Re: Updates - 7/25/2009
Having just moved, I've been without internet for a week and busy even since I got it back, so I missed all this. I actually read 22 pages of this thread (in 2 sittings) today, before I simply couldn't take anymore. I would have liked to join in several of the subtopics in this discussion, but for lack of time I'll simply address a few things that come to mind instead.
There are two basic sides to this argument: those who like the AoE change, and those who don't. It saddens me that no one seems to see the big picture: You're both pointing out the same problem!
On one side, Stides and his supporters argue that it's simply too difficult (or even impossible) to kill a competent defender or runner when purple potions are not involved but heal and cure potions are. Mara and co. add that dexers who don't use potions do too little damage to effectively kill an armored target with melee alone. The underlying problem here is that characters without alchemy are underpowered. You're admitting that in the current state of affairs, alchemy is a necessity to be successful in PvP.
On the other side, players are arguing that purple potions needed some kind of adjustment. I personally started a thread that went on for 15 pages (so far) pointing out that there were really no legitimate counters or drawbacks to using purple potions. Prior to this change, the consensus in that thread was that characters with alchemy are overpowered.
How do you all fail to see that those are one and the same? Whether you think alchemy needed to be nerfed, or everything else needed to be buffed, we're all on the same page here. The difference is in your ideology of how the game should be played. There was a pretty good discussion of this in the PvP forums a couple of weeks ago, that unfortunately descended into personal attacks and ended up trammeled. I still feel that the advantage should go to the defender - the game is coded this way! Cure is faster and less expensive than poison. Heal has the same relationship to harm. I say you should be able to survive in a fair fight until you make a catastrophic mistake and your opponent capitalizes on that opportunity. Others say the true measure of skill is being able to kill your opponent despite the fact that he has made no mistakes. To that I say, you can only do that if there are tactics which your opponent cannot counter, and uncounterable moves simply should not exist.
Of all the possible things that could have been done to restore balance, I do not think this is the best choice. There is the potential for griefplay, but it's so insignificant. It only applies to noto PKing! If mounts simply have the same guild and faction allegiance as their riders, then your orange opponent's mount will be orange to you. The only places where you can go wrong are in towns and housefighting, where there are likely to be blues (hidden or visible).
That brings me to my next point: a bad trend in PvP over several years. Yew moongate became a popular spot for ambushes because it's so close to the Shadowlords' base. When factions was first introduced, and sigil carriers couldn't use magical means to transport them, Yew gate was a choke point along the most likely route for sigils headed to or from the SL base. But why for the love of God do people still insist on PvPing there when factions and sigils have nothing to do with it? It's got a guard zone as well as lots of housing, it's near a town, there are lots of vendors around generating lag, the visibility there is awful (sans treehack)... there's simply no good reason for this place to remain a PvP hot spot. And yet it does! Last time I logged into OSI to see what was going on, albeit a couple years ago, Yew moongate was the only PvP spot on Catskills. That doesn't make sense.
Why do you all insist on PvPing in the worst possible locations? What's still there to attract you? It used to be that newbies would attract PK's, PK's would attract anti's, and battles would break out on the outskirts of towns, in graveyards, or in dungeons. Factions brought the fighting (at first) to towns (but away from the crowds) and strongholds. Guild warfare allows for fighting anywhere, but you're most likely to find oranges either in town centers or at their guildhouses.
With the exception of that last one, all those spots are great for PvP, and there shouldn't be any innocent bystanders to get in the way. If a particular guild you're warring consistently uses blue hiders or runs into crowds to defend against your alchemists, and you frown upon that, stop warring them and fight someone else on your own terms!
I guess I'm suggesting for the next publish to always have mounts take the same guild/faction allegiance as their owners. That will eliminate most of the "griefing" problem. Other than that I see no need for staff involvement on that point any further. Someone suggested griefers should be banned and that should be illegal, as it was on OSI. How can you honestly expect a free shard like this to have a staff sitting around waiting to police that shit? You're being ridiculous. Fortunately, UO has a great system of player justice, and you can deal with griefers yourself. Stop fighting househiders. Stop letting yourself be lured into crowds. Kill the offending party and beat them at their own game.
The only change that's happened so far is that you can't use pots around blues with impunity. That's logical enough. I would have preferred an alternative solution, such as armor working against purple potions... but this isn't over. There are more changes to come. I hope mount notoriety is among them. Perhaps mount stamina will be as well. It remains to be seen.
As far as I'm concerned, alchemy is still overpowered, it's just a little bit risky to use in certain places, as are all AoE's. This has no effect on reds, or legit guild and faction PvPers. It's really only going to hurt anti-PK's and noto-PK's, and then only in towns.