NationStates Jolt Archive

So my wife and I have been playing on a PvP (Player vs Player) server in EQ2 for quite some time now.

Now, my general gaming style is generally laid back, with my victories and losses running about equal most of the time. In EQ2 PvP combat on the other hand, I lose a LOT.

It's because I've never really made an effort to really spec my characters out for PvP combat. I like the atmosphere and mythos of the opposing sides but I'm not out there to somehow prove my manhood by anhilating other people's characters. I've won the occasional victory when attacked in game, but more often than not, I get pwned, even by characters lower level than mine.

So recently, as an experiment, I created a character who would be my PvP prototype. My goal was to see just what I could do with one. I chose a Fae as the race (They have excellent agility and I wanted to be a Ranger) Also, Fae can glide rather than fall if they step off a cliff, and I felt this would be advantageous in an ambush. The character is named Blufae and I got her leveled to the point of PvP combat readiness. She's 12th level (the minimum at which a character can wear mastercrafted armor for that level range.)

Using the resources of my other, high level characters, (yes twinking.) I made Blackened Iron Chain armor for Blufae. Using bonewood I created a longbow and a shield. Using more blackened iron I created 2 imbued daggers for her. I also upgraded her combat abilities and spells using rare loam. With rare silver and coral, I gave her mastercrafted enchanted jewelry items to boost stats.

Blufae was in a state of upgrade for several weeks and was not played as I did this. Most of her equipment is Mastercrafted, which isn't the best in the game, but is well above average and with recent server patches, more potent than ever before.

And so it was that I sent Blufae out on a test run. Previously, she'd been killed a handful of times by evil characters of significantly lower level than she, a result of my nonaggressive play style and general laziness in getting the best possible gear.

I sent her into Frostfell, a temporary holiday-themed zone where I often got ganked (being attacked and smashed in a sort of MMO-like suckerpunch) and activated the tracking ability. Immediately, I found an evil character who was only one level lower than I. (Well within the range of levels that would be considered a fair fight.) I immediately used stealth and maneuvered behind the freep. (A term refering to an evil character from Freeport) I was slowed by stealth mode so when he pulled ahead by moving down a long slide I simply jumped, using my fae wings to descend safely. I landed right beside him. He didn't know I was there.

I struck with my stun attacks and then a sequence of melee attacks. He healed himself but I punched my upgraded backstab and ripped away his newly regained hitpoints. Somehow he healed again fast, probably an item or some kind of emergency heal. I struck again and again. My wife, who was watching, said the fight lasted about 8 seconds. When it was over, the freep was dead. I looted his corpse and left.

I was a little shocked at how effective Blufae had been. I'd never really ganked anyone like that before and was expecting an even fight. My lack of PvP experience was my biggest weakness and I thought it could well be decisive. I then felt bad... I sometimes get a little frustrated when I'm trying to quest and somebody comes along and hits me suddenly... and I had just done exactly that to someone else.

On the other hand, I did choose a PvP server... and so did he. In the words of an excellent post on the EQ2Players forum: "You didn't come here to be safe. You were safe before [on the PvE servers.] You came here to embrace your mortality."

So I steered Blufae for home and deposited my newly-looted money into the bank. So... I kinda feel like a jerk, but that's in conflict with the fact that I SHOULDN'T feel like a jerk. After all, it's only a game, and I did nothing mean-spirited or unfair. (I encountered the newly respawned freep I killed on my way out of the zone and gave him a salute, and did not attack him again.)

So I've decided that I will not use Blufae to attack freeps in their home turf. I am still not a proponent of ganking people and while I think PvP is more fun an environment than PvE, I will continue my relatively nonaggressive play style.

...but if I'm on as Blufae and there are freeps in *my* home turf, I'll show no mercy.

Thoughts?

Ganking in PVP? Isn't that what PVP is all about? Felt good doesn't it?

The anticipation of stalking a target, the rush of adrenaline during the surprise attack and the elation if you win the battle... I think serial killers felt the same way,... hmmmm....

So... I kinda feel like a jerk, but that's in conflict with the fact that I SHOULDN'T feel like a jerk. After all, it's only a game, and I did nothing mean-spirited or unfair. (I encountered the newly respawned freep I killed on my way out of the zone and gave him a salute, and did not attack him again.)

You're not a jerk.

IMO you are being much too nice and not the other way around. Once you start doing just for the misery of others, then there is a problem.

Click Stand;13321492']IMO you are being much too nice and not the other way around. Once you start doing just for the misery of others, then there is a problem.

That reminds me of a time on a different character when I passed a freep that was fighting a creature. He was down to about half his hitpoints and I'd probably have killed him easily...

But I don't think it's particularly sportsmanlike to do that (and I've had it done to me plenty) so I passed by. He reacted by leaving the fight he was in just to come and gank me...

So I have come to realize you can't assume the other guy will play with honor and sportsmanship, so kill or be killed.

Equal level pvp, all's fair. I don't go in for the attacking people who are engaged with a mob or attacking those who don't have a prayer against me. I play on a PVP server in WoW Deathwing (http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Deathwing&n=Orann). I started over there after it was a well established server, and let me say the number of high level folks with nothing better to do than slaughter people 40 levels below them is disturbing. Makes me wonder why kind of sociopath they are in person. I don't generally enjoy killing anyone, but I do love revenge.

Had one bastard killed my little alt a couple times, so logged on the old hunter and chased his ass across two zones then proceeded to corpse camp him in the middle of a hostile town. 'Cause I'm level 70, I'm petty, and I can.

I occasionally play WoW for a few months or so (until I get bored. Then I quit, but some friend always ends up playing and gets me sucked back in. Usually on a different server than I've played on, but I want to start over so I can party with then anyway...). I tend to prefer PVP servers, and if I see an alliance player (Well, unless it's the rare occasion I play alliance) that I can easily beat, I will gank them-- but I'll leave them alone after that. If it's an even fight, it'll depend on my mood and if I'm busy or not.

There was one cool time where I was in a contested zone killing some trolls for some items for my warrior's weapon quest, and it turned out there was an alliance player there camping them already. I probably could have ganked him (we were about the same level, but he was pretty badly hurt and in combat with two mobs.), but I just waved and went about my own business there. After all, if I killed him, he'd only come back and then I'd spend half the time trying to fight him or any high level reinforcements he'd call in, at which point I'd have to call in the Horde's high levels, and the whole escalation of the conflict would make it rather difficult to get my items. (I needed rather a lot of them, too.)

We had quite a good time there together, killing trolls. In fact, if one of us got in over our heads, the other would help kill a few of the adds so the other wouldn't have to do a corpse run. Also, whenever other Horde players came by, I'd ask them to leave him alone, and he seems to have done the same on the other side, because I didn't get attacked either.

Oh, how I wished Horde and Alliance could talk. That guy was cool.


Buuuut, normally I love PVP. I enjoy ganking lower level players, but I never corpse/spawn camp them, with one exception. If I hear somebody on my side is being corpse camped, and I'm able to rescue them, I will do so and then turn the tables on the corpse camper. Turnabout IS fair play. :D

The best pvp game I've played was a mud where you could attack anyone in any area and where the consequences of dying were big, since you'd lose a lot of experience, skills, stats and all your equipment. But there was still very little pvp going on since there was a legal system that punished criminals with fines, and on top of that you couldn't go around being a pain for too long before others decided to gang up and hurt you back. People would still kill each other, but usually for a good reason, such as for a contract or during a guild war.

Ganking is such a huge problem because most MMO games are very poorly designed. People that want to gank can do it as much as they want because there are no consequences. There's not much you can do, or hell, even should try doing, to prevent ganking in MMOs, because that's just how the games were designed. It is the games that need to change, not the players.

Since the game has both PvP and PvE areas, I can't see anything wrong with what you did. The other player was there voluntarily, knowing the risk. Everybody who steps into the arena shouts, "We who are about to die salute you!" and lives or dies as skill and luck dictate.

Oh, how I wished Horde and Alliance could talk. That guy was cool.


In Star Wars:Galaxies Alliance and Imperial players can talk to each other. As far as I know, that's the only game where you can.

I've been thinking a lot about how to improve the PvP system in EQ2 (and by extension, other MMOs.) In EQ2 each zone has a specific level range for PvP, so if I'm level 50 and you're level 40, and the zone has a PvP range of 8, then I can't touch you.

This sometimes causes problems for other game mechanics, and is a rickety system at best.

What I would propose is this: A meaningful honor system thta actually has an in-game effect. So in the following circumstances:

If I attack you and my level is much higher than yours, I incur a large honor penalty.

If I attack you and my level is slightly higher, I incur a small honor penalty.

If we're the same level (or within a small range) I get a small honor gain.

If I'm much lower level than you, and somehow win, I get a large honor gain.

(groups count as the sum of their levels)

The effect: Large amounts of negative honor start making life difficult. The price of goods and services in your home city start to rise. Some quests become unavailable. At greater l evels of dishonor, services and goods become unavailable to you. At an extreme level of dishonor, you will be attacked by NPCs of your own city. Grouping with someone of extreme negative honor could penalize those in the group.

Large amounts of honor can have the opposite effect, lowering prices, unlocking quests, even allowing some services to become free of charge.

If you incur large amounts of negative honor, it can me remedied by quests or through honorable play.

That would minimize exploits of a more rigid system, and yet give meaningful incentives for players to play with good sportsmanship.

What I would propose is this: A meaningful honor system thta actually has an in-game effect. So in the following circumstances:

Let me explain UO's first of many reputation/pvp systems.

First generation system, right out of release. You gained notoriety by doing either good or nasty things. Give some coin to a beggar and you gain some, attack a beggar and you lose a lot. There were rankings, at neutral you were blue to everyone and couldn't be attacked without a notoriety penalty and guards would defend you in cities. Lose notoriety by any action and the first step down is Dishonorable. At this point you're gray, freely attackable by anyone with no penalty, once killed you can be picked clean by anyone again with no penalty. Drop down several more levels by theft or murder of others and you become Dread Lord, guards will kill you, everyone gains notoriety for splatting your ass, and there may or may not be a bounty on your head (literally they could cut off your head for cash).

That didn't work very well, people didn't mind so much being cut off from cities, there was enough of a player economy it didn't matter. Hell you didn't have to buy anything because you could just loot players you killed for anything you needed.

The next step was a complete revamp of the system, now called Karma. You gain karma by killing "evil" things. You gain fame by killing powerful things, or giving away "large" amounts of money to NPCs. So you can be a Lord (high fame) and very low karma, or vice versa. At the same time they added massive penalties for PKing. For every murder you've committed (and they wear off over time) you lose 1% of your stats and skills, up to 20%. Bounties on PKs became more commonly awarded by guards. Didn't help much. People would just use a bot to work off their murder count if they died since stat loss took place on resurrection, not death.

Finally they just gave up, split the world in half, no pvp, no theft, no collision on the one side, full pvp, theft, collision on the pvp side. They also added in item insurance, so your possessions couldn't be looted when you died.


Even with massive crippling penalties people still murdered others, in huge numbers, thousands and thousands of kills each player. Still happens actually.

In WoW, I've gone through a number of situations:
1) I meet a horde and I kill them and I go on my way, damned be their or my level. They could just have stayed out of a contested zone :P I never corpse camp low levels though, only equal or higher.
2) I meet a horde, wave to them, and move on, leaving them to their own devices.
3) I meet a horde, my brother mind controls them, and I buff them and we leave.
3.1) They are confused and all is well.
3.2) They attack and me and my brother completely annihilate them.
4) Hordes attack me and I defeat them. Then they attack me nine times more and I defeat them every single time. They never learn :p So I end up playing with them, leaving them at the brink of death and then killing them as they try to flee.

*snip*

But it would also encourage lower level players to attack higher level players, knowing that the higher level players will be in a lose-lose situation.

But it would also encourage lower level players to attack higher level players, knowing that the higher level players will be in a lose-lose situation.

Well in a hypothetical system like mine, if the lower level player initiates combat, then the higher level player should incur no penalty for winning the fight.

Well in a hypothetical system like mine, if the lower level player initiates combat, then the higher level player should incur no penalty for winning the fight.

Doesn't really matter, low level player risks essentially nothing by attacking even if they lose. They gain if they win.

Doesn't really matter, low level player risks essentially nothing by attacking even if they lose. They gain if they win.

True, but I'd expect that to be offset by the fact that a victory is highly unlikely, and with the rate of increase of power with level, using a zerging tactic might be counterproductive since it would take so many lowbies to bring down a high level character that the sum of their levels would likely incure an honor penalty.

I've tried out pvp a couple of times and didn't like it because I don't want to be bothered (ganked) and I don't want to be bothered with bothering (ganking) anyone else. All is fair in a pvp format (from what I've seen) and it's just not my style.

And not being able to physically voice what I want to say to someone frustrates the hell out of me (typing/writing has never been a satisfactory outlet for me in communication -- especially not when there is a conflict). So I decided a long time ago it's not a good idea to put myself in an environment/situation that will bring about a higher probability of this (this is also why I do not argue/debate in forums .. anymore).

Blue servers suit me well. I don't deal with idiots or young punks and don't have to worry about being zerged when I'm going about my merry way.

I've always thought that many of the best players predominately play pvp (use to be that way in EQ1 anyway) though. I'd think you'd have to be since you're having to fight characters controlled by an actual person and not just npc's.

And yea .. you and whoever else on a pvp server really don't have a reason to complain since you knew what you were getting into.

Here's a rather interesting article about types of player personalities. The approach to PK/PvP players -- the kind the author calls "killers" -- is interesting. He mentions the socially negative effect of such activities, but also talks about how keeping a certain number of killers in a game is necessary to maintaining a balanced game dynamic (but one must be careful not to let them multiply too freely).

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm

I play Eternal Lands, which segregates PvP/PK and PvE zones but has no karma, law or other system of consequences/rewards or behavior. Ganking is a constant theme in the PK zones. There are players who do nothing else but sit and wait for weaker players to happen by so they can wipe them out in 2 seconds. Amazingly, between 2 second murders, these PKers spend their time on the Eternal Lands forums, complaining that PK is dead in that game because nobody does it anymore. Apparently, it never crosses their minds that people do not think it's fun to get knocked into hell and lose equipment 12 times a day, without even a chance to get experience points from it. Players like me stay out of PK zones because we don't like being bothered by players like them.

Eternal Lands tries to bait players into the PK zones by making them the only places to get valuable resources. All that does is drive up the market value of those resources, as only a few people are willing to go get them.

The game tries to encourage PvP by making level-restricted training arenas. In these arenas, you can't initiate an attack if you are above a certain attack/defense level, thus promising to prevent ganking. But then the game implemented a potion that has the supposedly negative side effect of lowering attack and defense skills. It lowers attack/defense, but it does not affect physical strength or the nexus points to use high level weapons/armor. So the gankers just use enough of the potion to lower their skill levels to the point where they can attack in the restricted arenas and wipe out newer players who can't match them for strength or equipment. There's also an invisbility potion, which gankers use to sneak up on PvPers and murder them after they've taken damage (because, see, most PvPers looking for a place to play/train together, will not enter an arena if they see certain people loitering about). And yet, with these ideal tools for murdering people, gankers still complain that PK is dead and boring.

So the latest thing Eternal Lands is trying is a dedicated PK server. It's brand new; I think there are like 15 people on it so far. PK may not be dead there yet, but it isn't really alive either. Frankly, I don't see much more hope for PK there than on the main server, unless a whole different kind of player appears out of nowhere to use the PK server. It will just be the same bunch of gankers bitching that weaker players avoid them, and stronger players are, well, stronger (gankers apparently don't believe that turnabout is fair play).

I'm not into PK play. I don't find war games exciting. I don't get a rush out of using my little cartoon puppet to beat up someone else's little cartoon puppet. To me it's boring to do and distasteful to think about. And I have zero interest in looting corpses. My policy is, if I do somehow manage to kill someone, I will save and return their dropped equipment, or if I really don't like the person, I'll just leave it where it is and let them worry about recovering it. But I do enjoy a little cartoon martial arts training and sword dueling now and then -- non-lethal practice with agreement to return lost items if someone dies -- a friendly pastime where the goal is not to win or lose but for both players to rack up lots of experience. But I don't do that in Eternal Lands because of all the goddamned gankers who haunt the PK/Pvp zones like muggers.

PvP can be a lot of fun if it's more meaningful than a brutal mugging. For example, the most fun I had in an MMO was role-playing with a clan on a WoW PvP server. We organized raids on Alliance towns and high ranking NPC's for the fun of it, getting into the spirit of merciless slaughter and conquest as we did it. In PvP zones, we were as merciless as the characters we roleplayed and we had a great time fighting pitched battles against other RP clans that patrolled zones.

In any game with an RPG system for leveling and PvP, imbalances in character strength and equipment will make fights incredibly unbalanced for most players. No matter how good you are with a level 15 character, a level 50 will still wipe the floor with you unless your friends are close by. Hell, even in similar levels, the right spec or twink will kick your ass before you can respond. Unless MMORPG's change their fundamental mechanics, lack of balance will suck the satisfaction out PvP for players that prefer a good fight or a good reason to fight rather than an easy victory or sure loss.

Here's a rather interesting article about types of player personalities. The approach to PK/PvP players -- the kind the author calls "killers" -- is interesting. He mentions the socially negative effect of such activities, but also talks about how keeping a certain number of killers in a game is necessary to maintaining a balanced game dynamic (but one must be careful not to let them multiply too freely).

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm


You know, as interesting as I think that essay is, I've always found it a bit... biased against the "killers," and, to a lesser extent, in favor of explorers.
I mean, look at how he basically describes each play style:

Achievers: They like to level up and get really skilled at the game.
Explorers: They plumb into the depth of the game, discovering all sorts of neat secrets. Sure, they could level up really high a lot, but they don't want to.
Socialisers: A bunch of really swell guys who like to hang out and talk and have a good time
Killers: Huge jerks whose single goal in life is to ruin everybody else's fun. (They're also stupid.) And they're jerks. Who hate it when other people are happy, so they try to make them miserable by ganking them.

Anybody else ever get that vibe from it?

I mean, I enjoy PVP, not because it upsets somebody, but because I can be very competitive and often enjoy playing against a sentient, thinking human over some dumb AI. Plus, playing with other people is just... different from playing alone, even if the other people are over the internet.

I mean, I enjoy PVP, not because it upsets somebody, but because I can be very competitive and often enjoy playing against a sentient, thinking human over some dumb AI. Plus, playing with other people is just... different from playing alone, even if the other people are over the internet.

Competetion between opponents of fairly equal levels, skill and equipment are one thing. But when it's someone near the top consistently griefing new players with significantly lower levels and equipment, that's not PvP. That's bullying.

On my WoW server, high levels ganking low levels got so common, my alts ended up in the guild: Gank my alt, meet my main. And i literally camp my main in the areas where im levelling my alt, just so i can relog and countergank the gankers. Its actually pretty annoying. I simply can't see whats so fun about killing a character 20+ levels lower then you, theres no challenge, no reward, no nothing.

Now, 70vs70 lvl PvP is fun, and i enjoy it a lot. Even though people keep bitching about how overpowered my class is ;)

Apart from the days when PvP areas seemed to be full of nothing but zergs (and some 3 man understrength group I'd be in) it was a bit of fun - even getting zerged could be funny. Things that pissed me off were the l33t attitude a few had. If you were a PvP novice, it made the learning curve rather more difficult, as you'd avoid parties that had those types in it, and be a bit wary of asking questions in group/guild chat. It was rather aggravating in that the majority weren't like that, but the few were sufficiently off-putting to make it seem that way.

(That was DAOC, btw)

I simply can't see whats so fun about killing a character 20+ levels lower then you, theres no challenge, no reward, no nothing.

It's pretty much the bully mentality. Expression of self worth by denigrating the worth of others.

In Star Wars:Galaxies Alliance and Imperial players can talk to each other. As far as I know, that's the only game where you can.

SWG was beat by years by Anarchy Online where people from all sides (Omni-Tek and the Clans, neutrals aren't a "side" ;p) not only can TALK with each other, but also trade, buff, kill stuff and so on with people from the opposing side. The factions only come to play really in the Shadowlands where you can't team with the other side's people to gain SK unless you are killing monsters which aren't sided, and in PvP where you have the towers, Battle Stations and such stuff.

Also, in Universal Century.net Gundam Online, it was perfectly possible to talk with anyone. Just that anyone could also attack you (or steal anything you drop on the ground) so if you wanted to trade with the enemy, you had to do it somewhere secluded.

And I like Anarchy Online's PvP system. Sorta. It makes a lot of sense. There's level ranges you can PvP with (220ers can PvP with people down to level 175 and so forth) and certain special conditions have to be met for PvP to be possible in the first place, like less than 100% gas (100% gas = no PvP or PvM possible). In 75% gas (= PvE zones and cities since guards need to be able to kill folks) you can PvP by getting flagged (which you get from attacking a guard). There are 25% and 5% gas zones (25% is faction based PvP zone, 5% is mayhem) where PvP can happen without flags. But you can NEVER kill people below (or above!) your level range. So no bastardly newbie killing unless the néwbie has gone to a low gas zone or gotten flagged.

I played eq2 and WOW for quite a while.
Had a lvl 70 wiz, and a 70 templar.

I would duel occasionally, but wasnt on a pvp server.
Its a lot of work to get "Uber-Armor" and didnt want to squander my hard won equipment and cash on the chance some 12 year old dickface from Qeynos would sneak up and smash up, and make off with my shit.

In a duel, however, you better hope you get the first hit, because if not, wizzie wins with little effort.

One thing I kinda want to clear up is that when I say 'ganking' I don't mean just getting killed by another player. (I realize the way I told my story might seem like that's how it's meant.)

To me, a gank is different form a fair fight. A gank is when you're out there solo and a group that's composed entirely of toons that are higher level than you comes up and wipes you out, or when you're in a zone that has an 8 level PvP range and you're hit by someone fully 8 levels higher than you are. Basically, use 'gank' when it looks like bullying.

That said, the only PvP griefers I really have a problem with are the ones who kill you over and over again just out of meanness. In EQ2, if I come up and kill you, then you're on my 'hate list.' It means the for the next 30 minutes, if I kill you again I get no XP, no PvP stat gain, no chance to loot, nothing. There's absolutely no incentive whatsoever to kill somebody who's already on your hate list.

Yet some people do it... Over and over and over. Generally, if I'm in a zone and I get into a PvP fight and lose, I just go back to what I was doing, and generally the one who got me leaves me alone because there's no reason to fight again (unless I think I can take him, in which case I might retaliate ;) ) but for those 30 minutes, we just ignore each other. After the half hour is up, all bets are off. Fine. It's the people who keep doing it, just because they can, that I'd consider griefers.

It's the people who keep doing it, just because they can, that I'd consider griefers.

Like I said, the bully mentality. Why do it again and again when there is no tangible benefit whatsoever to doing so? The only two logical conclusions are that either you've done something that makes them, or someone who hired them, so angry with you, vindictive measures are warranted, or, they gain gratification over asserting their dominance over those weaker than them.

One thing I kinda want to clear up is that when I say 'ganking' I don't mean just getting killed by another player. (I realize the way I told my story might seem like that's how it's meant.)

To me, a gank is different form a fair fight. A gank is when you're out there solo and a group that's composed entirely of toons that are higher level than you comes up and wipes you out, or when you're in a zone that has an 8 level PvP range and you're hit by someone fully 8 levels higher than you are. Basically, use 'gank' when it looks like bullying.

That said, the only PvP griefers I really have a problem with are the ones who kill you over and over again just out of meanness. In EQ2, if I come up and kill you, then you're on my 'hate list.' It means the for the next 30 minutes, if I kill you again I get no XP, no PvP stat gain, no chance to loot, nothing. There's absolutely no incentive whatsoever to kill somebody who's already on your hate list.

Yet some people do it... Over and over and over. Generally, if I'm in a zone and I get into a PvP fight and lose, I just go back to what I was doing, and generally the one who got me leaves me alone because there's no reason to fight again (unless I think I can take him, in which case I might retaliate ;) ) but for those 30 minutes, we just ignore each other. After the half hour is up, all bets are off. Fine. It's the people who keep doing it, just because they can, that I'd consider griefers.

I'm more aggravated that the wiki article for ganking only talks about your MMO stuff and not . . .

[Female:] Ok, what would be the situation when you so-called "gank" somebody?

[Verse Two: Eazy-E]

Wait... for some people to leave
I got another trick up my sleeve
Step with pep to the back of the house
Look then... all the lights are out
Grabbed the door and it's locked, so
easily made my way to the window
Lift it up slow, cause it takes timing
Looked around, and then I climbed in
Once inside, I start takin
Cause you know it's no time for shakin
Get what you gonna get, front and center
or get five years for breakin and enter
Move quickly, but no runnin
Shht, I think somebody's comin
Hear the front door key, and I flee
out the back door with a fist full of jewelry
Over the wall... don't fall
Wipe my sweat cause that was a close call
Gettin ganked by the E is a lesson
So... is there any more questions?

MMO PvP makes me very, very certain that humanity is doomed.

You know, as interesting as I think that essay is, I've always found it a bit... biased against the "killers," and, to a lesser extent, in favor of explorers.
I mean, look at how he basically describes each play style:

Achievers: They like to level up and get really skilled at the game.
Explorers: They plumb into the depth of the game, discovering all sorts of neat secrets. Sure, they could level up really high a lot, but they don't want to.
Socialisers: A bunch of really swell guys who like to hang out and talk and have a good time
Killers: Huge jerks whose single goal in life is to ruin everybody else's fun. (They're also stupid.) And they're jerks. Who hate it when other people are happy, so they try to make them miserable by ganking them.

Anybody else ever get that vibe from it?

I mean, I enjoy PVP, not because it upsets somebody, but because I can be very competitive and often enjoy playing against a sentient, thinking human over some dumb AI. Plus, playing with other people is just... different from playing alone, even if the other people are over the internet.
Yes, I recognize the author's apparent bias. Even though I'm kind of superficially an explorer type player, I was struck at how positive the author was about explorers and how negative he was about killers.

On the other hand, if we separate his observations from his opinions about them, then I think his approach to understanding the social dynamics of MMOs is valid and useful.

Let's be honest, the kind of killer players he describes so negatively do exist and can have extremely negative effects on a game. That kind of personality is human and we meet it often outside of games as well. Maybe what makes his paper seem SO biased is that he only briefly mentions that other kinds of PvP players exist as well -- the ones who do it as a sport or as a role-play context and not as a way to bully people without getting punished for it.

As long as we acknowledge that not all PvP players are killers/gankers/griefers/bullies, then I'd say his bias is actually less negative than it sounds, because as much as he may dislike such players, he goes on to argue that, for game developers, they are a necessary ingredient to a balanced game, although a volatile one.

Competetion between opponents of fairly equal levels, skill and equipment are one thing. But when it's someone near the top consistently griefing new players with significantly lower levels and equipment, that's not PvP. That's bullying.
I agree completely. That is pretty much the situation in Eternal Land's PK zones. It is only a small minority of players who do that, but their impact is so great that it gives PK/PvP in general a bad name. Those who do it in a fair and fun way never get any attention, as opposed to those who just make a big pain in the ass of themselves.

I know that only a small number of people bully in EL because when the game has organized PvP or PvE events, it is always the same few high level fighters who stay at the low-level arena, rather than participate in the events. They love to beat up on weaker people so much, nothing can lure them away from it, even for a day.

Does anyone know where the term 'ganking' came from?

Does anyone know where the term 'ganking' came from?

Probably from gangbang or gangrape or the sort,... probably from yanking as well,... as in yanking your guts.


Another interpretation of the intention of a ganker is that the ganker is simply trying to draw out more powerful player-characters for a serious and exciting challenge. The premise is that the more powerful player-characters will soon come to "ruin" the weaker player-characters, and that the high level player-characters will come in greater numbers than is typically seen in the game. In this manner, the ganker greatly increases the likelihood of encounter with a high level opponent. In some cases, the ganker attracts player-characters that are much more powerful than he or she is. The result can be a thrilling "cat and mouse" game and genuine test of skill. Ironically, the ganker may very well be killed by the more powerful player-characters he or she has attracted.

Probably from gangbang or gangrape or the sort,... probably from yanking as well,... as in yanking your guts.

ahh yeah...

brrrr!

Good time to link the old Bartle Test (http://www.guildcafe.com/bartle.php).

EKAS players might be descibed as living by slogan: see the world, meet interesting people...and kill them. Immersion within the world is important to these players, because they love finding new things to explore--but they also enjoy the thrill of the hunt and finding other players within the world to fight.

Breakdown: Achiever 33.33%, Explorer 100.00%, Killer 53.33%, Socializer 13.33%

Killer always rates high, even though I don't particularly enjoy pvp. I just sometimes want to kill people, because they're stupid and annoy me.

I got EAKS

EAKS players often live by the phrase 'The journey is often more enjoyable than the destination.' They are motivated by meeting the challenges of the world, but they are usually in no rush--because seeing the creatures and places of the world is even more fun.

Breakdown: Achiever 53.33%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 40.00%, Socializer 20.00%

I got:

EASK

EASK players often live by the phrase 'The journey is often more enjoyable than the destination.' They are motivated by meeting the challenges of the world, but they are usually in no rush--because seeing the creatures and places of the world is even more fun.

Breakdown: Achiever 46.67%, Explorer 100.00%, Killer 6.67%, Socializer 46.67%

I play EVE. We have total PvP. Of course, in high security systems, attacking someone whom you are not at war with results in being attacked by CONCORD, whose ships have omfgwtfpwn weapons (you die instantly). And you can't declare war on noobs. Some pirates employ suicide ganking, whereby you try to destroy the target before CONCORD shows up, then have a friend collect the loot.

In low security systems, stations and stargates have guns that fire at you if you attack someone whom you are not at war with (retaliation against an attacker is OK). However, this problem can be solved in one of two ways:

1. Engage targets away from stations and stargates (asteroid belts, random spots in space).
2. Fit a ship that can survive sentry guns.

In zero security systems, we have full-scale wars.

Also, in EVE, "gank" has no negative connotation, since playing the game means that you consent to PVP.

I have a question: Is there any difference between PK (player killing) and PvP (player versus player)? I have heard the terms used interchangeably, and also as two different concepts. I prefer the two different concepts, um, concept, in which PK is total war, no holds barred, by entering the game you consent to kill or be killed, while PvP usually has limiting rules (like level restrictions on who you can attack and penalties for attacking someone too far below you). In games that I've seen that seem to have different concepts of PK/PvP, PvP is usually either a training exercise for PK or PvE, or it is competitive (in which case, PvP could be a sport, like tennis, just as easily as fighting).

I'm wondering which is the predominant view? Are they two different things, or not? Because it seems to me, if there is no difference, then it is pointless to question whether ganking is bullying or griefing, and whether bullying or griefing matter or are even possible in a game that allows fighting at all.

So, for instance, I would say that EVE is a PK game, whereas a game with level restrictions, like Runescape for example, is a PvP game. Obviously, ganking is part of the point of EVE, while another game would consider it a bad thing.