my lvl 50 koble shaman raped the shit out of almost any party AoE

[simlo]

Well guys stop thinking that mages can only dish out direct dmg. A good mage can probably take on 2-3 diff guys at same time if area sleep lands. Mages hav the most utility in the game. Drk's arent too bad, they hav some spells up their sleeves too. Pvp is gonna be similar to DAOC i reckon. Main reason a group would win is good crowd control, after that its just picking them off one by one.

[Antwan_3000]

DRK would do alright in PvP, but it would hardly be the best I think.

Best would be BLM, Ranger, and Beast.

BLM has insane nuking power, although he can't take too much damage, and has to rest every so often, he can kill guys from range without much problem.

Ranger is like a BLM, except maybe even stronger. While he probably won't kill as fast, he will be doing more damage then any other meele, at a range farther then them, plus he doesn't have to rest to recover MP (like a BLM) because shooting arrows only requires arrows. Probably the strongest PvP class.

Beasts are strong because well, they have Beasts with them, making them two effective fighter units out on the field, which means instead of just one guy, you need to deal with 2, which is pretty damn hard in a 1 vs 1 situation.

Like DAoC though, when/if PvP is implemented, it will probably consist of Parties vs Parties, rather then just 1vs1 combat. Because when a Party encounters that solo guy on the playing field, that solo guy has almost no chance of survival.

actually, i think DRK will do just fine in those situations..

the advantages you mentioned for BLM and Rangers were mostly based on ranged attacks. which is all about positioning. if the fight began at close range (which is very possible), the DRK could have the advantage. and this is not to mention the fact that DRK have a high magic resistance compared to other melee...

and as far as BST are concerned, the DRK has a BIND spell. he could simply bind the pet or put it to sleep (depending on what beast the BST has tamed). at that point, the DRK would make short work of the BST...

the only way for the BST to break the bind or sleep (to my knowledge) would be for him to attack his own pet. if DRK feels this will be the case (and if its even possible), the DRK would be better served to unleash a full onslaught on the BST first and ignore the pet. after the BST is dead (and hopefully you've survived the 2-on-1 action thus far), the DRK could then bind the pet and escape death...

i think a DRK/WAR would do very good in PvP....

[Thylteev]

This is something I just thought about. I think, regardless of job classes, that people will have a very hard time with PvP in the beginning. The whole game their strategy has been based on everybody fighting one monster. Now, it would be people fighting an equal amount of other people.

[Greywen]

Originally posted by kenoshi
Sigh.

PvP != PK

As in, Player versus Player does not equal to Player Kill/Killing. They specific said there is NO PLAYER KILLING.

Those are two different things. Its just assumed in most MMORPGs that PvP = PK.

Blame Everquest's misuse of the original term.

There is no Player Killing, only Player vs Player, so those of you looking forward to actually killing another player, forget it.

I doubt SE would want to do that anyway, because the classes are seriously unbalanced for PK. As it is, most of the popular melee class combos wouldn't last if it comes down to that, they'd get seriously, seriously owned by mages and beastmasters.

The story line wouldn't allow for it anyway. If anything, I'd bet its an extended version of the conquest system, with more tangible rewards.

Anyway, I guess we'll just have to see.

Dont know why you say blame EQ you seem miss informed yourself PK has meaning depending on the game just because it means a certain thing in one doesnt mean it doesnt in another. In daoc the non PvP servers there was no PK where as PK in daoc was the form of being killed or attacked without wanting to / griefed (the pvp server was PK). The normal servers where non PK pvp which was simply concentual(going into a frontier is you implying concent) PvP you did fight AND kill other players that does not make it PK style.

[Voodoo187]

Originally posted by zokathra
To the daoc single vs party my lvl 50 koble shaman raped the shit out of almost any party AoE

Ok me and you both can agree that DAoC was the most FU*$KED up unbalanced game ever created. It was like Mythic had their thumb up their @ss when they made it.