Retro Open PvP World?

News from our fansite.
Post Reply
User avatar
Cauliflower
Big chatterer
Big chatterer
Posts: 460
Joined: 5 Feb 2013, 18:19
Character: Cauli
Guild: Mental Madness
Location: Warsaw

Retro Open PvP World?

Post by Cauliflower »

Tibians, we have a big surprise for you today!
Image
For years, our stance on proposals about retro servers was quite clear: We had deep reservations and rejected them due to the complex and for the most part unfeasible nature such an endeavour would entail. However, players have kept on pushing these proposals and we continuously received feedback in which we were asked to at least give it a try.

Despite the official rejection, we have always followed the nostalgic discussions. In addition, our circumstances and possibilities gradually changed over time which has influenced the feasibility of such a project considerably. Especially the implementation of the new PvP rule set last year, the redesigned unjustified kill system that is currently being previewed and the underlying technical framework of both have finally opened doors to certain adjustments that were hardly feasible before. So in light of the continuous, passionate feedback and the changed circumstances, our opinion on this matter has also shifted to a more favourable stance. To get to the point:

We are thinking about introducing a new game world type: Retro Open PvP game worlds. These game worlds would be available to both free and premium players, and they would have all the content and features that are currently available on normal game worlds. Also, they would also receive all future updates except for PvP. PvP rules on these game worlds would feature a couple of things old school fans probably have missed dearly. Naturally, we have to set some limits here. After assessing all the feedback on PvP these days in comparison to PvP back in the good old days, we have compiled a list of popular old school features we are willing to bring back if you want us to:
  • 2 Unjusts, which means: No matter how many characters took part in an unjustified PvP kill, only the character that dealt the most damage and the character that dealt the final blow will face consequences.
  • No Ghosting (or its predecessor swapping), which means: Everybody always blocks all other characters anywhere.
  • No Fair Fight Rules, which means: No matter how many attackers took part in a PvP kill, the death penalty of the victim will not be reduced.
  • No Twist of Fate, which means: There is no additional blessing that will protect you from the losing your normal blessings in case of a PvP death.
Some of you may miss manual aiming on this list. Despite its desired return by some players, we will not reintroduce this feature. Also, since the focus clearly is on PvP rules, these world types would not bring back features which are not only relevant for PvP (e.g. no buyable runes through NPCs). For further information on our reasoning behind this, please check the corresponding statement in the Auditorium.

We are aware that it is not possible to find a common ground that will satisfy all players who are interested in old school PvP or retro gameplay aspects in general. Nevertheless, we are ready to give this a try to see how it is welcomed and accepted by the community.

Before pursuing this any further, though, we would like to get an idea of the general interest in such a game world type and the previously mentioned possible features you would like to see there. Also, we would like to know your opinion on whether or not character world transfers to Retro Open PvP worlds should be possible. Therefore, we have started a poll including all these questions. The results will influence our decision so make sure to cast your vote and spread the word.

We are eager to hear your thoughts!

Soulorbs
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 145
Joined: 25 Apr 2014, 02:59

Re: Retro Open PvP World?

Post by Soulorbs »

I'm very happy to see, of course I'll create some chars in there

And of course NO TRANSFERS, NO VOUCHERS AND NO OFFLINE TRAINERS this is my dream

Post Reply