[Website] The Ashes of Creation website will be down for scheduled maintenance on Tuesday, March 19, 2024 at 7:00 a.m. Pacific.

Estimated downtime is 4 hours. During this time, the shop and account login page will be inaccessible. We'll notify you upon completion.
Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!

Arena PvP, equalized gear ?

Is there any information regarding potential Arena PvP ?
If yes, are they planning to make the gear equalized in it ? I can understand that people want to just "kill noobs" in PvP when they achieved higher gear levels, but since this game will have Open World PvP, I think it's still important, espiecially in 1v1, 3v3 Arena modes to provide an equalized gear environment, to give a real access to PvP to all the players and letting skill alone (providing a good balance of the classes)  determine the winner(s).
«1

Comments

  • Here is some information taken from the Discord;

    Hopefully gear will be equalised in the arenas in order to allow skill and tactics to shine through.
  • Got it, thanks for your answer !

    Hopefuly, we get more information about it soon !
  • As long as the fights last longer than 3 globals  I will be happy. Please, please, please don't WOW the game to death. Lol.
  • There are games with both equalized pvp ques and with your own gear. I prefer equalized ones but maybe geared people will disagree with the rest and ragequit :D
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    An RPG is primarily about progressing your character. Taking away that progression in the arena will absolutely piss off some players - and only make those players not wanting to invest the time in to their characters happy at all.

    The biggest aspect of the game to take account of here, I think, is gear degradation. If gear degrades at a fast enough rate, and is expensive enough to repair/replace, players that are geared out may not want to use their best gear in a fight they could easily win without it.

    That said, I would be happy to see both, though I don't see a need for equalized gear arenas at launch.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    Noaani said:
    An RPG is primarily about progressing your character. Taking away that progression in the arena will absolutely piss off some players - and only make those players not wanting to invest the time in to their characters happy at all.

    The biggest aspect of the game to take account of here, I think, is gear degradation. If gear degrades at a fast enough rate, and is expensive enough to repair/replace, players that are geared out may not want to use their best gear in a fight they could easily win without it.

    That said, I would be happy to see both, though I don't see a need for equalized gear arenas at launch.
        Thats why open world pvp is a thing. In an arena we expect fair competition. But in a castle or node seige, or caravan raid, you are more than welcome to bring your excalibur or mjolnir or master sword to go wreak some havoc on under leveled defending players. But i agree with gear degradation part. If its going to be all about gear, than high level and long time players will be far too oppressive. Leaves no room for skilled outplay or outsmarting.
  • Open PvP is not about the fight, it is about the result. There will not be (many) people just fighting in the open world for the sake of it. People will fight over caravans and such - but they will do so largely by overwhelming the defenders.

    As for sieges, they are likely to be less about an individual in PvP combat and more about large scale tactics.

    People that want any kind of 1v1 fight will go to the arena.

    As I said though, I do see a place for an equalized arena - I just don't see that place being at launch, but rather after a few years of being out when the gap in gear is actually a valid complaint.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    I hope they don't equalize it.  I like to have goals and it gives pvping in arenas a purpose(something to work towards).  They should just have different sets of pvp gear, with the first tier very easy to get.  I don't mind going into pvp outgeared and working my way up to the top.  How much fun would pve raids be if they just equalized everyone's gear in pve?  How fun would that be knowing you are doing the raids for nothing, because everyone needs to be equal?  That feeling of achievement should be in both pve and pvp and removing it removes the drive to keep pvp alive.  What makes it fair is that everyone has to start at the bottom.  And if they have different tiers of pvp gear they can always keep the bottom tier within a decent gap of the top gear so the people on the bottom have a chance.  They could also just have 2 versions of each instance, ranked and non-ranked, if they plan on keeping track. 

  • I mean, I see the reasons you guys post out, but I remember my personal experience with Rift : no matchmaking, you join a pvp game as a tank, and get one-shot by an overgeared guy thats full DPS and still tankier than you.
    As said before, and I agree with that, Open World PvP and even batttlegrounds like in Blade and Soul are fine as non gear-equalized game modes, but it makes no sense imo to have a 1v1 arena mode with gear disparities. Especially since there's a ranking system that's scheduled to go live, you should rank up by being actually good and understanding matchups / windows of opportunities, rather than just brute-forcing your way out with superior gear.
    And for the PvE part, I don't believe you can compare it to PvP. It makes no sense to equalize gear in PvE because you fight AI's, whose patterns are predictable. That's the fundation of PvE instances. You can play around the patterns, and as long as you play the patterns correctly, having sufficient gear (not necessarily maxed) will always permit you to clear the instance. 
    Furthermore not equalizing gear isn't a problem as if an overgeared player joins, it just makes the run easier for everyone. If an undergeared player joins, well maybe they should first read / search for the requirements.
    Arena 1v1 with no equalization is basically like those max geared guys challenging new players to duels in the Open World. It makes no sense. Being even slightly undergeared leaves you close to no room for outplay, if not at all.
    I truly think that Arena 1v1's and even Arena in slightly bigger teams should always be equalized (like up to 3v3 for example).

    Plus, if I remember correctly, didn't the devs state that there would not be PvP / PvE gear, but only 1 set of gear ? Not sure about that one but I vaguely remember something similar.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    Noaani said:
    Open PvP is not about the fight, it is about the result. There will not be (many) people just fighting in the open world for the sake of it.

    Lol...

    Not everyone is a care bear you know. ;) Many people actually enjoy PvP for the sake of it, so gg with your "conclusions".

    https://forums.ashesofcreation.com/discussion/38136/pvp-or-pve/p1

    58% : 41% atm with large amount of votes (considering what rest of polls have in these forums). So yeah, that much about how many people will focus on PvE vs PvP.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    Gothix said:
    Noaani said:
    Open PvP is not about the fight, it is about the result. There will not be (many) people just fighting in the open world for the sake of it.

    Lol...

    Not everyone is a care bear you know. ;) Many people actually enjoy PvP for the sake of it, so gg with your "conclusions".
    Indeed.

    Thing is, even more people don't like it (by "it", I mean non-consensual PvP, not PvP in general).

    When it comes down to it, which way do you think Intrepid will go, with the few subscribers, or with the many subscribers?

    The flagging, corruption, guild war and bounty hunter mechanics exist for a reason, as do the arenas. Using a little critical thinking to figure out what Intrepid are doing and you will come to a similar conclusion to my own.
  • You assume there will not be many people who will PvP just for the sake of it and that's an error in logic (imho).

    You also underestimate how many PvPers are not following games till they are actually released. It's an actual tendency among PvP players to not follow on stuff, but just play when something is actually available.

    PvE players more often follow things in advance and are more active in posting stuff in alpha forums then PvP players. That usually skews the picture how many PvP vs PvE people will play the game.

    Yeah I know, you will ask me for a source on that. I don't have it. I'm writing this from my own personal observations over decade+ of playing and following MMOs. I never did an actual scientific survey.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    Gothix said:
    You assume there will not be many people who will PvP just for the sake of it and that's an error in logic (imho).

    You also underestimate how many PvPers are not following games till they are actually released. It's an actual tendency among PvP players to not follow on stuff, but just play when something is actually available.

    PvE players more often follow things in advance and are more active in posting stuff in alpha forums then PvP players. That usually skews the picture how many PvP vs PvE people will play the game.

    Yeah I know, you will ask me for a source on that. I don't have it. I'm writing this from my own personal observations over decade+ of playing and following MMOs. I never did an actual scientific survey.
    I actually agree with you in what you are saying here, no need for any survey or anything. I've been playing MMO's since 2004, and I've seen it too.

    What I've seen is a few PvP posters pre-release saying they want fully open PvP, and no developer ever addressing the subject at all as fully open PvP is an obviously terrible idea. A fully open PvP game only caters to those that want fully open PvP, where as a PvP system that has mechanics in place to limit where PvP is likely to happen leaves the game open for those that don't like PvP at all, those that like PvP sometimes (the group I personally fit in to), and those that like PvP all the time but understand the need for limitations.

    The only people a restricted PvP system doesn't suit are those few that want nothing but PvP, and fail to understand the need to attract a wider audience than those few people with the same mindset as themselves. 

    Now, lets take a look at what PvP this game DOES offer.

    First of all, there are arenas. The developers have said 1v1, 3v3 and 5v5 are likely, and have also said that equalizing gear is a possibility. They have also hinted at a 20v20 FFA arena. As in all games, this is an opt in instanced PvP setting.

    Next, we have caravans. This is essentially open world PvP that defenders opt in to by starting a caravan, and attackers opt in to by, well, attacking it. The flagging/corruption system is in full play here, the idea being the rewards from the caravan should outweigh the penalties.

    Next, we have the bounty hunter system - this is the kind of thing someone that likes "surprise PvP" should be keen on. Basically, you opt in to hunt down characters that have killed others (aka, opted in).

    Then we have node/castle sieges, large scale objective based PvP that players opt in to by either owning a node/castle or attacking one. This is organised PvP where both sides know days in advance when and where the battle will take place.

    Lastly, we have guild wars. We don't have heaps of information on this other than knowing it is objective based, there are multiple types and there are rewards for the winner.

    Any player that looks at all of that and says that is not enough PvP can only want one thing - ganking.

    Edit: I should point out, we don't know what PvP will take place on the ocean, as we have literally no information in that regards as far as I am aware.
  • If AoC implemented guild war system like BDO had (one sided war declaration), that would partially counter for corruption system, as guilds could add their largest enemy guilds to the list, and not have corruption inflicted for attacking them, or defending their nodes resources against them.

    BDO had a limit to how many guilds you could add to the list, so guilds were forced to prioritized, and as such PvP focused guilds always added their largest enemies there, to have more PvP available.

    Small guilds in practice never got added to that list, besides by other small guilds on occasion for some PvP. And solo players were exempt from that system.


    I do not understand why Intrepid does not implement such system (that worked very good in practice), rather then requiring mutual agreement that doesn't fix problems at hand at all, and allows guilds to use "green exploit" undisturbed.
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    Gothix said:
    If AoC implemented guild war system like BDO had (one sided war declaration), that would partially counter for corruption system, as guilds could add their largest enemy guilds to the list, and not have corruption inflicted for attacking them, or defending their nodes resources against them.

    BDO had a limit to how many guilds you could add to the list, so guilds were forced to prioritized, and as such PvP focused guilds always added their largest enemies there, to have more PvP available.

    Small guilds in practice never got added to that list, besides by other small guilds on occasion for some PvP. And solo players were exempt from that system.


    I do not understand why Intrepid does not implement such system (that worked very good in practice), rather then requiring mutual agreement that doesn't fix problems at hand at all, and allows guilds to use "green exploit" undisturbed.
    I am curious, where is it mentioned that the guild war system is by mutual agreement?

     It is one of the few things I've not seen a whole lot of info on. My assumption was that it would function more like the guild wars in Archeage - a cost to declare war, any guild above a particular level was a viable target, lasted a fairly short duration (an hour, iirc), and had a declared result for the whole server to see. The main differences I have seen with them in AoC over Archeage are that there are different types of wars, and there are definite objectives to them (which would suggest a limited duration).
  • Pretty sure it was an answer in a stream to a question. Could large guilds declare war on smaller guilds at leisure possibly or something to that effect. It was a concern about large guilds going after the easy meat all the time. Much like gankers.
    @Noaani

  • Yeah, make same stats in PvP, since it worked so well in WOW too...
    oh...
    wait...
    It didn't. It was the last nail in the wow PvP's coffin...

    PvP without need to gear is basically only kills the reason to actively do PvP. Not to mention that most players just want to own weaker players, so you would "just" lose ~50% of the potential playerbase this way. Nice insights...


  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    MADE said:
    Yeah, make same stats in PvP, since it worked so well in WOW too...
    oh...
    wait...
    It didn't. It was the last nail in the wow PvP's coffin...

    PvP without need to gear is basically only kills the reason to actively do PvP. Not to mention that most players just want to own weaker players, so you would "just" lose ~50% of the potential playerbase this way. Nice insights...


    You are confusing players with griefers.
    Plenty of full on PvP games for those types.
    Here picking on under levelled players and such will just merit you mountatins of corruption for you to enjoy....or not as the case may be.
    As that awesome gear will be going bye bye with all your combat stats crippled  ;)
  • Pretty sure it was an answer in a stream to a question. Could large guilds declare war on smaller guilds at leisure possibly or something to that effect. It was a concern about large guilds going after the easy meat all the time. Much like gankers.
    @Noaani

    My understanding of their intent is that they don't want guilds in perpetual wars with each other - so at the very least there would be a cooldown on declaring war on the same guild.

    I've not heard anything at all about the size of guilds in relation to guild wars, maybe see if you can get the question in to the next dev Q&A as it is a really good question - and one that they likely have at least an idea of their intent.


    MADE said:
    Yeah, make same stats in PvP, since it worked so well in WOW too...
    oh...
    wait...
    It didn't. It was the last nail in the wow PvP's coffin...

    PvP without need to gear is basically only kills the reason to actively do PvP. Not to mention that most players just want to own weaker players, so you would "just" lose ~50% of the potential playerbase this way. Nice insights...


    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
  • Equalized gear shouldn't be a thing outside of instanced Tournament arenas that need it for E-game promotion factors. 
  • Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



  • As long as there is PVP there has to be arenas :3 honestly I don't want equalized gear but instead put players into groups depending on their levels, but this depends on whether a player with a 5 level difference will be able to kill higher leveld players using their skill.
  • As long as there is PVP there has to be arenas :3 honestly I don't want equalized gear but instead put players into groups depending on their levels, but this depends on whether a player with a 5 level difference will be able to kill higher leveld players using their skill.

    Something like that can always be left to player choice.
    Give them a +- level range they are happy to fight against.
  • As long as there is PVP there has to be arenas :3 honestly I don't want equalized gear but instead put players into groups depending on their levels, but this depends on whether a player with a 5 level difference will be able to kill higher leveld players using their skill.
    Will there be infinite leveling in aoc? If no then this is redundant.
    If you think that a low lvl player will join PvP, then you are very very worng. (Yep, there are a few exceptions, but they are like 0.01%)

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    MADE said:
    Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



    I don't agree on that point.

    I can agree that progression, and especially gear progression, is one of the key factors that attract people to MMO's.

    However, if we're talking about Arena tournaments with a ranking system, what drives players is the progression in terms of ranking, which can be a direct measure of class mastery rather than "gg, you spent 1000 hours more than your opponent so you one shot them. You clearly deserved to have your ranking up, and your opponent lost ? they clearly deserve to have their ranking down".

    I don't really care that Open World PvP or Guild PvP uses non equalized gear. I even think that it shows the dedication of the players to the game, which is logical to translate into benefits for their guild / faction imo, so I'm all for it.

    I don't think anything other than Skill / class mastery / matchup knowledge / strategy, should impact Arena PvP. And you get as a reward for your efforts / success to see your ranking go up.
  • MADE said:
    As long as there is PVP there has to be arenas :3 honestly I don't want equalized gear but instead put players into groups depending on their levels, but this depends on whether a player with a 5 level difference will be able to kill higher leveld players using their skill.
    Will there be infinite leveling in aoc? If no then this is redundant.
    If you think that a low lvl player will join PvP, then you are very very worng. (Yep, there are a few exceptions, but they are like 0.01%)

    I think it's a good idea to allow players with slightly lower levels to kill others by making up with a bit of skill
  • MADE said:
    Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



    What?

    You need to start making sense at some point. All I've seen from you in this thread is a comparison to a game that is totally different to AoC in almost every way two games of the same genre can be different - I don't even know what your opinion on the topic is.

    My opinion, as stated, is that having two arena ranking systems - one for your own gear and one with equalized gear - is a very valid idea. However, my opinion is also that an equalized arena ranking system is not needed at launch, but will become more valid after a few years when there is a gear gap.

    Now, none of this has any relation to the open world, the part of the game where both progression and the outcome of PvP has an actual impact.

    Now, please start making some sense 
  • Ayunu said:
    MADE said:
    Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



    I don't agree on that point.

    I can agree that progression, and especially gear progression, is one of the key factors that attract people to MMO's.

    However, if we're talking about Arena tournaments with a ranking system, what drives players is the progression in terms of ranking, which can be a direct measure of class mastery rather than "gg, you spent 1000 hours more than your opponent so you one shot them. You clearly deserved to have your ranking up, and your opponent lost ? they clearly deserve to have their ranking down".

    I don't really care that Open World PvP or Guild PvP uses non equalized gear. I even think that it shows the dedication of the players to the game, which is logical to translate into benefits for their guild / faction imo, so I'm all for it.

    I don't think anything other than Skill / class mastery / matchup knowledge / strategy, should impact Arena PvP. And you get as a reward for your efforts / success to see your ranking go up.
    What I said isn't my option, but facts, whether you agree with it is irrelevant...

    You talk about Arena tournaments, but you know how much players do it? Let me answer you, hundreds... If you include everyone, even the noobs that doesn't even know where are they, you maybe endup with a few thousand, but still how many % is it from a sucessfull mmo with millions of players? 0.1%? ...

    There are very very few players who play just for the rank. Most(95%) play for gear. Some play for other rewards (achi, season end reward etc.), and only a very few percent play only to have high rank.

    There are no (sucesfull) game, where it would take 1000hour to get the actual gear anyway, but if you won't even spend that minimal effort on the game, then you are worthless anyway, and you have no place in the competitive realms.

    Well from me, they can use equalized gear, but don't be suprised, if the playerbase will be so low there, that you will going to need wait for long time for a single match, and even then, you get a entierly diferent level player, as there are no opponent.
    But remember, I warned in time...

  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited March 2018
    MADE said:
    Ayunu said:
    MADE said:
    Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



    I don't agree on that point.

    I can agree that progression, and especially gear progression, is one of the key factors that attract people to MMO's.

    However, if we're talking about Arena tournaments with a ranking system, what drives players is the progression in terms of ranking, which can be a direct measure of class mastery rather than "gg, you spent 1000 hours more than your opponent so you one shot them. You clearly deserved to have your ranking up, and your opponent lost ? they clearly deserve to have their ranking down".

    I don't really care that Open World PvP or Guild PvP uses non equalized gear. I even think that it shows the dedication of the players to the game, which is logical to translate into benefits for their guild / faction imo, so I'm all for it.

    I don't think anything other than Skill / class mastery / matchup knowledge / strategy, should impact Arena PvP. And you get as a reward for your efforts / success to see your ranking go up.
    What I said isn't my option, but facts, whether you agree with it is irrelevant...

    You talk about Arena tournaments, but you know how much players do it? Let me answer you, hundreds... If you include everyone, even the noobs that doesn't even know where are they, you maybe endup with a few thousand, but still how many % is it from a sucessfull mmo with millions of players? 0.1%? ...

    There are very very few players who play just for the rank. Most(95%) play for gear. Some play for other rewards (achi, season end reward etc.), and only a very few percent play only to have high rank.

    There are no (sucesfull) game, where it would take 1000hour to get the actual gear anyway, but if you won't even spend that minimal effort on the game, then you are worthless anyway, and you have no place in the competitive realms.

    Well from me, they can use equalized gear, but don't be suprised, if the playerbase will be so low there, that you will going to need wait for long time for a single match, and even then, you get a entierly diferent level player, as there are no opponent.
    But remember, I warned in time...

    If you are going to state imaginary figures I would say you are offering opinion, and a very prejudiced one at that.
    I take it you have access to a statistical site that also isnt prejudiced in some way and remains neutral without an agenda that influences what preferential data is added to the mix.
    No ? Thought not.

    There are highly competitive players that love superiority and desperately need to sate their power craving addiction.
    There are players that love a fair fight and parity to test each other on equal terms.
    There are those that need to feel protected and hanker after those who could protect them the most.
    Tyrants, sycophants and everyone else.
    To cater to all of them means understanding all of them and what drives them.
    And you need to cater to all of them in an MMO.
    Preferably in a way that doesnt add a self destruct button to the game.
  • MADE said:
    Ayunu said:
    MADE said:
    Noaani said:
    There are a number of reasons that direct comparisons between AoC and WoW (or any other game) simply do not work. Honestly, they are best to avoid. General comparisons can be of value, but specific direct ones fall flat.
    Do you know what drives a mmorpg? The progression. Which means first leveling, and at max level gearing.
    Now answer me pls. What do you lose with the suggestion in this topic?



    I don't agree on that point.

    I can agree that progression, and especially gear progression, is one of the key factors that attract people to MMO's.

    However, if we're talking about Arena tournaments with a ranking system, what drives players is the progression in terms of ranking, which can be a direct measure of class mastery rather than "gg, you spent 1000 hours more than your opponent so you one shot them. You clearly deserved to have your ranking up, and your opponent lost ? they clearly deserve to have their ranking down".

    I don't really care that Open World PvP or Guild PvP uses non equalized gear. I even think that it shows the dedication of the players to the game, which is logical to translate into benefits for their guild / faction imo, so I'm all for it.

    I don't think anything other than Skill / class mastery / matchup knowledge / strategy, should impact Arena PvP. And you get as a reward for your efforts / success to see your ranking go up.
    What I said isn't my option, but facts, whether you agree with it is irrelevant...

    You talk about Arena tournaments, but you know how much players do it? Let me answer you, hundreds... If you include everyone, even the noobs that doesn't even know where are they, you maybe endup with a few thousand, but still how many % is it from a sucessfull mmo with millions of players? 0.1%? ...

    There are very very few players who play just for the rank. Most(95%) play for gear. Some play for other rewards (achi, season end reward etc.), and only a very few percent play only to have high rank.

    There are no (sucesfull) game, where it would take 1000hour to get the actual gear anyway, but if you won't even spend that minimal effort on the game, then you are worthless anyway, and you have no place in the competitive realms.

    Well from me, they can use equalized gear, but don't be suprised, if the playerbase will be so low there, that you will going to need wait for long time for a single match, and even then, you get a entierly diferent level player, as there are no opponent.
    But remember, I warned in time...

    What you said IS an opinion. There are games that work well with such a system as a feature, not just for tournaments.
    Idk where you get your idea that rank isn't a good enough motivation by itself for players to play a mode. It's litterally the only thing that motivates people to play ranked modes in MOBA's, or to play games like Fortnite, PUBG, etc... where the only remarkable achievement is to end up in the top.

    So I think I understand that you don't really like it, you prefer playing to get you gear up and this is understandable. What I don't think is acceptable in terms of respect is that you use your OPINION as a fact to pretend that my opinion is worthless. I'm pretty convinced my opinion on the matter isn't "irrelevant" and that there's a solid population of players that enjoy gear-equalized Arena PvP.
    Moreover, don't pull up numbers if they aren't from actual sources. Even if most people you hear about confirm those numbers, it doesn't mean that the 95% of people who don't react to it follow the same trends.
Sign In or Register to comment.