How important is ganking to your WAR experience?

[Kalyptein]

How important is "ganking" to you.

Ganking in this context is any of the following (in PvE zones only):
*Killing someone from below 75%
*Killing someone with mob(s) on them
*Uneven odds stacked in your favour

[Kiminara]

Meh. I've never been a class that had the ability to 'gank'. I've certainly been on the receiving end of it though, and never enjoyed that.

[Loekii]

How important is "ganking" to you.

Ganking in this context is any of the following (in PvE zones only):
*Killing someone from below 75%
*Killing someone with mob(s) on them
*Uneven odds stacked in your favour

So basically anything that is above a /duel is considered ganking?

And I assume this doesn't apply to the Open RvR ruleset, as there are no 'PvE' zones, but rather RvR and Non-RvR zones (which basically if 'focused war front' and the rest of the area).

[Aqe]

Uh.. where is the i don't like it option?

[Ralzar]

Uh.. where is the i don't like it option?

Yeah, I was looking for that as well.

[Kalyptein]

Yeah, I was looking for that as well.

I guess if you mean "it" as in Ganking of any kind (as opposed to "it" being this poll itself) I intended it to be option 4 - Core ruleset, in that you will participate in RvR and scenarios but won't end up ganking (character limit made me remove that bit :/ )

[Hive]

I guess if you mean "it" as in Ganking of any kind (as opposed to "it" being this poll itself) I intended it to be option 4 - Core ruleset, in that you will participate in RvR and scenarios but won't end up ganking (character limit made me remove that bit :/ )

"Don't care" means just that, one does not care either way. "I hate it", which should be an option, means you do care about the subject and want it to not be apart of the game.

[Browncoat-WHA]

Poll edited ;)

Be aware that the "who likes to gank" thread has already brought up the fact that ganking has many different definitions, so this poll is ultimately not going to be that accurate.

[NoneSuch]

Wheres the " I like Open RVR, but don't like the idea of ganking - Though I know it's going to happen and is just part of the server?"

[Commentaris]

PvP without ganking is like riding a motorcycle without the accidents.

you know there's a good chance you'll have a crash before you get on a bike. you accept it and get on the bike hoping today it's not your day to die, while knowing full well that somewhere outthere there's a biker that will have a horrible accident.

[Ranti]

Poll edited ;)

Be aware that the "who likes to gank" thread has already brought up the fact that ganking has many different definitions, so this poll is ultimately not going to be that accurate.

Honestly with all the different definitions for that term it almost has become to basically mean anything other than a duel of the same class with the same gear.

I voted I hate ganking, but in reality I hate this poll

I hate killing anyone below your level bracket

Not fond of killing someone who is fighting a npc, but it isn't below me

Anything else is fair game, if they aren't at max health then they should of planned/scouted the area better

I am going open RvR server (99% sure)

[Chrismorris]

Ganking is fun for sh*ts and giggles once in a while. Open or Core RvR, not fussed.

[Aysop]

Ganking is fun for sh*ts and giggles once in a while. Open or Core RvR, not fussed.

I love everything that defines the word "ganking". But I would rarely go out of my way to do it unless the main part of the game suddenly got boring.

[Duty]

How important is "ganking" to you.

Ganking in this context is any of the following (in PvE zones only):
*Killing someone from below 75%
*Killing someone with mob(s) on them
*Uneven odds stacked in your favour

Due to the gear advantage and skill advantage I expect to have, nearly any kill I get is going to be a gank. :(

[Gemini]

Ganking as in killing lowbies - BAD

Ganking as in killing people while fighting a mob or another player - GOOD(in WAR, other games I might feel different)

[Kharnan]

Killing other people no matter of what they're doing or their lvl is fine. As long as I'm the one who kills.

Nauuu, it's gonna be my buiseness to keep it like that. :)

[Auricthunder]

PvP without ganking is like riding a motorcycle without the accidents.

you know there's a good chance you'll have a crash before you get on a bike. you accept it and get on the bike hoping today it's not your day to die, while knowing full well that somewhere outthere there's a biker that will have a horrible accident.

Interesting metaphor. So... motorcycle accidents are a good thing? If the motorcycle designers could completely eliminate the possibility of an accident occurring, they should just say, "Eh, the risk is what makes it fun?"

[Mecka]

Ganking as in killing lowbies - BAD

Ganking as in killing people while fighting a mob or another player - GOOD(in WAR, other games I might feel different)

I agree. I really dislike the killing of lowbies, and I support the chicken-mechanic in both core-ruleset-servers and open-RVR-servers. Chicken FTW!

But if I find a dwarf fighting a mob, he's not safe by any means. And if I'm running around with a couple of friends, and we come across a single enemy player, he certainly won't be spared. And people will do the exact same thing to me. And that's just how that should be, IMO, on PvP-oriented servers (or RvR-oriented).

So here's to hoping the chicken is still applied on Open-RvR-servers - otherwise I'll have to pick a core server, although I really prefer the open kind. But griefing of lowbies, that's a big no-no in my book. The chicken is just great, let's never get rid of it!

[Zimjin]

I voted for the second option, but I wanted to comment that it's more like:
"I don't mind a mechanic designed to prevent high level characters from ganking low level characters."

I really hate the chicken mechanic though. I think it's an exceedingly stupid way to solve the problem, for multiple reasons.

[Kurimus]

I hate ganking too but if you are weak you are weak get deal with that. If you are higher ranked and better armored you should be able to kill weak players as many you want. I mean war is everywhere and in "real" war would you go and kill weaker characters if you could.

[Frein]

Generally, I go by the "If it's red, it's dead" philosophy, which means I'll attack any enemy regardless of his/her situation, though without actively seeking easy kills, but sometimes I feel merciful or tired and can't be bothered to gank.

[Krulltak]

I'll attack any enemy I see.

Ganking, by my definition, is to prey upon weak and easily slain lower level players. The chicken mechanic fully prevents this from happening, so there is nothing to worry about.

But if you get near me, I will kill you.

[Eldaran]

I hate ganking!!!! Which I refer to as a much more powerful player one shots a lower level player. What i do not have a problem with is losing against 2 or 3 other people near my level. If I can take one of them down before I drop i think that is amazing. No need to grief players much much lower than you. Go find someone near your level that is running a way from a mob or something. Certain dirty tricks are welcome as long as it is by someone that you could potentially put up a fight to. Chances are like in WoW even a person 5 levels above you is extremely difficult to kill, but chances are they cant cast one spell and wipe your entire HP bar down to nothing. That's not fun or exciting for both parties. If you really are a super duper PvPer like I hear you all claiming, then why not go find a challenge instead of tormenting little guys. Just my opinion

[Pira]

Gank is for freaking cowards, that are scared of diyng..

But if I see a enemy in front ofme, i'll kill him, i don't even look at his health or if hes attacking a monster or afk, i'll just kill him.

But i NEVER, EVER kill any lowbies.

[Grim and Frostbitten]

definitely want to be able to gank.

[Kalyptein]

Ty browncoat :) In hindsight the intestion was to get a measure of how much people would want to take part in ganking and how important they see it as a feature in WAR, rather than if they themselves disagree with it as such (although they may be the same thing - I'm kinda hungover). e.g. you could say "I like ganking, but if it was removed from the game I wouldn't care" VS "I like ganking, if it was removed from the game I wouldn't play it"

edit: I just wanted to see if the vocal anti-chicken rule people represented a majority of what people wanted to see in WAR.

[Mo0rbid]

You are misusing the word "gank" on several levels. ITS PVP welcome to reality

[Yvo]

Honestly I don't even care much about ganking, I think it should be able to happen, and if you don't want it to happen to you, avoid that situation as best you can. Theres no real penalty for death, you can't be corpse camped, and all in all you lose maybe 5 minutes of your time.

It's not even wanting to gank people, or wanting to not get ganked for me. I just think limiting players through a mechanic that turns them into a chicken is... whats the word? Oh yeah, retarded.

[Blaze]

In the last thread we sort of agreed that polls like this don't serve any purpose, because people seem to have a different opinions about what actually constitutes ganking.

If you can't agree on definitions and just end up arguing about semantics, and not the actual issue.

But for the OPs definition, I don't really mind it. I like the feeling of danger that comes from having to look over your shoulder. And I like the freedom of beeing able to attack anyone I want (around my level ofc), that helps the immersiveness and the feeling of beeing in a real war.

[Roargh]

It moves, it is targetable, it dies.

[Loekii]

In the last thread we sort of agreed that polls like this don't serve any purpose, because people seem to have a different opinions about what actually constitutes ganking.

If you can't agree on definitions and just end up arguing about semantics, and not the actual issue.

But for the OPs definition, I don't really mind it. I like the feeling of danger that comes from having to look over your shoulder. And I like the freedom of beeing able to attack anyone I want (around my level ofc), that helps the immersiveness and the feeling of beeing in a real war.

I agree - both with regards to the semantics argument, as well as to the level of 'danger' that is enjoyable.

[Anborn]

I don't hate ganking, I could care less how other people decide to fight. Sadly ganking is also a part of pvp now, we've all experienced it at one time or another, as a noob and as a pro. I don't think there are ways of getting rid of it completely, but WAR seems to have the right idea. As for how important it is to me, I don't do it at all, but I don't have a hatred for it like others. People are free to gank all they want if it makes them happy, I just wont be with them.

[ChosenOne]

The first tier to me is off limits. Learn your class, decide if its the one you want and if you wish to go on with it. But if you step foot into the next tier area you are "in the game" as far as I am concerned. You have taken that next step into the ranks of the army from the "boot camp".

At that point I dont consider it "ganking" but instead a possibly unfair fight. Dont sit there and whine about it, go find some friends and put together a counter to such. You are part of your army, to sit there and cry that its unfair to me is just...laughable.

In my opinion Tiers 2-4 should be open and I will be in a server that has that if its available. I dont care if it slows down my ranking up, thats not a big deal to me. Thats WAR, its never a perfect situation. You deal, and you overcome.

[Auricthunder]

The first tier to me is off limits. Learn your class, decide if its the one you want and if you wish to go on with it. But if you step foot into the next tier area you are "in the game" as far as I am concerned. You have taken that next step into the ranks of the army from the "boot camp".

At that point I dont consider it "ganking" but instead a possibly unfair fight. Dont sit there and whine about it, go find some friends and put together a counter to such. You are part of your army, to sit there and cry that its unfair to me is just...laughable.

In my opinion Tiers 2-4 should be open and I will be in a server that has that if its available. I dont care if it slows down my ranking up, thats not a big deal to me. Thats WAR, its never a perfect situation. You deal, and you overcome.


First of all, part of the appeal of Warhammer is right off the bat, you're engaged in RvR. When you log on to the game, you have the option of significantly contributing to the t1 RvR. There is no boot camp here.

And this is a game, not actual war. To have a server where tiers 1-3 are essentially worthless because of the power a t4 player wields is simply not fun for the lower levels. It makes the game a grindfest, level as fast as you can, no time to enjoy the game 1-39, so that you can actually contribute to the conflict.

T4 players should not have the option of slowing down their ranking up in exchange for wreaking havoc amongst the lower tiers, because simple ganking is the least of the problems. T4 players entering lower tiers of combat means the lower tier players are worthless.

[Pseudoman]

The first tier to me is off limits. Learn your class, decide if its the one you want and if you wish to go on with it. But if you step foot into the next tier area you are "in the game" as far as I am concerned. You have taken that next step into the ranks of the army from the "boot camp".

At that point I dont consider it "ganking" but instead a possibly unfair fight. Dont sit there and whine about it, go find some friends and put together a counter to such. You are part of your army, to sit there and cry that its unfair to me is just...laughable.

In my opinion Tiers 2-4 should be open and I will be in a server that has that if its available. I dont care if it slows down my ranking up, thats not a big deal to me. Thats WAR, its never a perfect situation. You deal, and you overcome.
Really what your saying is create a noob zone, toss the whole tier system out the window and have one front where anything goes.

[Loekii]

Really what your saying is create a noob zone, toss the whole tier system out the window and have one front where anything goes.

I would /pass on that game.

Again, if a Tier 4 player cannot cut it in the Tier 4 zones, they should either accept it, or get better.

No need to negatively impact the game for others, simply to make the poor Tier 4 player feel better about their poor PvP skills. ;)

[Tbaism]

Aren't we suppose to earn exp through almost every aspect of the game, continually moving us forward as though it were an invisible hand? Like some, from what I have heard, I don't expect there to be an option to make a Tier "twink". I hate that word with a passion. So if there was no real way of simply slowing everything down to a complete halt, how much effect can players actually have on the lower tiers such as 1-3? Sooner or later they will be pushed forward, so if they don't make enough influence while they are there in that tier, than they will never be able to if they can't return. That is what I got out of it all, but then again, I can't say it was the right interpretation.

If the system is made so that just about all progrssion in the effort is done primarily through RVR and PVP, wouldn't the chicken mechanic or the boundaries somehow neglect and hinder that concept?

I have been curious about that for awhile now, so if anyone could clarify, that would be highly appreciated.

[Apocryphus]

Being that this game revolves around a constant war, those that participate in the war, despite the strength of those participants, are considered combatants. Combatants all run the risk of dying. It's part of the game, it flows with the lore, there's nothing wrong with it. If you think any northman would hesitate to engage any servant of the empire, stronger or weaker, you're sadly mistaken. Ganking is a term created by those with nothing better to do than complain while the rest of the community continues to advance in the game. I don't care if it gives me xp or not, citizens of the empire are KoS, no matter what tier they're currently in, and on the same token, I fully expect to be purged with righteous fire by any warrior priest or witch hunter or whatever that happens upon me while I'm doing my best to bring down their civilization. I'm not going to sit around and corpse camp some poor chump for hours, that's boring for everyone, but I'll blast them into oblivion and move on to the next stooge in my way.

[Loekii]

You are right. It is war, and soliders will sometimes attack weaker opponents, despite orders from superiors.

So, following that logic...

The gods have decreed a curse upon the lands that if you attack 'unworthy' opponents, you will be turned into a chicken.

So there. It is still 'war' and you can still try to attack a lower tier enemy, but the gods' curse will turn you into a chicken.

Just because you personally do not like it, does not mean the gods are wrong, nor that they are likely to change their minds.

[Auricthunder]

Aren't we suppose to earn exp through almost every aspect of the game, continually moving us forward as though it were an invisible hand? Like some, from what I have heard, I don't expect there to be an option to make a Tier "twink". I hate that word with a passion. So if there was no real way of simply slowing everything down to a complete halt, how much effect can players actually have on the lower tiers such as 1-3? Sooner or later they will be pushed forward, so if they don't make enough influence while they are there in that tier, than they will never be able to if they can't return. That is what I got out of it all, but then again, I can't say it was the right interpretation.

That sounds about right. However, the tier stuff that they are leveling into is more powerful than the tier stuff they leveled out of, so there really wouldn't be much point to continuing to gain influence in lower tiers anyway.

If the system is made so that just about all progrssion in the effort is done primarily through RVR and PVP, wouldn't the chicken mechanic or the boundaries somehow neglect and hinder that concept?

No, the chicken mechanic is crucial to allowing the primary progression to be through RvR. Without the chicken, RvR would be dominated by t4 players, so new players would be stuck leveling through PvE.

[Tbaism]

That sounds about right. However, the tier stuff that they are leveling into is more powerful than the tier stuff they leveled out of, so there really wouldn't be much point to continuing to gain influence in lower tiers anyway.



No, the chicken mechanic is crucial to allowing the primary progression to be through RvR. Without the chicken, RvR would be dominated by t4 players, so new players would be stuck leveling through PvE.

Well the post was meant to be together, instead of recieving two seperate response. You answered my question though thank you. The last part of my response, was the result from my first. It meant that if players weren't able to contribute to the cause, the first time they were in that tier, than they wouldn't be able to go back and try to fix the problem, because of the chicken mechanic. It would force them to influence the cause solely through PVE anyways. But since I didn't quite understnad the real concept, my interpretation is a bit irrelevant anways, and should just be ignored.

Since that is the case, the chicken must STAY! The first thing I siad.

[Loekii]

Aren't we suppose to earn exp through almost every aspect of the game, continually moving us forward as though it were an invisible hand? Like some, from what I have heard, I don't expect there to be an option to make a Tier "twink". I hate that word with a passion. So if there was no real way of simply slowing everything down to a complete halt, how much effect can players actually have on the lower tiers such as 1-3? Sooner or later they will be pushed forward, so if they don't make enough influence while they are there in that tier, than they will never be able to if they can't return. That is what I got out of it all, but then again, I can't say it was the right interpretation.

If the system is made so that just about all progrssion in the effort is done primarily through RVR and PVP, wouldn't the chicken mechanic or the boundaries somehow neglect and hinder that concept?

I have been curious about that for awhile now, so if anyone could clarify, that would be highly appreciated.

Well not all progression is RvR and PvP based. PvE activities affect the progression as well, and thus also benefit the player.

The chicken mechanic is comedic symbology of the game mechanic restricting Sandbagging (comedy reflecting that only Chicken Players Sandbag).

As Auricthunder (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/member.php?u=15403) stated above, it is crucial to their design for proper progression.

They don't want Tier 4 players hanging out in Tier 1 zones, and they certainly do not want them affecting the Tier 1 experience of the Tier 1 players.

Basically what it comes down to is that some players want to sandbag, and the developers of the game have not only said no, but added comedy to their answer.

They could have simply prevented sandbagging in the same manor they have prevented Dwarfs from attacking HE. They could have also simply put up some 'gate' to prevent a regression back into lower tiers.

However, the Chicken mechanic is just as effective, and sends a message.

I can imagine what would have happened if this game had been designed with a Mature rating.

[Blaze]

Victory points from lower tiers spill over into the higher tiers as explained in one of the podcasts. So the lower tiers matter too.

Allowing max level players to attack players in lower tiers would defeat one of the main focuses of the game: having action at all levels and allowing everyone to contribute to the war-effort. There would be no point in having lower tiers if that was the case, and the only meaningful RvR action would be for tier 4 characters.

Mythic does not want to create a game where players are forced to grind their way to tier 4 before they can do anything meaningful. In most other games leveling alts up to max level is a chore. That's obviously something WAR seeks to avoid.

[Tbaism]

Well not all progression is RvR and PvP based. PvE activities affect the progression as well, and thus also benefit the player.

The chicken mechanic is comedic symbology of the game mechanic restricting Sandbagging (comedy reflecting that only Chicken Players Sandbag).

As Auricthunder (http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/member.php?u=15403) stated above, it is crucial to their design for proper progression.

They don't want Tier 4 players hanging out in Tier 1 zones, and they certainly do not want them affecting the Tier 1 experience of the Tier 1 players.

Basically what it comes down to is that some players want to sandbag, and the developers of the game have not only said no, but added comedy to their answer.

They could have simply prevented sandbagging in the same manor they have prevented Dwarfs from attacking HE. They could have also simply put up some 'gate' to prevent a regression back into lower tiers.

However, the Chicken mechanic is just as effective, and sends a message.

I can imagine what would have happened if this game had been designed with a Mature rating.

Sorry brother, but my question was answered already in a more sufficient and efficient manner. You didn't quite get to anything that was significant in my post either, and I am pretty sure you may have interpreted in the wrong way.

Also, the chicken mechanic and the "message" behind it, was fairly obvious straight from the beginning, and anyone who didn't get that piece of information by now has been a very sheltered individual IMO.

Thanks for your comment though, appreciated either way.

[ChosenOne]

Really what your saying is create a noob zone, toss the whole tier system out the window and have one front where anything goes.

No, what I am saying is what I would do. Funny how some of you are so angry about the idea of dying like this. Have some bad days on a PvP server in WoW or something?:roll:

Secondly what difference do you want from the Core ruleset to the Open set?

That you can just go into the PvE area of your enemy in same tier that you are in?

If all you are about is going about following the mechanics of the game then just play coreset and go where you are told to go. Some other folks want to go anywhere and everywhere. Would I go into the lower tiers all the time? Hell no, the rewards would be to low. But if the other side made attacks into our lower tiers I would definately run over into theirs for reprisal attacks. Too me that takes the action into a different level that isnt promoted simply by rewards (the WoW affect) but for another reason entirely. Realm Pride.

So for all of you who just want to follow the gameplay as its set out for you, go play coreset if you cant keep an eye out around you while you are ranking up. I invite the enemy to come and try and gank me. I will be watching.

[Auricthunder]

No, what I am saying is what I would do. Funny how some of you are so angry about the idea of dying like this. Have some bad days on a PvP server in WoW or something?:roll:

Secondly what difference do you want from the Core ruleset to the Open set?

That you can just go into the PvE area of your enemy in same tier that you are in?

If all you are about is going about following the mechanics of the game then just play coreset and go where you are told to go. Some other folks want to go anywhere and everywhere. Would I go into the lower tiers all the time? Hell no, the rewards would be to low. But if the other side made attacks into our lower tiers I would definately run over into theirs for reprisal attacks. Too me that takes the action into a different level that isnt promoted simply by rewards (the WoW affect) but for another reason entirely. Realm Pride.

So for all of you who just want to follow the gameplay as its set out for you, go play coreset if you cant keep an eye out around you while you are ranking up. I invite the enemy to come and try and gank me. I will be watching.

The problem is that this does effectively toss the tier system out the window. You, personally, might not be spending a lot of time in the lower tiers; I don't think any single person would. However, the size of each realm's population is enormous. If the option was open, there could be a fair number of T4s in the lower tiers at any given time. This would effectively mean that the T4s, with their mounts and greater power, would dominate the lower level players.

This would make leveling through RvR, basically, a gigantic pain in the and not the viable route to 40 that we've been promised. If you want the ORvR zones to be PvE to 40, then RvR everywhere while the Core servers enjoy RvR from 1-40... well, I chuckle at you claiming to be hardcore.

So yes, the only difference I want with Open RvR servers is that I am able to be attacked anywhere. That doesn't mean I should be able to be attacked by anyone. I want the feeling of danger and the sense that I'm doing something somewhat useful, not the feeling of helplessness and the sense that 1-39 is just a waste of time.

[ChosenOne]

And I chuckle at your attempt to try and demean me. Seems all those in favor of the chicken are all the same. Unable to have a conversation about such without lowering themselves to such aggressive words.

You could always stick to the Core servers like all the others throwing around tough words due to the fact they are worried about how long it will take them to rank up. Thats the real issue here isnt it?

If they make the Open RvR servers nearly the same as the Core set as you wish, then whats the purpose of having both? Just make the Open RvR into the Coreset because there really isnt much difference.

[Auricthunder]

And I chuckle at your attempt to try and demean me. Seems all those in favor of the chicken are all the same. Unable to have a conversation about such without lowering themselves to such aggressive words.

You could always stick to the Core servers like all the others throwing around tough words due to the fact they are worried about how long it will take them to rank up. Thats the real issue here isnt it?

If they make the Open RvR servers nearly the same as the Core set as you wish, then whats the purpose of having both? Just make the Open RvR into the Coreset because there really isnt much difference.

Hmmm. I think this would be a bad road to go down. Trust me, I've heard your "Go play on the core servers, carebear" and I've heard it plenty. I could have used less aggressive words there, but really, I do find it ironic that the result of your concept of Open RvR is actually limiting the RvR.

[Pseudoman]

No, what I am saying is what I would do. Funny how some of you are so angry about the idea of dying like this. Have some bad days on a PvP server in WoW or something?:roll:
The gankers on WoW were annoying but you learn to live with it, but then WoW isnt a PvP game, there is no world PvP just, well ganking. I always felt there must be a better way to approach PvP/RvR and you know what? Mythic is doing it.
Secondly what difference do you want from the Core ruleset to the Open set?
That you can just go into the PvE area of your enemy in same tier that you are in?
If all you are about is going about following the mechanics of the game then just play coreset and go where you are told to go. Some other folks want to go anywhere and everywhere. Would I go into the lower tiers all the time? Hell no, the rewards would be to low. But if the other side made attacks into our lower tiers I would definately run over into theirs for reprisal attacks. Too me that takes the action into a different level that isnt promoted simply by rewards (the WoW affect) but for another reason entirely. Realm Pride.
Your right there isnt alot of difference between core ruleset and open ruleset if the chicken is still in. I think the argument really is how many people want to play on a server where gankers and griefers are given a free license, especially if there are other servers with the "carebear" PvP that some people find so distasteful.
So for all of you who just want to follow the gameplay as its set out for you, go play coreset if you cant keep an eye out around you while you are ranking up. I invite the enemy to come and try and gank me. I will be watching.
Again your right pick the server you want to play on. However I am still amazed that some people are willing to throw away any opportunity to RvR competitively in the open world at low tiers, just for some extra freedom at higher levels. Its the biggest drawcard for me. I love good fun PvP against opponents of a similar level. You simply wont get that without the chicken. Any battle that doesnt come with a queue will be won and lost by the amount of higher tier players you have.
/shrug If there are enough people who want it then Im sure Mythic will make a server. Id say its unlikely a launch but perhaps further down the track, similar to Mordred/Andred on DAoC.

[ChosenOne]

I just want the option Pseudo. Its really not so I can go and nonstop attack lower levels. Thats really not fun at all for me at all. I had a blast on Mugthol in WoW keeping an eye out for higher levels running by. It added a whole lot more to the experience For Me to have to watch over my shoulder during every kill.

I totally understand that isnt for everyone and I am not trying to say put this in the Core ruleset.

But what some here seem to want isnt much different from the coreset. Why not just make it so the Coreset allows players to go into the PvE area of the enemy at the same tier as they are in? Wouldnt that make the Coreset what you wish?

[Auricthunder]

I just want the option Pseudo. Its really not so I can go and nonstop attack lower levels. Thats really not fun at all for me at all. I had a blast on Mugthol in WoW keeping an eye out for higher levels running by. It added a whole lot more to the experience For Me to have to watch over my shoulder during every kill.

Hey, I'm on Mug'thol (US)!

I'd just point out that even with the chicken on ORvR, you still have to watch your back for enemy players of your own or lower tier, especially if they attack in groups.

[Spiky Yellowteef]

But what some here seem to want isnt much different from the coreset. Why not just make it so the Coreset allows players to go into the PvE area of the enemy at the same tier as they are in? Wouldnt that make the Coreset what you wish?

The idea Mythic has for the core server already allows Destruction players to enter Order PvE areas, or zones, and they're automatically flagged for PvP but they can only attack players also flagged for PvP.

Source: http://www.warhammeralliance.com/articles/showentry.php?e=32

[ChosenOne]

The idea Mythic has for the core server already allows Destruction players to enter Order PvE areas, or zones, and they're automatically flagged for PvP but they can only attack players also flagged for PvP.

Source: http://www.warhammeralliance.com/articles/showentry.php?e=32

So really then, why are not alot of these people going to play the Core rules then? To try and make the Open rules near identical to the Core rules so they will then be "able" to play there and say that they play on an Open server?

The more Open they make the Open RvR servers the better off their Core servers will be. The closer they make it to the Core ruleset the more likely they will just have to adopt one of them and consolidate servers as they remain too low on population.