Feedback talk:User/Kalizar/PvP Zones

The only popular game I can think of that encourages players to farm other playes by having items drop on death is PWI, which people pay through the nose for consumables that DON'T let that happen. I vote No. Weaponmaster 18:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh, hell NO. Do not like this suggestion at all. The only time this would be acceptable is if both sides agreed to dual. Previously Unsigned 19:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

A dual that displays a contract first that you must sign with your character name. Rypofalem 20:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

That would be fine, I just don't want to be wondering around and have some scrub kill me with an overpowered build and then take my items. Previously Unsigned 20:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I called it PvP ZONES for a reason. I didn't mean having to go through your day and then get pwned by someone, I meant that there should be areas where such PvP can be done. Like some of the Sulfurous Wastes, some of the Ring of Fire Islands, and generally different areas that have no use whatsoever besides the explorer title. So please don't comment on it when we're talking about multiple different things. Kalizar of the Demagon 00:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

"Also, among this feature of guild halls in the PvP zones, I suggest that you may destroy the guild halls, take materials, money, etc from the ruins..." Stop right there. --Kyoshi (Talk) 19:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

loosing items?!

u play runescape dont u?

Getefix 21:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

I did, in fact, play it. But they removed the second-greatest pvp system out there, and the game, in itself, failed miserably. Kalizar, Lord of War 01:33, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Have to agree. One major draw for me to Guild wars is the Casual style of play. Most MMO's already make you lose things when you die. Guild Wars is different--and should STAY different. sure you can say that it only happens in certain areas, but maybe I like to explore and see that area's landscape. whether for my explorer title or just for the sake of seeing it. I don't want there to be area's that are off-limits unless I am willing to lose items. I used to play runescape too... and lost millions because I lost connection during a fight. I quit runescape and found Guild Wars. Roflmaomgz 12:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm gonna have to defend the OP, some people commenting here just aren't making any sense. Since when did he say the entirety of GW2 would work like this? I got the gist that maybe <1% of the areas would be like this. If you don't wanna go there and lose items, don't go there! If you wanna explore without risk, run around in loin cloth :P Greep 22:19, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Runescape fails accept it. Now if u want to get loot from killing players learn to ha (its not the same but close). Btw. runescape fails. Making areas like that tend to make developers want to put somethings worth discowering in those areas, or something worth killing so running around in you loincloth isn't going to help you. (oh did I forgot to mention how runescape fails?). The pvp system in gw1 is already brilliant (except for skill "balancing"), so it doesn't need too much changes, just learn to use it properly. OH and loot from kills is for pve, and cos gw2 seems to encourage "fun to play for everyone, no griefing etc. I doubt they would put in system that makes it possible for players to lose theirs most presious items in a whim.88.113.135.202 19:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I know it fails. But I'm just suggesting an alternative for the people who actually want to get something out of their PvP. Honestly, HA is nothing like what I just described. HA is a bunch of people getting together running gimmick builds in order to win in a thing that really isn't all that fun. Now, what I'm suggesting is where if there are 50 people in a room, those 50 people will try their best to kill everyone in the room around them. The guy on top, wins, or some of them run away and look for better chances of winning. Now, I'm not suggesting that this will be EVERYWHERE. That, my friend, would suck very, very badly. BUT!!!! I do think that this should be in some places in the game, as a completely optional alternative to the structured PvP GW has already. I'm not thinking of replacement of our current, awesome PvP system, just of a system which would be completely OPTIONAL for all players to decide whether or not to play in. Looting on death is for monsters? Does it have to be? Seriously, ever heard of Ultima Online, the game which was pretty much the first major MMO which all other MMOs have copied, which still has thousands, if not millions of active players that pay a monthly fee for graphics WORSE than World of Warcraft's? Now, do you think ALL of those people who spend their money on a 2d graphics-game JUST for the PvE? No. Honestly, I'd respect your OPINION better if you actually knew basic grammar, but you don't, and you really don't think that HA is similar to "Looting off of corpses" do you? The HA chest is a RANDOM drop. I want to kill a guy with a Vampiric Dragon Sword and get the Vampiric Dragon Sword off his corpse, plus whatever other items graced to be in his inventory. I don't want to get stuck with noobs on my team, I want to kill the noobs and form a team with pro's at my level. Kalizar, Lord of War 22:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

if my grammar is so bad please point out most of the mistakes (that are not done on purpose) sorry for not being native english speaker. And just believe me, the kind of pvp your suggesting is in contradiction with everything that anet wants their pvp to represent, and most players just find the idea horrible. Btw you know good balanced ha > all gimmicks? 88.113.135.202 09:26, 27 May 2010 (UTC)