No PvP Honor System coming

[Arioch]

From Tyren on the official forums (http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?FN=wow-general&T=124300&P=1):

The dishonorable system is already in the game for civilian NPCs. You cannot get a dishonorable kill for killing a fellow player.

[snip]

1. Due to the Alliance, Horde and Contested areas, you can only really be PKed once you are in your 20s. Thus you have a good amount of time to learn the ropes of your class and if the need should arise, be able to escape certain situations.
2. The death penalty is neglible, thus the worst thing that can happen is to lose some time.

In reality a penalty system gives rise to griefing and baiting. A penalty system would discourage PvP rather than make it more fair across the board.

Instead of penalizing "bad" behavior, we want to encourage good behavior through a reward system.

[snip]

The introduction of a PvP penalty system opens the doors to many "what if" situations.

Lets say theres a mass PvP raid with players of all levels. Are you forced to watch who you are attacking for fear that killing those players will result in a penalty?

What if a lower level player is walking around buffing players who do not have a PvP flag. So lets say he sits there and buffs people prior to fights and after they rezz. You cannot touch that person because they are not flagged for PvP.

What if a lower level player decides it'd be fun to follow you around everywhere but not attack you to make a nuisance of himself.

The system is currently very wide open. But it's a more natural system of PvP, rather than try to figure out who you can attack and who you can't and what are the consequences. So Blizzard lied to us again, and those of use who chose PvP servers based on the promises of Honor systems and gank control really got screwed. Interesting that they didn't mention it. If I had known Blizzard was going to change their minds about this, I would never have chosen a PvP server. Ganking on Tichondrius is almost unbearable.

From the PvP article (http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/pvp/pvp-article.html) on the official site:

Honor is a concept that is central to our PvP ranking system. There are honorable kills and there are dishonorable kills. You earn honor for killing opponents at or near your level, and more honor still if you kill a higher level player character, as opposed to an NPC. There are also dishonorable kills, and these would include killing lower level PCs and NPCs, and especially non-aggressive NPCs like gryphon masters and quest givers. If you repeatedly make dishonorable kills, you'll eventually go into the negative ranks, and lose experience and become attackable on sight by both factions. Our intention is to punish dishonorable behavior and reward honorable PvP play.

[ParraCida]

Ouch, very very bad. Sorry blizzard, but there will always be grievers and exploiters, whatever you're going to do. What blizzard is describing is valid, but I know that people are capable of dedicating themselves for months on end to grieving as many players as possible. Now there is nothing to stand in their way, blizzard just opened the floodgates. I was planning on playing on a PvP server once the game gets out in europe, because pvp was bound to certain rules and had meaning.

Dropped the ball, changed their minds to late, bad decision. Go blizzard, the more we progress the more you're ****ing things up. Ah well, it had to happen sometime.

[Rio Darkblade]

It's not that bad, they are still going to have rewards, but no penalties, they make some valid points and all. They should have told us earlier though.

[Squarebob Spongepants]

That's the kind of information they should release before launch :grrr:

_______________________________

Slowly but steadily going for 2000+ posts :xgrin:

[1have2much3time]

If I had known Blizzard was going to change their minds about this, I would never have chosen a PvP server.
Ouch. The reason i intend to play a PvP server is because i thought Blizzard were gonna move forward on Player vs Player rules, not backtrack and just leave it as it is, which just seems lazy to me. I figured by the time the game comes out in Europe they'd be a nice balanced set of rules, honour system and all, for a good PvP server experience.

If they leave the PvP servers as they are, i'll seriously be thinking about playing on a blue server.

So now, Blizzard, the company who "don't like to release information about their games early incase they have to pull it" (paraphrased), have now added the honor system to the list of no shows...


Heroes
Battlegrounds
Honor System
Weather

I can live without weather but the other 3 are major parts of the game that have been pulled/postponed. Nice.

~1have2much3time

[SadaraK]

Ouch. The reason i intend to play a PvP server is because i thought Blizzard were gonna move forward on Player vs Player rules, not backtrack and just leave it as it is, which just seems lazy to me. I figured by the time the game comes out in Europe they'd be a nice balanced set of rules, honour system and all, for a good PvP server experience.

If they leave the PvP servers as they are, i'll seriously be thinking about playing on a blue server.

So now, Blizzard, the company who "don't like to release information about their games early incase they have to pull it" (paraphrased), have now added the honor system to the list of no shows...


Heroes
Battlegrounds
Honor System
Weather

I can live without weather but the other 3 are major parts of the game that have been pulled/postponed. Nice.

~1have2much3time

I thought weather was definately going to be put in...

Anyway, this is bad (and I am definately going to be on a PvE server now) but their explanation is very valid. I think the best thing to say is: What would you do about it? It seems like they hit a brick wall tring to figure it out.

That said, they really should have said this before the US release, there will be alot of level 30 americans not wanting to be on the server they are on now and wont want to change...

I think the most constructive solution would be to try and figure out a way to get around this and suggest it. Not that I care that much now, as PvE still has a very good PvP system working, easily good enough to get the rushes from raids and such.

[degnar]

The problem is exactly what blizz stated. How do you separate "dishonorable" lowbie kills from "justified" kills? Wouldn't you hate it just as much if someone was harassing you, but you could not touch them due to the honor system? The honor system would introduce as many problems as it might solve.

They need some sort of system that activates after too much ganking... allow lowbies to get caught in crossfire, squished if they are harrassing, etc. But after a few (5? 10?) repeats, some sort of elite guard is summoned to hunt down the ganker. And any lowbie that buffs/helps should count as attacking (i.e. no protection).

Let people do what they want... in general. Occasionally killing people lower than you is fine (part of the game, IMO). Camping corpses or lowbie areas is just wrong.

[Arioch]

Although I think the Blizzard stance is simply the easy way out (leave it unregulated), it's certainly a valid viewpoint... any system can be abused. The problem is that they didn't announce this change in plans, and I spent a whole week building a level 25 character on a PvP server believing that controls were going to be added. Now I have the choice of starting over on a PvE server or trying to tolerate constant ganking. It's just not a very good choice... after two beta periods, I'm really tired of starting over.

And I don't think it's impossible to implement a good honorable PvP system. If a character is, say 10 levels below you, then that character could simply be not marked as PvP to you, unless he chooses to attack you first, just like in the non-contested zones. So if a lowbie "harasses" you, by attacking you or healing/buffing another PvPer, then he's marked for PvP and you can kill him. And ganking... if you're in combat with a mob and someone attacks you, that's easy to detect. These problems are not that hard to solve... Blizzard is just being lazy.

[ParraCida]

Several people already suggested a very easy way around the problems blizzard describe. Attacking a low level will give you a dishonorable kill unless he attacks you first, in return autotarget should skip them and AOE's dont affect them untill they have attacked you.

easy enough.

[degnar]

Several people already suggested a very easy way around the problems blizzard describe. Attacking a low level will give you a dishonorable kill unless he attacks you first, in return autotarget should skip them and AOE's dont affect them untill they have attacked you.

easy enough.

Agree. But I think the biggest problem this system would introduce is harassment from someone lower than you. There are times when you would need to attack first, no matter what.

[ParraCida]

Agree. But I think the biggest problem this system would introduce is harassment from someone lower than you. There are times when you would need to attack first, no matter what.
So what are they going to do? Run around and jump up and down? I'm sure they'll get bored of that pretty soon. Maybe try foulmouthing you, it's a nice try but you can't understand eachother. Possibly even pull mobs on you, ofcourse that most likely mean they'll get killed themselves.

Theres a way around every system, but fact is that there will be one hundred times less low levels harassing high levels than the other way around. And to top it off, loosing a little honour isn't that bad. In the rare event that someone indeed is harassing you at much lower levels, I'm sure a little lost honour over a good killing isn't such a bad thing.

[Solaquin]

They tried the dishonour system in beta and it was hideously unpopular, for the reasons Tyren stated. Something to bear in mind: just because they are scraping the dishonour system doesn't mean they are ignoring griefing and not working on a different solution. PvP is a major part of the game, they're not going to simply ignore it, but the dishonour system didn't work. Personally I believe that it's better to wait and develop a good solution than to implement a bad one now.

Lastly, Blizzard haven't cancelled anything on the delayed list. This is an MMO, not an off-the-shelf game. These things will make it into the game unless Blizzard decides they can't make them work with the rest of the game. It just takes time.

[Squarebob Spongepants]

Well, I guess that's one good thing about the delayed Euro release. We found out about this before choosing servers was even remotely an issue :uhhuh:

_______________________________

Slowly but steadily going for 2000+ posts :xgrin:

[Arioch]

It's not that bad, they are still going to have rewards, but no penalties That's a reward system, not an honor system. We were told there was going to be an honor system.

They tried the dishonour system in beta and it was hideously unpopular, for the reasons Tyren stated. Not so... the brief penalties they had in beta were never a complete system.... it was totally broken, and people complained, and Blizz snapped that it hadn't really been implemented, to wait to complain until they really implemented it. They never really tried it, just gave up. This is just another feature that got cut, and now they're trying to pretend like it was never promised. As usual.

[SadaraK]

Several people already suggested a very easy way around the problems blizzard describe. Attacking a low level will give you a dishonorable kill unless he attacks you first, in return autotarget should skip them and AOE's dont affect them untill they have attacked you.

easy enough.

The how do they handel a low leveler healing a high leveler who is attacking a town? You certainly cant attack the low leveler as all he is doing is cating buffs so you have to sit and wait until he attacks you, which he wont do, he will just keep re-enforcing the high leveler, who will then turn around and kick your *** because its suddenly become an uneven fight.

[degnar]

This is just another feature that got cut, and now they're trying to pretend like it was never promised. As usual.

Hopefully it is not that bad. I'm crossing my fingers that they will get a good system in place. (But not holding my breath). They need something. I'm just not sure the dishonor system was the way to go.

Any thoughts for a penalty/disincentive other than the dishonor system??

[Copperleaf]

And I don't think it's impossible to implement a good honorable PvP system. If a character is, say 10 levels below you, then that character could simply be not marked as PvP to you, unless he chooses to attack you first, just like in the non-contested zones. So if a lowbie "harasses" you, by attacking you or healing/buffing another PvPer, then he's marked for PvP and you can kill him. And ganking... if you're in combat with a mob and someone attacks you, that's easy to detect. These problems are not that hard to solve... Blizzard is just being lazy.

This proposal is a good one . . . but it's not an honor system either. So since it's not, Blizzard could /still/ implement it and not be contradicted by their latest pronouncement. If you /can't/ kill a lowbie, you can't gain dishonor thereby.

[ParraCida]

The how do they handel a low leveler healing a high leveler who is attacking a town? You certainly cant attack the low leveler as all he is doing is cating buffs so you have to sit and wait until he attacks you, which he wont do, he will just keep re-enforcing the high leveler, who will then turn around and kick your *** because its suddenly become an uneven fight.
And when is a low level going to do that? No seriously, do you really think the situation you just described will happen more than once every 6000 years? Like I already said, low levels harassing high levels will be a factor 100 less than the other way around, so definatly an improvement I'd say.

Low levels can't keep up with high levels, who are usually in high level areas, it's just not feasable. Coming up with all sorts of crazy potential situations where this solution would not work is funny and all, but not realistic.

[Terhmino]

I have a better idea. Maybe if you got XP for PvP kills if they were over your level or equal to your level, but never if they were under.

[SadaraK]

And when is a low level going to do that? No seriously, do you really think the situation you just described will happen more than once every 6000 years? Like I already said, low levels harassing high levels will be a factor 100 less than the other way around, so definatly an improvement I'd say.

Low levels can't keep up with high levels, who are usually in high level areas, it's just not feasable. Coming up with all sorts of crazy potential situations where this solution would not work is funny and all, but not realistic.

Not if they know how much the other player will suffer for attacking them.

Think about it, if they used a dishonour system half the thrill for a low leveler would be knowing the high level who just killed him will be singled out for doing it, when he actually had little choice.

[Raevan]

Like others I see the problem in an honor system like this

What about this, though: When a PVP battle started, a radius around the battle was created (either on the mini map or in the air or something) that signaled a sort of PvP arena. The ring was big enough that the distance from the edge to the nearest player was outside casting/shooting distance. If you entered that ring you were fair game and could be killed.

Now you would always be able to attack people, say...6 levels on either side of you, that way fights always start fair, and if others want to join in they can. But if a level 10 doesn't want to get killed by that level 40, they just keep away. However, if they are gung ho and want to just have fun, they run into the circle and join the fight.



what do you all think?

[Rio Darkblade]

Now is there still gonna be Reputation systems? Or is there already one?

[SadaraK]

Like others I see the problem in an honor system like this

What about this, though: When a PVP battle started, a radius around the battle was created (either on the mini map or in the air or something) that signaled a sort of PvP arena. The ring was big enough that the distance from the edge to the nearest player was outside casting/shooting distance. If you entered that ring you were fair game and could be killed.

Now you would always be able to attack people, say...6 levels on either side of you, that way fights always start fair, and if others want to join in they can. But if a level 10 doesn't want to get killed by that level 40, they just keep away. However, if they are gung ho and want to just have fun, they run into the circle and join the fight.
what do you all think?

Then what if someone initiates a PvP with a low level (6 below) then runs straight at you and kills you because you are in the radious of the players?

BTW, I started a seperate thread on suggestions, because I figured people would have plenty :)

[Neffri]

Wouldnt this be quite a good solution?
U can still kill who ever you want but the disshonorable kill lvl is 6 lvls below you. That way u can kill a lvl 20 if you are lvl 25, but if you u kill a lvl 19 at 25 you get a dishonorable kill.

But if the 19 attacks you, its free for you to slay him. That way you will have a great shot even if the lvl 19 attacks you first.

Or this, letz say you are lvl 25 and attacks a lvl 19, he dosnt do anything and you kill him. You get a dishonorable kill, he hits you back. You dont get it.

And then that maybe the penalty for killing a lowbee is great, you get alot more - for a disKill than you get + for a HonKill.

And if you are on - in reputation or honurabillity or what ever its called, vendors should cost more. Like repairing your items would cost way more.

Then people wouldnt run around ganking since they would loose a ****load of money.

[SadaraK]

Wouldnt this be quite a good solution?
U can still kill who ever you want but the disshonorable kill lvl is 6 lvls below you. That way u can kill a lvl 20 if you are lvl 25, but if you u kill a lvl 19 at 25 you get a dishonorable kill.

But if the 19 attacks you, its free for you to slay him. That way you will have a great shot even if the lvl 19 attacks you first.

Or this, letz say you are lvl 25 and attacks a lvl 19, he dosnt do anything and you kill him. You get a dishonorable kill, he hits you back. You dont get it.

And then that maybe the penalty for killing a lowbee is great, you get alot more - for a disKill than you get + for a HonKill.

And if you are on - in reputation or honurabillity or what ever its called, vendors should cost more. Like repairing your items would cost way more.

Then people wouldnt run around ganking since they would loose a ****load of money.

Thats almost exactly the same thing blizzard was going to do, and it won't work for exactly the same reasons. What do you do if a low level is buffing a high one? What do you do if a massive raid is going on and you score a killing hit accidentally on like five lvl 1 people along for the ride? (your suddenly kill on sight and a piece of **** for no reason).

[TheSoulflame]

And I don't think it's impossible to implement a good honorable PvP system. If a character is, say 10 levels below you, then that character could simply be not marked as PvP to you, unless he chooses to attack you first, just like in the non-contested zones. So if a lowbie "harasses" you, by attacking you or healing/buffing another PvPer, then he's marked for PvP and you can kill him. And ganking... if you're in combat with a mob and someone attacks you, that's easy to detect. These problems are not that hard to solve... Blizzard is just being lazy.

I vouch for this method too. It's nice and clean I think. And you are right about Blizzard being lazy, or at least breaking promises. They said they were working on it and now they abandoned it. Right, like they couldn't brainstorm for 1 hour to come up with a system like Arioch proposes or haven't heard this from beta players. The reasons mentioned by Tyrel are just another excuse so they don't have to worry about that feature as well either.

I wonder where this ends ...
"Sorry we said we'd create additional content for you, but the additional content could be too difficult for your character and destroy what you've build up and take up lots of time for corpse runs. Also the items may not be balanced so we can't release them.
So we have decided with all our wisdom that we will nnot release additional content and this is the final world."

...

[SadaraK]

Since n-one seem to be taking a blind bit of notice of my solutions thread I may aswell post my idea for a system in here:

I have an idea about how to fix the current system of PvP servers to prevent too much dishonourable behaviour. If anyone would like to give an opinion/ come up with solutions to other problems they are welcome to post so people can evaluate .

PvP woe/low level player killing solution

Lets say they make a system much like aggro, where if you heal a warrior it acts as a great deal of aggro for the monster. If a low level player heals/buffs the high level that you are fighting, or is fighting you then you are alowd to kill him because he aggroed you.

In theory this could work, all that has to be done is to have some easily rocognisable change in the low level player to make sure you know you can hit him without suffering dishonour, say, a coloured ring around him shifting from green (non combatant) to red (attack on sight).

Corpse Camping solution?

Another nice change would also to be to have a very short invincibility period upon resurection of your corpse in the field (after you have ran back to it). Say, 10 seconds. This gives you a sporting head start on any corpse campers and would be enough to put many off. You would also be able to attack but not be attacked in the 10 seconds, allowing you to at least slow the player down a little to get away.

Opinions?

[Neffri]

True true...hmmm....this is a tuff nut to crack.
Im gonna sleep on it and give you the yber solution tomorrow.
Then im gonna sell it to Blizz and become rich :D

[SadaraK]

True true...hmmm....this is a tuff nut to crack.
Im gonna sleep on it and give you the yber solution tomorrow.
Then im gonna sell it to Blizz and become rich :D

I have already submitted my ideas for free :)

[Mr.Sunrock]

Hmm they have only pulled the dishonor system from the PvP honor system? Or have they pulled the ranking system all to gather?

One way to keep the dishonor system but take away the risk of geting a penelty by attacking lower level combatants might be to put in a deathblow...
When your HP gets to 0 you will not get killed at once. Insted you get KO for 30-60 sec and when you get up agen you have only 1% of your full HP. To kill the person you had to deal a deathblow.

But even this system would be used to greef other players. There is no real way to stop greefing in the game mech. if you have a PvP system. You just have to understad that is inmoral to gank and tell your team mates that if they gank some one else you think they are reatarded assholes who deserv to die.... well what I mean that it most be socialy not accepted to gank or greef. I think this is very important to all the guild leaders and there officers to uphold by there members. It is realy no Blizzards foult how you are acting.

[Mr.Sunrock]

Corpse Camping solution?

Another nice change would also to be to have a very short invincibility period upon resurection of your corpse in the field (after you have ran back to it). Say, 10 seconds. This gives you a sporting head start on any corpse campers and would be enough to put many off. You would also be able to attack but not be attacked in the 10 seconds, allowing you to at least slow the player down a little to get away.

Opinions?

:eek: And that system would not be abused? especily if "You would also be able to attack but not be attacked in the 10 seconds,"? That is like saying here is the best system in the world to gank and greef.

[The Romulans]

The system Arioch has mentioned gets my vote too.

Remember, we want to keep it simple. ie. none of this "circle of PvP" business.

Its so amazingly simple that it seems stupid of Blizzard to back out like this. As others have mentioned, lazy. Now that Blizzard have got a userbase who seem content with the game why bother changing core game mechanics? Thats crap.

Now lets take a look at the scenarios Tyren brought up, some of which will be rare occurances I'm sure:

Mass PvP Raid. Probably the most concerning thing. You don't want to have to "be careful" in a huge battle.
- I believe PvE spells and abilities already ignore players who aren't in PvP mode, so similar sort of thing except applied to a single player. In other words: no "accidental" injuries to low levels.
- Lower level players don't appear as PvP-able to you, perhaps they can even have some sort of effect on them so you know you shouldn't target them. A warning / confirm message could come up perhaps or simply not allow you to attack them at all (unless you "force attack" somehow).
- I'm not sure about this but there should be a "select closest target" command. I think pressing attack does this (at least when you have nothing selected), so rather than just the closest target it'd be the closest target within your range, of course. If you click a lower level player there might be need of a "select next target" command. Hell, I'd find both of those commands useful PvE. So the game would sort out who the closest targets are so you don't have to be careful.

Buffers. Lower level players aren't going to have too many buffs really worth spreading around anyway.
- If they are buffing people before PvP, good on them? I don't see anything majorly wrong with that? You can call over a lower level faction member to take care of them if you really are annoyed, or engage these other players (the ones that they are buffing) earlier.
- If you want to get a little more harsh, you could make it so if the buff was put on the player 60 seconds before engaging in PvP, that player is a valid target. That is, if this starts happening you could wander over and start slicing up the buffed player and then take care of Mr. Buffer. Sure they might try and wait 60 seconds or some such silliness, but you can use those 60 seconds to engage.
- If they really feel the need to help out their faction already engaged in PvP then perhaps they can receive a warning / confirm message with "Continue" and "Cancel". Its up to the lowbie to watch who they are buffing.

Following you around.
- There could be some sort of time-based thing that kicks in after a few minutes if the lowbie remains in a certain radius of you, the annoyance will turn PvP-red and you can take care of him.
- Not that big of a deal. Again, you can always ask for help from a passer by or run through some higher level creeps or somewhere with friendly guards.

[Mr.Sunrock]

The system Arioch has mentioned gets my vote too.

Remember, we want to keep it simple. ie. none of this "circle of PvP" business.

Its so amazingly simple that it seems stupid of Blizzard to back out like this. As others have mentioned, lazy. Now that Blizzard have got a userbase who seem content with the game why bother changing core game mechanics? Thats crap.

Now lets take a look at the scenarios Tyren brought up, some of which will be rare occurances I'm sure:

Mass PvP Raid. Probably the most concerning thing. You don't want to have to "be careful" in a huge battle.
- I believe PvE spells and abilities already ignore players who aren't in PvP mode, so similar sort of thing except applied to a single player. In other words: no "accidental" injuries to low levels.
- Lower level players don't appear as PvP-able to you, perhaps they can even have some sort of effect on them so you know you shouldn't target them. A warning / confirm message could come up perhaps or simply not allow you to attack them at all (unless you "force attack" somehow).
- I'm not sure about this but there should be a "select closest target" command. I think pressing attack does this (at least when you have nothing selected), so rather than just the closest target it'd be the closest target within your range, of course. If you click a lower level player there might be need of a "select next target" command. Hell, I'd find both of those commands useful PvE. So the game would sort out who the closest targets are so you don't have to be careful.

This will be a unfear system. And will seperate players by lv. If this was implanted only the lv 60 players would be doing the fun PvP raids.


Buffers. Lower level players aren't going to have too many buffs really worth spreading around anyway.
- If they are buffing people before PvP, good on them? I don't see anything majorly wrong with that? You can call over a lower level faction member to take care of them if you really are annoyed, or engage these other players (the ones that they are buffing) earlier.
- If you want to get a little more harsh, you could make it so if the buff was put on the player 60 seconds before engaging in PvP, that player is a valid target. That is, if this starts happening you could wander over and start slicing up the buffed player and then take care of Mr. Buffer. Sure they might try and wait 60 seconds or some such silliness, but you can use those 60 seconds to engage.
- If they really feel the need to help out their faction already engaged in PvP then perhaps they can receive a warning / confirm message with "Continue" and "Cancel". Its up to the lowbie to watch who they are buffing.

Well they can still make the difrent how tiny there byffs may be.


Following you around.
- There could be some sort of time-based thing that kicks in after a few minutes if the lowbie remains in a certain radius of you, the annoyance will turn PvP-red and you can take care of him.
- Not that big of a deal. Again, you can always ask for help from a passer by or run through some higher level creeps or somewhere with friendly guards.

Maby this idea have some value to it. But I'm guessing it would ber extreamly hard to code and would be very bugy. I think the complains would be alot more with that implanted then without it.

[ryu1313]

Agree. But I think the biggest problem this system would introduce is harassment from someone lower than you. There are times when you would need to attack first, no matter what.


And grouops of level 40+ people handing around in level 20 areas killing all in their path repeatedly isn't harassment?

[AgeOfAbnegation]

I was looking forward to rewards and titles for earning lots of honorable kills. I think they mentioned before that special loot would be available for skilled players etc. That's bad news IMO. If there is one possible good that can come out of it, it will force players to play well, or stay dead. As someone else mentioned, it does appear that Blizz has gotten a bit lazy. There's so much more they could do with an already great game, and I hope they implement more features later on.

[Minsterr]

I totally agree with blizzard points about changing the honor system. With the "current" honor system making you not able to defend yourself against low lvl players or protect a friend getting ganked by 5x25 lvl players (60ty yourself), but then again they need to add some kind of system as they mentioned, so players would much rather spend their time killing players higher or equal to their lvl.

[Elite Hacksaw]

I agree with all those who disagree with this change.

The ganking is really bad at this stage, because some people played more than others, and are therefore signficantly higher than others.

Hopefully it will even out in time, and some higher lvl players will come out from both sides to push away the griefers.

I have to say though, it does seem to be a horde thing, mostly in Ashenvale from what I've heard, which really hurts NE (who allready have a bad start).

[SaroDarksbane]

I got smacked down today by a ?? player who saw me and put an arrow through me after his pet bear tore me a new one.

You know what? I don't care.

I was in a contested area. I knew the risks. I got whacked. Boo hoo.

I lost nothing except a minute or two of time, and from that point on I was more careful, and I had a better idea of how to stay alive, and get away from danger if need be.

"WTF, I can't kill paladins as an undead, blizz!! make sure any pally who kills me gets punished, k!?"

If you want PvP, don't whine that you might be killed unfairly. In a system with no death penalty, and with protections from harm in certain areas (even on a PVP server), you people have no idea what you're whining about.

I swear people will complain about anything . . .

[galadann]

And I don't think it's impossible to implement a good honorable PvP system. If a character is, say 10 levels below you, then that character could simply be not marked as PvP to you, unless he chooses to attack you first, just like in the non-contested zones. So if a lowbie "harasses" you, by attacking you or healing/buffing another PvPer, then he's marked for PvP and you can kill him. And ganking... if you're in combat with a mob and someone attacks you, that's easy to detect. These problems are not that hard to solve... Blizzard is just being lazy....

I vouch for this method too. It's nice and clean I think. And you are right about Blizzard being lazy, or at least breaking promises. They said they were working on it and now they abandoned it. Right, like they couldn't brainstorm for 1 hour to come up with a system like Arioch proposes or haven't heard this from beta players. The reasons mentioned by Tyrel are just another excuse so they don't have to worry about that feature as well either.
...

I have played on PVP servers before in other MMOs... and your system will definitely have many exploitable loopholes.

For one, the lower lvl characters will always enjoy first strike as the higher lvl characters will have to withhold from striking them. With the high amount of stun/daze/sleep/snare effects in game, the higher lvl chars can be dead in seconds if attacked by multiple players lower than them.... because they are penalized otherwise - you hit first you lose, you don't hit and you lose.

Trust me it's not that far-fetched at all - my groups have ganked solo/duo higher lvl chars plenty on times on DAOC's PVP server. When we die to a purple con(much higher lvl) player we lose nothing. When he dies we get a lot of Xp and gold.

Next, the honour system can easily be exploited by players making lower lvl chars as spies. These lower lvl chars can move around contested areas largely untouched.... and report on the movement of the other side. To beat this you either have to rack up dishonourable kills... or go through the trouble of rolling lower lvl alts merely to counter them. Such a situation will be really sad :"Gee that Orc there is spying on us! ... arghhh! Non of us is low lvl enough to take him out!"

Lastly, group/multi group PVP is in fact very hectic and messy, and it will be really difficult to pick targets with this honour system in place. Can you imagine if the other side is intermixed with characters of different lvls? How much effort must a ranged caster put to select not only strategic targets, but targets of even/higher lvl? Wouldn't the honour system be a great penalty to ranged class who must strike hard from distance, that multiple lower lvl melee classes can abuse their lower lvls to charge in unmolested?

Also, with heavy penalties for killing a lower lvl chars, any honour displayed is forced - a sham. Having played in a real PVP server before (free for all pvp), you end up respecting those with honour all the more - given that they have the choice to be a bastard, but chooses to be honourable instead.

[Concillian]

A possible maintenance of the 'honor system' is to track honor and dishonor. Your honor level is your honor - dishonor. The following criteria would be necessary:

- People who attack you first are always honorable or neutral kills
- Party/Raid party members of people who attack you first are always honorable or neutral kills to you and your partymates
- Anybody casting a buff/heal on someone who you are in combat with (regardles of whether that person is an honorable kill or not) becomes an honorable / neutral kill.
- "lowbies" that 'become' honroable kills give only a minimum amount of honor, or no honor and no dishonor.
- a debuff type timer for each dishonorable kill doubles the amount of dishonor for each inappropriate kill made within the time limit... (1 dis kill = 1 unit dishonor, 2 dis kills = 3 units dishonor, 3 dis kills = 9 units dishonor, etc...)
- Honorable kills would NOT work the same way in reverse, thus a single ganking of a small party would be signifiacntly more difficult to overcome in terms of honor.
- There is an 'acceptable' dishonor level, some fraction of you honor level. Such that some accidental kills are NOT penalized through the dishonor system (5% of honor, 10% of honor, not sure on the value here, it would take some experiementing, certainly NOT 50+% of honor for example, this would clearly be someone who gains honor just so he can do dishonorable things.)
- Someone who has the dishonor 'debuff timer' is a neutral / honorable kill for all players of the opposite faction regardless of level
- Alternate to the above bullet would be to allow ALL players regardless of faction to be able to kill the person with the dishonor 'debuff timer'. This way you could kill like faction players who are a problem.

This has three key factors:
1) it allows a certain level of dishonor or necessary dishonorable kills like the 'spies' mentioned in the above post.
2) It SEVERELY penalizes multiple dishonorable kills in a short period of time with the debuff timer. Timer length should be long enough to do a long corpse run AND put some reasonable distance between you and the offending player.
3) It allows high level friends to come to the aid of and 'protect' lowbies against gankers/griefers by having the debuff timer = no dishonor kill for even high level characters. In other words, greifing a greifer is honorable.

This would require a method in combat where you can identify dishonorable kills easily, or cannot readily attack dishonorable kills without at least a confirm. It would also require an icon above the head of someone with dishonor similar to how several skills in the game currently work (hunters and warlocks come to mind). Preferrably the icon would grow in size depending on the 'level' of dishonor he is at.

The "what ifs" about buffing before combat and a player being a nuisance you can't kill are WAY better options than being repeatedly ganked.

I'm glad I waited to buy the game. I liked the idea of well implemented FvF based PvP servers. With what I've seen so far, however, I will likely be going PvE now, since the FvF based PvP does NOT seem to be well implemented.

[Stiganamatic]

I think Blizzard is making the right decision to hold off on this. I think that if they're given enough time to experiment on this, they'll get something which will be fun for the majority of the players.

And seriously, I'm mostly positive that None of you has ANY right to call Blizzard Lazy for holding off on this. Not unless you have your name on the box of a game that's sold millions of copies world-wide, you have no right At All.

[myndreach]

Lets say theres a mass PvP raid with players of all levels. Are you forced to watch who you are attacking for fear that killing those players will result in a penalty?

What if a lower level player is walking around buffing players who do not have a PvP flag. So lets say he sits there and buffs people prior to fights and after they rezz. You cannot touch that person because they are not flagged for PvP.

What if a lower level player decides it'd be fun to follow you around everywhere but not attack you to make a nuisance of himself.

The system is currently very wide open. But it's a more natural system of PvP, rather than try to figure out who you can attack and who you can't and what are the consequences.

This all makes good sense to me. The game of WoW is based around a new paradigm in MMOs. That being the idea of positive reinforcement. Instead of punishing you for death, etc. they try to make it more rewarding to live. It is a subtle, but different way of doing things than other MMOs which tend to use negative reinforcement (ie: dont die or you'll lose experience and levels!).

there will be alot of level 30 americans not wanting to be on the server they are on now and wont want to change...

This is what shows you are all misunderstanding. All Blizzard is saying is that they have removed the punishment of dishonor. It says nowhere that they have removed the honor, or reward system, for pvp. Why would a level 30 leave a pvp server because there is no dishonor? All blizzard did was remove dishonor for killing a lower level player.

Who cares? It is more realistic this way. All of their points are valid and I don't understand what the fuss is all about :scratch:

[ScytheNoire]

this blows
i knew Blizzard wouldn't implement it because they are lazy and lack the programming skills to do so

i think a system where if someone is 10 levels difference, then that should be a line where they cannot attack someone 10 levels lower. that would be fair.

hopefully Blizzard will do something though, otherwise, we'll see level 60's harrassing level 10's and ruining their questing by killing NPC's.
i know, i had a quest NPC for me and i had to wait a day to complete it.

[myndreach]

i knew Blizzard wouldn't implement it because they are lazy and lack the programming skills to do so


This is obviously true from everything Blizzard has done in the past. I mean, I can't think of a more horrible mess of inept programming skills than games such as Starcraft, Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft, Warcraft II, and Warcraft III.

Games, to me, that were obviously made by unskilled, talentless, lazy programmers who don't give a crap about their products.

:surprise:

[Jashug]

I for one am glad they scrapped it. The systems proposed in this thread strike me as too complex. For every condition you add someone will learn to abuse it. Better to keep it simple.

[mekon]

although i don't like what this spells for heros/battlegrounds ... i think this is good i was actually worried about what was gunna happen if im raiding and a lvl 15 gets in my way ... am i gunna be punnished for that ? tbh everyone i whining cause they don't wanna get killed, but PvP is all about knowing when to run as a low level n **** and this would have been very hard to immplent well. If you don't wanna be killed play PvE ... i think this works well

//mek

[Fagercraft]

Several people already suggested a very easy way around the problems blizzard describe. Attacking a low level will give you a dishonorable kill unless he attacks you first, in return autotarget should skip them and AOE's dont affect them untill they have attacked you.

easy enough.

it took me 5 seconds to come up with a way around this one. It aint this easy mate, if it was Blizzard and even the earlier mmos would use it. You think the developers dont know **** about consequenses?

Imagine 10 lowbis forming a ring around you, you dont wana attack first so you leave them be. Now when they have formed up they all gank you. Bang you dead - they get good honor and a laugh of the kill.

This is what i could think in 5 secs. Just imagine if those with a little brains and a desire to ruin for others could think about.

Don't think it's easy to solve this, if it was you'd see many mmos using that solution as its one of the most needed solution for any pvp mmo out now.

I personally dont see the bad about taking of the dishonor system. Actually it seems like a pretty wise choise to make since it obviously won't work. Ofcourse it wont take away the problem about ganking - but as an old Lineage2 player i can only say - solve it ingame, defeat fire with fire. It is after all the PvP server, its supposed to give more of a challange and i wouldnt play WoW without it.

Sure you might be ganked but the other faction is having the same rouble as you do. Remember your not the onlyone in your faction (atleast i hope not)

It was a wise decision Blizzard, good job. Dont implement something that wont work. Oh and for those who say they should have said this earlier. Ever though about that they perhaps were doing there all to make it work but in the end there was no solution and they had to give up. If they'd give up earlier just to prepare the audience at launch they would be worse as they wouldn't have tried everything to make it work. They even took it of the release patch perhaps to try to get it in a good shape.

[TROGDOR_the_BURNINATOR]

-ding- I have an idea that will solve all of Blizz's problems in this regard.

All they have to do is adjust the timing. If a player kills another player who is much lower level than him, the player killed, when he gets back to his corpse, will be able to always res right away. No dishonor with any cities for the victor, and as long as a GY isn't too far off it isn't a big problem really for the person killed. However, this marks the winner with a dishonor tag. Say this tag lasts 5-10? minutes. During that time, if the player marked with the tag dies, the player must wait x amount of time before he or she can revive their corpse (unless they use a spirit healer, in which case they remove themself from the area anyway). X increases based on how many low-level characters that player has killed before he died within that 5 minutes, or 10 minutes, or whatever. Blizz can balance that as they see fit. But it would allow a comparable-level character to come in, kill the player, and let the lowbies in the area finish their quest or clear out and get on with their gameplay without being continually harassed by a higher level player that can respawn quickly because they haven't died nearly as much as you have. It also allows the high level player to get away from an attacking low level player or players without incurring the wrath of their faction. It would also allow lowbies to enjoy their victory over a higher level player without being harassed again right away.

[zingfharn]

I don't see a problem with a higher level attacking a lower level. As someone mentioned, lowers could be used as spies.
What should happen, though, is that if a lower level player is killed by a player (or groups of players), then that lower level player is immune from them for an 5-10 minutes (or whatever). This allows them to get their corpse back, without gankers camping, and get the hell out. They can continue to wander around if they like, but if they do, then they'll be targets again pretty soon, and there's nothing to stop another player (group) attacking them. By which time, the first group can probably attack again.
It also means that in large battles, the same high level player won't continuously pick them off. I've actually thought for a while that three kills in a row (non-rezzed) in a raid should result in 100% damage to all eq, meaning you've got to go and get it fixed, which is a good time sink to prevent you returning to combat too quickly.

That solves the honour issue, and lets people who want to hunt lowbs continue to do so, but not at the expense of the lowbs enjoyment of the game, because they can't just repeat kill ad nauseum.

[myndreach]

The title of this thread is quite false also...

"No PvP Honor System coming"

Nowhere does Blizzard say that they are getting rid of the Honor System. They are simply removing dishonor against other PCs.

[chickTopSPEED]

OK Blizz wants to encourage people to PVP actions. But why they dont give little honor points losses when u kill lower char and much bigger price for killing better char than u. It would encourage people to clear theit land from oposite faction mambers. Besides they should add bigger honor points losses when u kill somebody who just (just: i mean 10-20 sec.) returnet to life.

BLIZZ PLS DO STH !!

[SadaraK]

This all makes good sense to me. The game of WoW is based around a new paradigm in MMOs. That being the idea of positive reinforcement. Instead of punishing you for death, etc. they try to make it more rewarding to live. It is a subtle, but different way of doing things than other MMOs which tend to use negative reinforcement (ie: dont die or you'll lose experience and levels!).



This is what shows you are all misunderstanding. All Blizzard is saying is that they have removed the punishment of dishonor. It says nowhere that they have removed the honor, or reward system, for pvp. Why would a level 30 leave a pvp server because there is no dishonor? All blizzard did was remove dishonor for killing a lower level player.

Who cares? It is more realistic this way. All of their points are valid and I don't understand what the fuss is all about :scratch:

I thinkyou are missunderstanding, by removing the dishonour system they are effectively opening the doors to corpse campers and gankers all over PvP servers, where as a great many people who joined PvP servers will have done so because they knew that such loathsome tactics were going to be punished and therefor rare.

I got smacked down today by a ?? player who saw me and put an arrow through me after his pet bear tore me a new one.

You know what? I don't care.

I was in a contested area. I knew the risks. I got whacked. Boo hoo.

I lost nothing except a minute or two of time, and from that point on I was more careful, and I had a better idea of how to stay alive, and get away from danger if need be.

"WTF, I can't kill paladins as an undead, blizz!! make sure any pally who kills me gets punished, k!?"

If you want PvP, don't whine that you might be killed unfairly. In a system with no death penalty, and with protections from harm in certain areas (even on a PVP server), you people have no idea what you're whining about.

I swear people will complain about anything . . .

Obviously you either haven't been listening or don't undertand....

People generally don't mind being killed by a player higher level than them in a contested area, it comes with the sodding terratory, and people know that. What people ARE complaining about is the kind of player that (as a rouge for example) will kill you, then stand near your corpse waiting for the revive (in stealth mode so you can't see him) then wander up and kill you again. Eventually forcing you to revive at a graveyard and paying a fortune.

[Madskills]

From Tyren on the official forums (http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?FN=wow-general&T=124300&P=1):

So Blizzard lied to us again, and those of use who chose PvP servers based on the promises of Honor systems and gank control really got screwed.

INCORRECT.

EXAGGERATED.

Blizzard isn't cancelling the Honor System, they are removing the PENALTIES from the Honor system.

I like it, it means that now, if you kill lowbies while on a Raid, you won't lose honor.

[Da DM]

Correct. The PK's that ruined diablo. The kind that ruined the game.

Me, I hope for the honor system. I think the PvE servers will overcrowd soon enough if they don't integrate it in the play.

[SadaraK]

INCORRECT.

EXAGGERATED.

Blizzard isn't cancelling the Honor System, they are removing the PENALTIES from the Honor system.

I like it, it means that now, if you kill lowbies while on a Raid, you won't lose honor.

And its players like him that warrent the need for a better system...

[Coldcell]

It's a correct decision.

Corpse Camper? Do you know what a Spirit Healer is for? And that you can never lose an equipment because of durability?...

[awestruckin]

Thats almost exactly the same thing blizzard was going to do, and it won't work for exactly the same reasons. What do you do if a low level is buffing a high one? What do you do if a massive raid is going on and you score a killing hit accidentally on like five lvl 1 people along for the ride? (your suddenly kill on sight and a piece of **** for no reason).


If a player who is unflagged for PVP buffs a player who is, then he becomes flagged for PVP himself and by all rights should be maimed unmercifully. Do it just like DAOC does it and they'll be fine. That's the only part they were missing in their plan. If the lowbie guys don't wanna get killed, don't stand around helping the warmongers. Go back to killing your cats and dogs. If you want to help the war effort, prepare for death.

[Hells]

Thats almost exactly the same thing blizzard was going to do, and it won't work for exactly the same reasons. What do you do if a low level is buffing a high one? What do you do if a massive raid is going on and you score a killing hit accidentally on like five lvl 1 people along for the ride? (your suddenly kill on sight and a piece of **** for no reason).
Make buffing count as healing, enabling free kill flag :P

[Coldcell]

Then what if a lowbie guy follow you around and make all the stupid emotes and stuff? The honor system will ruin the game if it penalize to kill a lowbie.

[SadaraK]

Make buffing count as healing, enabling free kill flag :P

If you had read the whole thread you would see that that is exactley what I said to do.

[SadaraK]

Then what if a lowbie guy follow you around and make all the stupid emotes and stuff? The honor system will ruin the game if it penalize to kill a lowbie.

Of-course it wont. It will however ruin the game for many people if a level 60 horde player could wander into a starting zone and slaughter people with one hit at will. I think I could cope with some fool following me around making faces if the pay off was to effectivley prevent lowbie killing.

[Coldcell]

The heck.. if a level 60 horde is bullying in Alliance's newbie zone, then an Alliance's level 60 should come and help. This is 'WARcraft' and full scale PvP is there. That is why we have World Defence channel to keep players informed.

Honestly for people who disagree with this pvp honor system.. go to PvE server. Blizzard has them for you.

[Kenspeckle]

The problem was/is that if there's penalties the harrasment and ganking gets reversed. I saw this happening in cb in a couple ways:

1) all incentive and no disincentive for lower lvls to attack higher lvl players. If you win, you get a nice honor bonus. If you lose, you cost your opponent honor for killing you. Small groups of lower lvl players can play havoc, as they end up being more powerful than a single higher lvl player, cost the opponent honor, and can round robin the kills to lvl up.

2) City defense pvp battles are a complete fur ball most times, and you'd never know the lvl of the person you're fighting until you get the msg "dishonorable kill". You're defending your city! How can that be dishonorable? Having to be cautious about who you attack in your city's defense is miserable and unrealistic. Eventually you'll lvl yourself to 60. Do you want to be limited to defending yourself only against lvl 55+ players?

Essentially PvP wasn't thoroughly tested in beta. No rewards, no battlefields. I expect we'll see several iterations of the system before things settle in. If you like PvP, stick with the pvp servers (the pvp on regular servers is tef hell). Blizz will iron our the wrinkles with some time.

[Skie]

Lower level players in the honor system are a problem indeed, but how about honourable kills when you're level 60, then?
I mean, there aren't any higher level players, so you would be limited only to a certain amount of 'honour increase' per kill. That means that when you are level 60 you will have much more trouble getting honour than when you are level 55, for example. Anyone thought about this, or is there a solution already? My first post here.

*fetches his final beta kit from the post office while he waits for answers* :drool:

[SadaraK]

The heck.. if a level 60 horde is bullying in Alliance's newbie zone, then an Alliance's level 60 should come and help. This is 'WARcraft' and full scale PvP is there. That is why we have World Defence channel to keep players informed.

Honestly for people who disagree with this pvp honor system.. go to PvE server. Blizzard has them for you.

Which is another thing thats a big problem, and one of the main themes of the thread, people joined PvP servers under the understanding that there would be a system to prevent lowbie killing and now there isn't.

You do understand that there are players who happily spend months doing nothing other than making other players life a misery? People whos enture goal is to destro peoples player experiance. Without some kind of system they will be free to do what they wan't, do you wan't to play in a server where people like that are allowed to thrive?

[Neffri]

Just a small oppinion.
Since people are talking alot of raids and stuff like that.
Why not make it soo if you are in a Raid group your a automaticly a Neutral/Honorable kill, even if you are a lvl 1 and a lvl 60 kills you.

Ok, understand that you dont need to be in the raidgroup, but most people would like to be i guess, othervise its not fun. :buddies:

[shadracht]

Of-course it wont. It will however ruin the game for many people if a level 60 horde player could wander into a starting zone and slaughter people with one hit at will. I think I could cope with some fool following me around making faces if the pay off was to effectivley prevent lowbie killing.


You ALREADY can't do this. The "starting zones" are horde or alliance controlled. This means that ANY member of the controlling group is not attackable unless they attack you first. So, a lvl 60 horde player won't be wandering into the dwarf newbie area and slaughtering everyone. The players are immune, and there's a ton of guards in those areas around the NPCS anyways.

[The Romulans]

There is a lot of good brainstorming going on, something to add:

Defending your faction's turf
Clearly defending yourself and your faction's goods is honourable and should be treated as such or at least those within your bounds of honour should be treated as honourable, otherwise they are merely "neutral" kills (unless they have a dishonour flag up (an idea I like), then they are an honourable kill).

In other words:
- All levels are game in your "Green" territories. Easy.
- All levels should be game in your faction's areas with patrolling guards. (ie. Alliance has Menethil Harbour in Wetlands)

Those two are clear. However what about defending your faction's NPCs that are positioned outside of towns:
- If a player has initiated an attack on a target that will bring them dishonour (ie. NPCs) and/or buffs a target currently involved in such an attack, they are fair game.

Also, in relation to Battlefields (and the fact that they are billed as 'more dangerous'):
- Anyone in a Battlefield zone / territory is fair game to the other side.

Dishonour Flag
I like the idea of the 'dishonour flag'... I see that as a change of icon from the normal "proud warrior of the alliance / horde" icon which you see when you enter PvP mode (I think?). This flag would give more of an immediate cause for not wanting to be dishonourable - if you are dishonourable the enemy, all of the enemy, can target you immediately. And definitely this dishonour flag, once enabled, would accumulate dishonour with multiple dishonourable kills.

Hated by your own people, players
Also I see members of your own faction (players) being able to attack you if it really gets that bad... but that'd be like 100% dishonour, which would be pretty much the end of things and after your faction's NPCs have already done as such.

Corpse camping
A nice little helping hand to corpse camping comes with the honour system. How about a period of time (say 10 seconds?) where it is dishonourable for that player to be attacked, and likewise for that player to attack another.

[Neffri]

You ALREADY can't do this. The "starting zones" are horde or alliance controlled. This means that ANY member of the controlling group is not attackable unless they attack you first. So, a lvl 60 horde player won't be wandering into the dwarf newbie area and slaughtering everyone. The players are immune, and there's a ton of guards in those areas around the NPCS anyways.

My guess is he is talking about the lvl 20+ areas, and most of those are contested. A lvl 20 is still a lowbee against a lvl 60. My guess is 1-2 blow before that 20 dude is dead

[Tiresias]

Lowbies cannot harass a higher-level player by running around them making stupid emotes... because there is an /ignore command. If they follow the higher level into higher-level areas, they will get killed by mobiles. To prevent gang-ups, I suggest an "anger" system for this: if a lower level remains in the vicinity (spellcasting range) of a higher level too long, they get a warning message that their PvP flag is about to be auto-set. They are given the option to ignore the warning or to be randomly moved to a safe location (no mobs nearby) 50 yards away (to prevent higher-levels from chasing lower levels), likely a road or nearby town. Inconvenience for the lower-level being chased? Yes, but a small one, as 50 yards isn't really that far, but puts you a good distance away from your threat. This system also prevents impromptu lower-level gatherings against a high-level character in an uncontested zone, as the higher-level can just start slaughtering everyone that stays in the vicinity too long waiting for friends. If the higher-level is on the move, it shouldn't be an issue anyway.

Set up contested areas for PvP depending on the average levels of the mobs and quests available to that region. Is the average level 25? Players level 20-30 are fair game for each other. Anyone outside that level range CAN still attack those players, but if they are higher, they risk garnering massive amounts of dishonor for the action, depending on thier level. Are they level 31? No big deal. Are they level 35? Pretty bad. Level 40+? Serious penalties will apply. This should be independent of what level the player you are attacking is, so the level 31 would get the same penalty for attacking a level 20 as he would for attacking a level 30. This would encourage the level 20's to stay out of the area until they were closer to the average, or to travel in groups. A system message can be set to inform players as they cross from area to area what the average level is, and whether they are OK for PvP in that area. Players too low or too high for the zone are always fair game because they do not "belong" there. The idea is to stop high-level ganking when people are out for some exp or quests, but still demand an awareness of what similar-level players from opposing factions are doing. If you are just passing through, tough luck.

Corpse camping? Take a cue from the video games of old: when you respawn you are invincible for a set amount of time, during which you move faster, but cannot attack. This allows you to get out of Dodge, if you desire. This time should be drastically reduced if the player was killed through events that involved only the environment, to make corpse runs to dangerous areas risky and exciting. If the player was killed in PvP conflict, make him invisible and undetectable for 5 seconds (or so) so nobody knows where he respawned to. Obviously, this could be circumvented if you had a massive search party to look for the player, but that is more trouble than it's worth, probably.

Are there loopholes? Sure there are, but there always will be. I simply had the idea of presenting solutions to the events that most anger people: low-level griefing and ganging up on higher-levels, high-levels attempting to control a low-level questing zone, and corpse camping.

Sorry for the long post. Comments are welcome.

[Dalai]

I agree with Tyren's post. The proposed honour system sounded very contrived, I'm glad they dropped it.

I think non-messy, fair PvP will only happen in balanced team vs team instances, similar to Guild Wars. I'm hoping the proposed Battlegrounds will bring something like this, some structure to the PvP in WoW.

[Hells]

But I didnt :P

[Coldcell]

True there is the Ignore. But what if you want to do an AoE?? You will attack the lowbies around you too and prolly 1-hit kill them.

As mentioned, a level 60 would be restricted to killing level 60s.

You go into PvP server with the promise of a honor system? Personally I think that's a lame excuse. PvE server lets you do PvP with restrictions. That's the perfect place for you! And god.. the game has only been out for 8 days!!!

Just because you dont want to do an 8-day work, you will suffer in your server. Start over in PvE server, you do an 8-day work and you'll be happy after that.

[Tano]

bringing to much rules and ingame modifications will just make the game complicated.. probably also boring...
the thing with being teleported being to near enemy is totally out of range..

keep it as simple as possible, that will also make it more realistic...
at least i would like the game to be realistic. Its not so much of a big deal if a player gank me. If im smart i should be able to avoid it.

furthermore, isnt griefing something that the community should be working against.. also, people pay for gms to be in the game...

[Grumpy Joe]

After reading the Blizzard post on pvp, I am sad to say I will never pvp on a pvp server. Ganking and corpse camping is for a55holes!

[Eiger]

Ah, all I can say is "I told you so." I didn't think they'd be able to implement a reasonable system to dissuade ganking. Not ever.

[Eiger]

So what are they going to do? Run around and jump up and down? I'm sure they'll get bored of that pretty soon. Maybe try foulmouthing you, it's a nice try but you can't understand eachother. Possibly even pull mobs on you, ofcourse that most likely mean they'll get killed themselves.


Yup, it's amazing how fast annoyers go away if you completely ignore them. They are trying to get a rise out of you. If you don't respond, you are no fun and they move on. Works every time. Really. No kidding. Seriously....

[GreenArmadillo]

My initial reaction to this was also disappointment, but I've since realized that honor/dishonor isn't the problem. The fundamental problem with PVP as it now exists is that there is no incentive in the game (either benefit or penalty) for upper level players to come to the assistance of lower levels.

For example, take Bloodhoof Village. There are no guards at the entrance to Mulgore, like the Dwarf Mountaineers in Dun Morogh or the fact that Horde can't even get into Teldrassil without zoning into the middle of Darnassus, for instance, and as such there is nothing stopping even a single character in the high teens from performing an effective denial of town attack - there are important NPC's with levels at low as level 10 wandering outside the town's guard aggro radius (e.g. the guy who starts the Venture mining co quest line). Note that this is NOT a PVP-server only issue - if anything, it's easier to get away with on PVE servers because the offender is safe once their PVP flag expires as long as they don't actually go to Thunder Bluff. Well, it's the responsiblity of high level Tauren to defend their homeland, you say? Forgive the pun, but that's a load of bull.

The closest flight point, Thunder Bluff, is the least traveled of the Horde capitols and a good three minute run from the city, not counting those blessed with slow fall abilities who can shave a few seconds off by jumping. I have almost never seen a Horde character higher than level 14 on the ground in Mulgore, or honestly any noob zone, because there is NOTHING FOR THEM TO DO while they're there. Who is going to spend 10 minutes in transit to fend off a random level 18 Alliance member who can always log off or disappear into the vast plains of Mulgore until the defender leaves?

If there was a bonus for players to defend their lands/lowbie cousins, or if the faction suffers an honor loss when its NPC's and members die, then there MIGHT be an incentive for capped players to hang out in massively lower level zones just to guard against the occasional attack by griefers barely above the level of the players in the zone to begin with. That's STILL a pretty big if, since again there are many areas in the game where a single low leveled character can cause significant grief with minimal time investment (and thus very little sacrifice, even if they do eventually get in game penalties, since they can just roll a new toon), compared to the sheer vastness of world that these supposed high level defenders must cover. But that's the only real way to counter the griefers, who probably would have viewed being KoS to their own faction as a badge of honor anyways.

[SYNthSRI]

heh

That's great and all, but where the hell are BATTLEGROUNDS?!?
I want it...now! I would like to see the system implemented IN Battlegrounds ONLY, where raising honor and the sort gives you/your faction something.

[Grumpy Joe]

Do you think that they using the "saving the best for last" approach? I.e. AO's notum fields (and now player controlled cities) and titles, DAoC's controlled areas, eq's tokens (or whatever they are).

[LeVandrum]

You might never know. I hope they are gonna blow us away with something remarkable. I don't really have a problem with ganking, I just ignore them and watch them from ghost mode while i watch tv or something.

[SYNthSRI]

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=142597&s=blizzard&tmp=1#blizzard

" Players,

Though it goes without saying, systems and concepts change during the beta process. The PvP article was released and since then many changes went into the PvP system. One of them was the removal of dishonorable kills from killing other players.

We chose instead to focus on strengthening PvP rewards. I ask our players be patient. We have some interesting additions coming to the PvP system."

Stop crying...and wait just like I've been waiting for battlegrounds :p

[LeVandrum]

I know Blizz wouldn't bend us over like that. They must have something interesting coming. I hope the battlegrounds system is implemeted. Sorta like a GuildWars arena.

[Fagercraft]

I know Blizz wouldn't bend us over like that. They must have something interesting coming. I hope the battlegrounds system is implemeted. Sorta like a GuildWars arena.


As i said, there is no reason for them to screw you intentionally guys, they tried there best but it didnt work, now they'll try a different approach...

I dont blame those who hoped for the dihonor to be disapointed but for those who say Blizz are lazy and incompotent - they are just whiners - no better then the whiners at the battle.net forums imo, have some patiance and trust.
And for christ sake show some respect for the company giving you a nice game like this, not to mention all the other best sellers they have shipped to your cd-drives :buddies:

[Camtron]

Ouch. The reason i intend to play a PvP server is because i thought Blizzard were gonna move forward on Player vs Player rules, not backtrack and just leave it as it is, which just seems lazy to me. I figured by the time the game comes out in Europe they'd be a nice balanced set of rules, honour system and all, for a good PvP server experience.

If they leave the PvP servers as they are, i'll seriously be thinking about playing on a blue server.

So now, Blizzard, the company who "don't like to release information about their games early incase they have to pull it" (paraphrased), have now added the honor system to the list of no shows...


Heroes
Battlegrounds
Honor System
Weather

I can live without weather but the other 3 are major parts of the game that have been pulled/postponed. Nice.

~1have2much3time

Blizzard has always said the that heroes would not be in the intial release. Their reasons for taking away the honor system makes total sense. All of these things would have been nice to have I agree, but i would think that there are battlegorunds and heroes in the future. Yes weather would been nice effect but it absence doesnt make me feel one way or the other about the game. It is still an awesome game and we are only a week and a day into its realease i susspect alot of cooler nicety's are on there way that will leave these complaints in the dust.

[Mangedor]

Then what if a lowbie guy follow you around and make all the stupid emotes and stuff? The honor system will ruin the game if it penalize to kill a lowbie.

Do you really care about this? If so, I for one can't understand why. Just ignore them and go about your business.

Spies? If they cross into your lands can't you kill them without losing honor regardless of level? (if so then this is a legitimate concern)

Someone also made a argument that 10 lowbies could gang up and gank a high level... I see that as unlikely compared to high levels ganking lowbies and how is that different than the other way around? (other than being much harder to organize and therefore far much less likely to happen.)

Also what is so bad about taking a honor hit once and a while to defend yourself against such a threat or in a big battle? I read that Blizz said it would be a accumulative effect... not like you kill one lowbie and your doomed right away. Plus they stated that it could be repaired by not doing the same thing over and over. The only people who should be worried about a dishonor system are the gankers.

My bottom line is that if players can play for the joy of ruining the game for others than Blizz has not done their job well. Gank/greif players should not be coddled. If they want to do that crap, shadowbane is looking for players. Let them go elsewhere and leave the honorable fighting to the rest of us.

Mange.

BTW I love the game so far.... just a bit disappointed on this issue. I was really looking forward to people being accountable for stupid behavior.

[GreenArmadillo]

Actually, if they're bent on carrots instead of sticks, one thing that might work would be increasing honor rewards based on the number of PVP enabling kills the victim has. E.g. Killing a level 30 character wouldn't be worth almost anything to a level 60 normally, but if the level 30 has been spending their time in a newb zone camping merchants at a level 6 town and ganking anyone foolish enough to put up their PVP flag they might suddenly be worth a LOT of honor. This would also make the legit PVP elites targets, but killing one of the top PVP players on a server SHOULD be worth more than killing some random guy making his first attempt at it anyways. :)

[Whitering]

How often was this a concern? It may have been more in Beta. Good luck running around bugging me if you are 10 levels or more lower, not in the areas I fight in. Enemy players should be attacked by the town guards no matter what level they are, so I would be safe in the towns and whilst adventuring. Who the hell was complaining about this?

Run around and continuously bother me? Good luck.

Battlegrounds? Not clear on what those are.

This was a screwed up decision. Not at all suprising unfortunately, and you know what, that's the Mythic experience in me. Blizzard should be different. You think people didn't whine about synergies in Diablo 2? Well they did it anyways and it was fun.

I am on a PvP server, if I can't level past 30 because I can't level in those middle zones without being ganked I will just cancel.

[Argo]

I love the idea to track the number of lowbies a ganker has been killing and use that to create some sort of incentive for the badasses on your own side to come after him. This creates some incentive for high levels to come help out lowbies who are getting ganked, and some disincentive to go out and gank lowbies, but it does it in a fun "bounty-hunter" style sort of way. There'd be a reason for upper level Alliance characters to sweep through Ashenvale every once in a while and clean up the gankers, for example.

[PeonSlayer]

I agree with Tyren's post. The proposed honour system sounded very contrived, I'm glad they dropped it.

I think non-messy, fair PvP will only happen in balanced team vs team instances, similar to Guild Wars. I'm hoping the proposed Battlegrounds will bring something like this, some structure to the PvP in WoW.

Dont bet on it. With the lack of penaltys for dishonor kills that gankers should collect the gankfestorama will just get worse as time goes on.

Gankorama realms was NOT what we got told earlier but it seems like gankorama realms are what they want due to being LAZY to code it.

It is so fun to be camped over and over that i cant stop laughing about it i love it :lol:

I have ZERO problem with being killed and good excellent PvP action should be a MAJOR part of the game but if you let gankorama run rampant you get neither of it since being a group that to the victim all are con ?? it must be as challenging as killing a mindless zombie or a rattlecage skeleton when you are lvl 15 1 cough and it is dead basically.

The game needs to have a system that automatically deals with gankorama and gives them penalties to there honor and reputation.

I was looking forward greatly to a TRUE PvP game with this release a game where ganking got penalized as it should be. But instead we seem to get more of same old same old gankers paradise realms.

Perhaps it is a method to ease up the load on some of the PvP servers since very very many feel cheated with the decision that seems to have been made. And trust me it will ease up on it rather quickly since very few are actually into loving to be a gankers ***** over and over.

[Mangedor]

I love the idea to track the number of lowbies a ganker has been killing and use that to create some sort of incentive for the badasses on your own side to come after him. This creates some incentive for high levels to come help out lowbies who are getting ganked, and some disincentive to go out and gank lowbies, but it does it in a fun "bounty-hunter" style sort of way.

That does sound like a good idea. Also you could add a tag to them that made them desirable targets in big battles. even just one word like "dishonored" in their info to let people know there is a bounty on their head and killing them gets you a nice reward.

I'm sure someone will find a down side....

Mange.

[Coldcell]

People, do not use Corpse camping as an excuse.

There is the SPIRIT HEALER to prevent THAT!

[Coriolis]

Bleh spirit healer. There are ALTS for that. This game is fast enough to allow even pretty casual players to have an alt and get to a decent level. Especially since your corpse remains in the world when you log off I think this is downright the best way to scew with corpse campers. They try to corpsecamp you, you go play an alt for an hour and those idiots are wasting their time standing around your corpse.

Once more people realize that I don't think there will be any issue. Even better, if you have a high lvl alt who's around you can log on and show those little bastards who's boss :).

Seriously if you expected a "fair" system you really should've stayed on pve servers. Pvp will always be unfair and chaotic. If you get easily frustrated then it's just not for you.

I don't think blizz is backing off from a penalties system because it will be that hard to implement but rather because it will contribute to a more regulated pvp experience and that is just not what it's about :). Implementing a good system may be hard but it's definetly not *that* hard, I think they are just giving people an excue when their real reason is simply that they don't think it's neccesary.

[degnar]

People, do not use Corpse camping as an excuse.

There is the SPIRIT HEALER to prevent THAT!

Sort of. This whole issue goes beyond just corpse camping. Corpse camping is pretty easy to get away from.

The worst instances of ganking I saw were "zone" camping... basically a lvl 60 char hangs out in a zone where lowbies (i.e. lvl 20-40) are questing. All the lvl 60 does is run around and kill any lowbies they find. This effectively shuts down the game for everyone in the zone until you can get friends/guildmates to clear the person out. And often they are back in an hour. There needs to be a system that makes this behavior very undesirable.

I have no problem being killed when in PvP. That is what it is about. I like having to watch my back. The "strong" units should destroy the "weak" units. The towns should be overrun and destroyed. This needs to be possible. possible. This might even be honorable.(?)

The problem is separating this from what I described above. There should not be a penalty for killing a lower player. There should be a strong "disincentive" for continuously killing the same char(s) over and over. One person should not be able to shut the game down for 50+ others.

[JackedUpJesus]

I would be very curious to find out how many people posting here actually know how much effort it would be to design and code most of these systems they are proposing, not even taking into account the enormous effort it takes to add them to already massive amounts of code and still have it all work. It's not like you just type out steps into a text editor and it magically converts it to C++, or whatever they are using for WoW, and then integrates it into the already existing code. You have to significantly modify the game's engine. I find it somewhat offensive that people feel justified in calling Blizzard lazy when they have no real concept of just how hard they work and how talented they really are.

[Terhmino]

It's not really that big of a deal. Stay out of the areas likely to be extremely dangerous, and only in contested areas close to your home territory, unless you're lvl 60, in which case go wherever the heck you want.

PvP is fun.

[Hopfrog]

Well you've pretty much said it all here. I will take Blizzards response to this as a portent of the future, I hope they respond well!!
Ribald
Master of Arms
Aeternum Erus

[Xlorep DarkHelm]

Ouch. The reason i intend to play a PvP server is because i thought Blizzard were gonna move forward on Player vs Player rules, not backtrack and just leave it as it is, which just seems lazy to me. I figured by the time the game comes out in Europe they'd be a nice balanced set of rules, honour system and all, for a good PvP server experience.

If they leave the PvP servers as they are, i'll seriously be thinking about playing on a blue server.

So now, Blizzard, the company who "don't like to release information about their games early incase they have to pull it" (paraphrased), have now added the honor system to the list of no shows...


Heroes
Battlegrounds
Honor System
Weather

I can live without weather but the other 3 are major parts of the game that have been pulled/postponed. Nice.

~1have2much3time

The only postponing was till after release. Honestly, at this very moment, I'd rather they got the server database problem completely solved (without needing to pull the servers down each and every night to re-align the database) before anything else. The missing parts you listed aren't show-stopping. The database problems are. It's called prioritizing, are you at all familiar with the concept?

[skellekin]

Seriously, you guys are making this way to complicated.

The point of a PvP server is to be able to be killed... by anyone, as well as kill anyone. If you don't like those rules go to PvE. I'm serious, I don't want you on my server if you can't stand being in a more realistic enviornment.

As for the PvP honor system, simply put I think the best way to make this work is to make it a reward system. By this I mean that if you kill someone within your level range you earn "PvP experinece", however if you kill someone too low then you get nothing but the sheer gratification of ridding the world of one more nasty dwarf.

Feel free to comment, but I believe this way not only maintains the meaning of PvP but also encourages people to do so.

[The Romulans]

I've been going over it again and again, and I hate to say it - bleh, they're right.

Rewards for killing above, yes.

I think the best idea so far is probably the "dishonor flag" idea - if you kill someone dishonorably you get the dishonor flag, which in turn, allows the enemy to get some sort of greater reward from killing you.

[Ikkei]

Actually, if they're bent on carrots instead of sticks, one thing that might work would be increasing honor rewards based on the number of PVP enabling kills the victim has. E.g. Killing a level 30 character wouldn't be worth almost anything to a level 60 normally, but if the level 30 has been spending their time in a newb zone camping merchants at a level 6 town and ganking anyone foolish enough to put up their PVP flag they might suddenly be worth a LOT of honor. This would also make the legit PVP elites targets, but killing one of the top PVP players on a server SHOULD be worth more than killing some random guy making his first attempt at it anyways. :)
That system seems indeed very powerful and totally within WoW's state of mind.

Dishonorable players would become targets of choice for the opposite faction, eventually for their own faction. With a nice long-term timer so that dishonor decreases, it would totally rock (being flagged for all faction, it would take several weeks or more to get totally unflagged, getting killed would only remove a *few* dishonor). That allows players to choose their play style, but at the cost of being exposed. On the other side, you get rewarded for killing dishonorable players, which is perfectly realistic. You can fall into the 'dark side' of your path, then come back from it after 'redemption'. No matter which words we put on it, behavior is IG, and it's all about choices... The key to a realistic world.

May not be perfect, yes, but the idea looks good enough to be submitted to blizz imo.

---
Now about those saying Blizz is lazy -and other disrespectful assessments- : you guys just can't be living in the same world as I am. Do you really know who Blizzard is? Or did you just discover them a few weeks ago along with WOW's launch announcement?
Or maybe you don't have ANY IDEA of what it is to run a MMO, especially when you get 500,000+ players within a week.
I wonder what you would say if your boss told you you were just lazy and unskilled because you couldn't do a one-month work within a week.

[Mangedor]

The point of a PvP server is to be able to be killed... by anyone, as well as kill anyone. If you don't like those rules go to PvE. I'm serious, I don't want you on my server if you can't stand being in a more realistic enviornment.


Heh, what is realistic about that? In the "real" world if you do something considered unpleasant buy society then you are branded a villain and prosecuted... seems to me the "realistic" thing to do would be to implement some type of minor punishment for acting in a way that annoys others for the sport of it.

I think thats all most people expect... if someone acts like a jerk, (not just killing a lower player but doing it repeatedly with the purpose of being annoying) that they will at some point be held accountable.

Otherwise its chaos... which I understand is what some of you want and I don't discount the validity of that. I just personally would not find a free-for-all as interesting as open PVP with rules that help prevent stupid behavior.

Mange.

[zkajan]

I think thats all most people expect... if someone acts like a jerk, (not just killing a lower player but doing it repeatedly with the purpose of being annoying) that they will at some point be held accountable.
let's run with that example
if you were a WW2 US soldier somewhere in France in late 1944, and you had gone through the beaches of Normandy, and before that you were in the Italian campaing, you'd have a reasonable amount of exp, if you will, and let's say you are at lvl 35
now, there is some German soldier that was just drafted from the reserves a few weeks ago, since it's clear the lines are failing the Germans are drafting just about everyone now into the army. it'd be reasonable to say you are lvl 3.
would it be *ganking* it the US solider kills that German soldier?
should he incurr dishonor for doing so, and when he gets back home later be forced to pay higher prices (merchants) and get passed up on job offers (quests) because he killed that German soldier?

[Semidi]

Doesn't really bother me, I get ganked by higher levels all the time. That's why I joined the pvp server to get ganked and gank. I don't have an issue with getting a 10 on 1 serving. I really don't see how an honor system would have mattered. With the dishonor system their still was no penalty for dying, but there is one for killing. Wait for battle grounds for fair pvp.

What about 40 equal level players killing a solor? Is that not fair either?

In game example: A group of level 30 trolls are questing in stonetalon. Me, a level 60 troll, (I'm no 60 just using this for the example) gets a whisper from the trolls who are getting corpse camped by level 40 gnomes.

Why would I get dishonor for doing an honorable thing? That's why, I think, blizzard took it out. It caused more problems then it solved.

Keep you candy and rainbows on the pve server. Keep ganking in pvp servers. If you joined the pvp server with dreams of not getting ganked then head over to the pve server.

[Mangedor]

let's run with that example
if you were a WW2 US soldier somewhere in France in late 1944, etc...

I am sorry to disagree, but to me, your example seems flawed... at no time in RL combat is a solder that much more powerful than one on the other side. They are usually very close in physicality and equipment (in comparison to WOW). And yes if a heavily armed soldier slaughtered many many unarmed and unskilled recruits who are trying to train with wooden rifles or worse yet trying to surrender then yes... he would most likely be tried for war crimes. Or at the very least be court-martialed jailed or punished in some way.

War is not supposed to be chaos, (altho I am sure it more like chaos than not its just not SUPPOSED to be) there are very strict rules agreed on by most of the world. We have a name for the people that don't comply with those rules. Think about it.

And if the folks back home heard about what he did... who knows, maybe they would close their shops to him or he would not be welcome in the corner bar if recognized.

I think it would be a closer analogy would be if a person in a tank rolled around a town purposefully killing everyone even though they only had sticks to fight with.

Just my opinion... I don't expect everyone to agree.

Mange.

[zkajan]

I am sorry to disagree, but to me, your example seems flawed... at no time in RL combat is a solder that much more powerful than one on the other side. They are usually very close in physicality and equipment (in comparison to WOW). And yes if a heavily armed soldier slaughtered many many unarmed and unskilled recruits who are trying to train with wooden rifles or worse yet trying to surrender then yes... he would most likely be tried for war crimes. Or at the very least be court-martialed jailed or punished in some way.

War is not supposed to be chaos, (altho I am sure it more like chaos than not its just not SUPPOSED to be) there are very strict rules agreed on by most of the world. We have a name for the people that don't comply with those rules. Think about it.

And if the folks back home heard about what he did... who knows, maybe they would close their shops to him or he would not be welcome in the corner bar if recognized.

I think it would be a closer analogy would be if a person in a tank rolled around a town purposefully killing everyone even though they only had sticks to fight with.

Just my opinion... I don't expect everyone to agree.

Mange.
seeing as i GREW UP IN A WARZONE i think i know a littl bit more about how actual wars and combat work
and while regular soldiers don't "level up and get new spells" there is a big gigantic difference between a veteran and a rookie
the Romans knew it, the medieval strategists knew it, and modern army knows it too

[Arioch]

seeing as i GREW UP IN A WARZONE i think i know a littl bit more about how actual wars and combat work
and while regular soldiers don't "level up and get new spells" there is a big gigantic difference between a veteran and a rookie
the Romans knew it, the medieval strategists knew it, and modern army knows it too Of course there is a difference in the abilities of soldiers, but what your talking about is the same as a difference between a level 25 Hunter who doesn't know how to play his class, versus another level 25 Hunter who does. The second Hunter will kick the crud out of the first, because he's a better player, not because the first Hunter was ten levels lower and was physically incapable of hitting him.

[Mangedor]

seeing as i GREW UP IN A WARZONE i think i know a littl bit more about how actual wars and combat work
and while regular soldiers don't "level up and get new spells" there is a big gigantic difference between a veteran and a rookie
the Romans knew it, the medieval strategists knew it, and modern army knows it too

I am sorry you have had it rough... really, that sucks. I never implied I knew more than you or that you opinion was invalid. Just that I didn't agree... and I still don't.

You don't see what I'm saying at all??? I find that astounding that there could be such a difference about such a simple thing. I understand that "no-rules" people like playing in a free-for-all and I respect that. I just don't understand why that appeals to you. I don't think its as fun to play a game that does not attempt to demand honorable combat.

I played Shadowbane for quite a while and eventually I just got sick of it because unless you made it your whole life you were doomed. It was boring beyond belief to me. You sound like you would love it... there is no structure what so ever... none. You may want to try it... I'm not trying to be a smart-guy here I honestly think its the game for FFA PVP folk.

Think about that guy in the tank... really don't you think thats more like what we are talking about? What is going on has nothing to do with being "real" and why would anyone want it to?! I just want it to be as ENJOYABLE as it can be... I personally enjoy unjust acts and dishonor being punished. Even in games... : )

Mange.

[Radish]

This is pretty basic but I'd like to see it this way:

Treat PvP the same as experience for killing monsters. If the player is too low a level then you get no honour.

If the PvP kill was lower level but made in your territory then there is never a loss of honour. You're just defending your lands.

If the PVP kill was lower level and made in the other faction's territory then there is a loss of honour unless they engaged you or did something to effect someone who engaged you (buffing). Treat this the same way as monsters as well. Lower level enemies would be green (non-aggressive) but if they engage you they become red and you can kill them but there will be no honour gained.

I know ganking sucks but I haven't seen too much of a problem so far. Sure sometimes some jerks start killing off the low-levels PC but usually it doesn't take to long for the Local Defense to kick in. If someone can't handle the thought of ganking there are non-PVP servers they can go on.

Also they could implement a diminshing returns system so that if someone constantly is killing the same person then they would get less and less honour until the kill is no longer giving them honour. The reverse could also hold true to repeatedly killing lower level PCs. After a few times you would be losing more and more honour. Hopefully this would help somewhat with ganking but lets face it....there's going to be players who don't care about honour at all. Even penalties for low-honour won't stop them from ganking if that's what they enjoy.

Most (if not all) of these ideas have probably been mentioned already but I'm too lazy to read them all. :xmad:

[zkajan]

I am sorry you have had it rough... really, that sucks. I never implied I knew more than you or that you opinion was invalid. Just that I didn't agree... and I still don't.

You don't see what I'm saying at all??? I find that astounding that there could be such a difference about such a simple thing. I understand that "no-rules" people like playing in a free-for-all and I respect that. I just don't understand why that appeals to you. I don't think its as fun to play a game that does not attempt to demand honorable combat.

I played Shadowbane for quite a while and eventually I just got sick of it because unless you made it your whole life you were doomed. It was boring beyond belief to me. You sound like you would love it... there is no structure what so ever... none. You may want to try it... I'm not trying to be a smart-guy here I honestly think its the game for FFA PVP folk.

Think about that guy in the tank... really don't you think thats more like what we are talking about? What is going on has nothing to do with being "real" and why would anyone want it to?! I just want it to be as ENJOYABLE as it can be... I personally enjoy unjust acts and dishonor being punished. Even in games... : )

Mange.
Honor is fine for duels and such, but in war there is no such thing. It's kill or be killed.

[Colovion]

I think it's a real shame that they aren't incorporating the honor system - that was one reason I joined a PvP server.

Blizzard shouldn't give up on this idea, there must be some way to make an honor system work. As it is, it'll be annoying when players get to be higher levels across the board and you have raids going into the noob towns.

[blahblah2]

Oh lovely... The game is supposed to be PvP centric yet without someway of preventing the killing of lowbies its really not gonna turn out how they wanted to (the one method of making everyone worth a certain amount of points and lower lvls are worth next to nothing was good).

As it is on dragonmaw lol all people do is raid the starter zones of each race... no one pvps against their own lvls /gasp that might present a challenge. Nope though the only real pvp is in a conested region like oh say stranglethorn where you gotta fight off horde/alliance to do your quests. But other than that 99% of all PvP is and probably will be lvl 50's fighting lvl 1's. And thats probably all it will ever be.

[Mangedor]

Honor is fine for duels and such, but in war there is no such thing. It's kill or be killed.

Exactly... and this is a game, an IDEALIZED version of war that is designed to be fun. sooooooo... your point?

Look we don't want the same thing, thats no crime. Lets not start our own war over it. : ) I think our discussion started because someone someone said that FFA PVP was closer to RL and I am sorry but that just makes me laugh. Everything we do is effected by the rules of society. Sociology describes a person who ignores those rules as a psychopath. A bad thing to be in RL but playing one in a game is merely annoying... heh.

I think people who have problems with a dishonor system most likely feel that way because they like to gank. I honestly see no other valid reason for being dead-set against it. No system I have heard described would drastically punish someone who occasionally killed a low level to defend their land or themselves or in a big battle.

People who want to play a game as a ruthless honor-less character have every right to do so. (as long as it stays a game : ) ) Just be honest about it, except the consequences. I just think even on the PVP servers their should be minor consequences. Like I said, no big deal just different wants for different people.

Mange.

[Mangedor]

This is pretty basic but I'd like to see it this way:

Treat PvP the same as experience for killing monsters. If the player is too low a level then you get no honour.

If the PvP kill was lower level but made in your territory then there is never a loss of honour. You're just defending your lands.

If the PVP kill was lower level and made in the other faction's territory then there is a loss of honour unless they engaged you or did something to effect someone who engaged you (buffing). Treat this the same way as monsters as well. Lower level enemies would be green (non-aggressive) but if they engage you they become red and you can kill them but there will be no honour gained.

I know ganking sucks but I haven't seen too much of a problem so far. Sure sometimes some jerks start killing off the low-levels PC but usually it doesn't take to long for the Local Defense to kick in. If someone can't handle the thought of ganking there are non-PVP servers they can go on.

Also they could implement a diminshing returns system so that if someone constantly is killing the same person then they would get less and less honour until the kill is no longer giving them honour. The reverse could also hold true to repeatedly killing lower level PCs. After a few times you would be losing more and more honour. Hopefully this would help somewhat with ganking but lets face it....there's going to be players who don't care about honour at all. Even penalties for low-honour won't stop them from ganking if that's what they enjoy.

Most (if not all) of these ideas have probably been mentioned already but I'm too lazy to read them all. :xmad:

I think in a nutshell what you describe is all all us "pro dishonor" people are asking for... seems very reasonable to me. I see very little downside to your outline. The arguments against such a system posted here don't hold water with me.

Mange.