[Guide] World-RP-pvp for beginners

Lazarus wrote:I know who you are.
Just a habbit calling you by you'r old characters name.

I was Gogol.

Oh...

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:*eyes forsaken* where was his grave again?

At the isle by th-*Gets kidnapped and stabbed to death*

Rasonal Dranger wrote:

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:*eyes forsaken* where was his grave again?

At the isle by th-*Gets kidnapped and stabbed to death*

*sweeps his corpse under the carpet*

...let that be a lesson to you.

As for Gogol/lazarus's comments, they are all quite valid and interesting, i shall make sure i incorporate them into the big edit!

Rasonal Dranger wrote:
At the isle by th-*Gets kidnapped and stabbed to death*

Yes, he's right! I was at the funeral actually. That small island south of th-...*muffled noises*

Mandui wrote:

Rasonal Dranger wrote:
At the isle by th-*Gets kidnapped and stabbed to death*

Yes, he's right! I was at the funeral actually. That small island south of th-...*muffled noises*

*stuffs her corpse into a wardrobe*

...anyone else feeling bold!?

Candlejack was he

Rargnasha wrote:Candlejack was he

dont worry folks, edits -are- coming, i just have alot to edit! be patient and keep the comments coming!

Well..I could aid this guide with accompanying strategic maps if needed?

Kaigron wrote:Well..I could aid this guide with accompanying strategic maps if needed?

all welcome and appreciated, perhaps even some information from an experienced commando/scout/assassin...

I think you might be taking wpvp in world of warcraft just slightly too seriously here

Or you too unserious. ;P

Glilya wrote:I think you might be taking wpvp in world of warcraft just slightly too seriously here

Ummm it could be me waking up but how is w-pvp being taking to seriously?

tis a guide, to help those new to w-pvp or looking for isperation. i doubt few people here dis like a nice war campign.

bah i'm rambling time to find a coffee

p.s keep up the good work

Leaina wrote:

Glilya wrote:I think you might be taking wpvp in world of warcraft just slightly too seriously here

Ummm it could be me waking up but how is w-pvp being taking to seriously?

tis a guide, to help those new to w-pvp or looking for isperation. i doubt few people here dis like a nice war campign.

bah i'm rambling time to find a coffee

p.s keep up the good work

I think its more to the point that WPvP is very rarely (unless staged by both sides such as an ambush) little more than two sides lining up and charging at each other. Its an alright guide, sure, but it does feel a little.. bogged down in some things that in the majority of cases won't be used.

I don't really find anything wrong with the afore ranted 'line battles' to be honest. We've had a few of them but in most cases (when drama hasn't arisen) people have enjoyed them. Mixed up battles such as ambushes (quite common) have proven to be good too. At the end of the day people come to WPvP to slug it out with the opposite side to make it feel immersive in the sense that they are actually fighting a war with their enemy. In-character you're going to want a win, sure but at the end of the day a sucessful WPvP event (as with the game in general) is about both sides having fun and not pretending your a virtual commander and winning at all costs.

Gunnell wrote:

Leaina wrote:

Glilya wrote:I think you might be taking wpvp in world of warcraft just slightly too seriously here

Ummm it could be me waking up but how is w-pvp being taking to seriously?

tis a guide, to help those new to w-pvp or looking for isperation. i doubt few people here dis like a nice war campign.

bah i'm rambling time to find a coffee

p.s keep up the good work

I think its more to the point that WPvP is very rarely (unless staged by both sides such as an ambush) little more than two sides lining up and charging at each other. Its an alright guide, sure, but it does feel a little.. bogged down in some things that in the majority of cases won't be used.

I don't really find anything wrong with the afore ranted 'line battles' to be honest. We've had a few of them but in most cases (when drama hasn't arisen) people have enjoyed them. Mixed up battles such as ambushes (quite common) have proven to be good too. At the end of the day people come to WPvP to slug it out with the opposite side to make it feel immersive in the sense that they are actually fighting a war with their enemy. In-character you're going to want a win, sure but at the end of the day a sucessful WPvP event (as with the game in general) is about both sides having fun and not pretending your a virtual commander and winning at all costs.

if such was the case, then Blizzard wouldnt of bent to the enormous demand from rolepplayers who wanted RP-pvp servers making. DB was made to cater to the W-pvp i have here created a guide for. simple line up battles and 'ambushes' in organised contexts can be created on any server simply by turning your blue shield off...

I wrote this Guide to promote DB's true purpose, not what people got bored of on Argent dawn in 2005. And if your perhaps not aware, thats large scale, epic, challenging and Fun World pvp.

Krogon/Sulthar wrote:
if such was the case, then Blizzard wouldnt of bent to the enormous demand from rolepplayers who wanted RP-pvp servers making. DB was made to cater to the W-pvp i have here created a guide for. simple line up battles and 'ambushes' in organised contexts can be created on any server simply by turning your blue shield off...

I think the point was to -force- the blueshield off so that people couldn't just walk around in enemy territory as if it was their back yard.

I thought it was to keep the ooc ganking away?

I'm sort of inclined to agree with Seiken/Krogon. Why do we have to separate tactical and competetive fighting and IC fighting? I mean, I don't organise many fights... but usually it seems to me to be chance or if one side is caught unprepared that decides the outcome of a battle? Why can't we have tactics and strategy?

I mean, there's many IC benefits that I can see. Our commanders could get reputations based on how they fight and how well they succeed. Some may get a reputation of being bold, creative and others passive. Skilled scouts could earn a IC and OOC reputation for that. Instead of being one faceless member of the line you could be holding a flank, stand in the reserve, hold the centre or be part of a strike team?

Why can't we combine rp with having advanced tactics, well trained participants, good coordination and utilising everything we have? Why can't we be effective and IC at the same time?

Gahalla wrote:I'm sort of inclined to agree with Seiken/Krogon. Why do we have to separate tactical and competetive fighting and IC fighting? I mean, I don't organise many fights... but usually it seems to me to be chance or if one side is caught unprepared that decides the outcome of a battle? Why can't we have tactics and strategy?

I mean, there's many IC benefits that I can see. Our commanders could get reputations based on how they fight and how well they succeed. Some may get a reputation of being bold, creative and others passive. Skilled scouts could earn a IC and OOC reputation for that. Instead of being one faceless member of the line you could be holding a flank, stand in the reserve, hold the centre or be part of a strike team?

Why can't we combine rp with having advanced tactics, well trained participants, good coordination and utilising everything we have? Why can't we be effective and IC at the same time?

Marry me.

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:I thought it was to keep the ooc ganking away?

I think the point of giving people the option to turn pvp off in their own territory stems more from stopping lower-levels getting ganked, however I see the logic if you are say standing in the Cathedral Square.. Any orc who could get close would be decapitated.

Anaei/Vezullia wrote:

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:I thought it was to keep the ooc ganking away?

I think the point of giving people the option to turn pvp off in their own territory stems more from stopping lower-levels getting ganked, however I see the logic if you are say standing in the Cathedral Square.. Any orc who could get close would be decapitated.

Doesn't make it any less retarded to become unattackable.

Thats like saying I'M IN MY HOUSE YOU CAN'T SHOOT ME IN MY HOUSE!

Cyaska wrote:

Anaei/Vezullia wrote:

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:I thought it was to keep the ooc ganking away?

I think the point of giving people the option to turn pvp off in their own territory stems more from stopping lower-levels getting ganked, however I see the logic if you are say standing in the Cathedral Square.. Any orc who could get close would be decapitated.

Doesn't make it any less retarded to become unattackable.

Thats like saying I'M IN MY HOUSE YOU CAN'T SHOOT ME IN MY HOUSE!

Well of course not, but some people dislike the aspect of an ooc rogue ganking their level 42 warlock while they are trying to rp. I myself do not turn my pvp off, don't get me wrong. However I am just saying I can see the logic of some. It may be retarded to become unattackable but it's just as retarded to think you can attack someone anywhere.

Anaei/Vezullia wrote:

Cyaska wrote:

Anaei/Vezullia wrote:

Kristeas Sunbinder wrote:I thought it was to keep the ooc ganking away?

I think the point of giving people the option to turn pvp off in their own territory stems more from stopping lower-levels getting ganked, however I see the logic if you are say standing in the Cathedral Square.. Any orc who could get close would be decapitated.

Doesn't make it any less retarded to become unattackable.

Thats like saying I'M IN MY HOUSE YOU CAN'T SHOOT ME IN MY HOUSE!

Well of course not, but some people dislike the aspect of an ooc rogue ganking their level 42 warlock while they are trying to rp. I myself do not turn my pvp off, don't get me wrong. However I am just saying I can see the logic of some. It may be retarded to become unattackable but it's just as retarded to think you can attack someone anywhere.

That's how it goes. It all depends on your personal standards and mood. A major annoyance of mine is the people who roll on an RP-PvP server intentionally and then do either one or the other, not even touching the other aspect at all. While I will admit to blueshielding on rare occasions when people charged Silvermoon while I couldn't be arsed, that's about it. While these days I can rarely be bothered to argue with blueshielders (Especially now I'm tabbed out from a wormhole operation gone wrong >.>), it still remains a pet peeve.

To respond to your last sentence- It COULD happen that you are attacked anywhere. Freak occurances happen. Negligence happens. Not checking a crate happens. Being magically invincible, on the other hand, only happens if your name is Rasputin.

Updated and ready for added comments. tactics or ideas welcome.

Not sure if this should be in a topic for itself or in here, but I reckon it'd be good for both budding leaders and experienced commanders, as well as participants, to have some fodder for their thoughts on this subject.

Im sitting with some thougths about Thursdays W-PvP battle, mainly rules in W-PvP as well as what to do with those who break the established rules 'on purpose', I reckon some of the things can slip, but when a person starts doing it on purpose, or just slips all the time, how to handle that?

With my thoughts on the W-PvP battle, there was a rogue who repeatively battle ressed. Being in dialouge with Angos via R.ID, I was being assured he was yelling plenty at his side not to ress during battle.
Yet despite this, the behavior of the rogue was unchanged throughout all of the figth, how should that be handled?
My first personal thought would be if the person keeps breaking the rules again and again, even after warning given, perhaps blacklist said person from w-PvP events till they prove that they're ready to follow the rules?

On another subject, I had an idea of how to better moniter such things as people ressurecting in battle, I know there are some addons (Like recount) that measures the amount of deaths people suffers in your raid (For example, anyone who'd suffer 2 deaths in the same battle, would probaly have battle ressed).
One can also have the "Show" raid option on, that shows all the members of your raid and their health, then it'd be easy to see if a participant resses during battle, click his or her name and send a whisper. Though this would require a person to sit out on the battle.

As a last brainfart, battle resses, as in, the actual abilities, such as the ones druids, shamans and warlocks have, are they best being allowed, or should one keep your hands off of them, to avoid confusion? Personally I would prefer the latter, which I also know that Rasonal called for in the Horde raid, (If everyone followed, I am not sure). But at the end of the day, if there's something that's bothersome about w-PvP, it is the drama that sometimes follows, which I am personally interested in lowering as much as possible for future events.

Edit: If any moderators see this post fit to be in another place/topic, feel free to re-locate it.
Counter-Edit: It's fine.

Rargnasha wrote:Not sure if this should be in a topic for itself or in here, but I reckon it'd be good for both budding leaders and experienced commanders, as well as participants, to have some fodder for their thoughts on this subject.

Im sitting with some thougths about Thursdays W-PvP battle, mainly rules in W-PvP as well as what to do with those who break the established rules 'on purpose', I reckon some of the things can slip, but when a person starts doing it on purpose, or just slips all the time, how to handle that?

With my thoughts on the W-PvP battle, there was a rogue who repeatively battle ressed. Being in dialouge with Angos via R.ID, I was being assured he was yelling plenty at his side not to ress during battle.
Yet despite this, the behavior of the rogue was unchanged throughout all of the figth, how should that be handled?
My first personal thought would be if the person keeps breaking the rules again and again, even after warning given, perhaps blacklist said person from w-PvP events till they prove that they're ready to follow the rules?

On another subject, I had an idea of how to better moniter such things as people ressurecting in battle, I know there are some addons (Like recount) that measures the amount of deaths people suffers in your raid (For example, anyone who'd suffer 2 deaths in the same battle, would probaly have battle ressed).
One can also have the "Show" raid option on, that shows all the members of your raid and their health, then it'd be easy to see if a participant resses during battle, click his or her name and send a whisper. Though this would require a person to sit out on the battle.

As a last brainfart, battle resses, as in, the actual abilities, such as the ones druids, shamans and warlocks have, are they best being allowed, or should one keep your hands off of them, to avoid confusion? Personally I would prefer the latter, which I also know that Rasonal called for in the Horde raid, (If everyone followed, I am not sure). But at the end of the day, if there's something that's bothersome about w-PvP, it is the drama that sometimes follows, which I am personally interested in lowering as much as possible for future events.

Edit: If any moderators see this post fit to be in another place/topic, feel free to re-locate it.
Counter-Edit: It's fine.

Moderators eh?

ahem, anyway... i shall endeavour to piece something together.

In regards to your point about troublemakers, i have had to put up with them in the past, and personally i find my approach simple.

If the leader of a Guild cant control his/her members in a fashion that corrosponds with the rule set of a battle, then you should ensure the guild leader does something... to which end, i usually inform the guild leader that they and their guild in entirety with no exceptions are not welcome to further event until that individual is made an example of or suitable changes have been made. It Does work.

Shit rolls down hill, essentially.