some place where you can sleep without being killed

[KhalidTheMighty]

i really need it... seems im being attacked alot lately :(

[LadyPhoenix]

That would make PvP basically pointless, since no one would CHOOSE to sleep anywhere they could be attacked (except high levels wanting XP from people foolish enough to attack them). Might as well remove the entire PvP model, in that case.

[JCP]

No where is safe.

[Xecutioner]

The inn has some cover seeing that you have a bodyguard that..well...really doesn't help, that much. well...yeah..nobody's safe.

[Sneakabout]

At higher levels most of your experience comes from killing people. Having a completely safe place would seem to work against the flow of the game.

However, the bodyguards do need beefing up and there is a different thread about that here...

[Akuma AKA Kurama]

Well that or have a tent or something that you can buy with 300,000 gold or something that you can log out to when your tired. It should reset every DK so you'll have to buy a new one. Believe me, it will take at least a moderate amount of time to save up 300k even for the most skilled players. By that time they should be at least lvl 11 and only use the tent a few time anyway, thus not really killing the PvP spirit.

[Sneakabout]

If nobody is going to use a new feature (and nobody would use something which cost 300,000 gold) then what is the point of putting it in?

[Akuma AKA Kurama]

Easy, class. To show that you could do it. Same reason for buying a Wyvern over something like a Warhorse. Both are good creatures but while the Wyvern is better, when you see someone with it you think, "Wow, they must be good." Same reason I suppose.

[Sneakabout]

Ah yes, but I have a Wyvern and so do plenty of people... your analogy has flaws...(although if you're on the alpha, MightyE would be nice ;))

[Kether Rowan]

Q:When does somone have time to earn 300,000 gold?
A: When they're 15th level, and don't have to worry about being killed anyway...

Guys, I'm sorry to sound rude, but get over it allready. I get annoyed getting killed all the time too, especially by the same 6 people over and over, but you know what, that's the game. Take it like a warrior and stop asking to be invincible.

[Akuma AKA Kurama]

LOL, wow, I can hit 300,000 just fine by about lvl 12-13. Yeah, I was just offering advice as to what they could do in a way to not ruin the game.

[Zombie]

That would make PvP basically pointless, since no one would CHOOSE to sleep anywhere they could be attacked (except high levels wanting XP from people foolish enough to attack them). Might as well remove the entire PvP model, in that case.

:?:
How about a room at the Hunter's Lodge? i.e. People could pay for
somewhere safe for a couple of turns.

The need for real cash would limit its abuse...

[Sneakabout]

True - if people want to pay real cash there should be special rooms in the Hunter's Lodge...

[Moonchilde]

Eric and I have discussed this in the past, and we are pretty much agreed that we do not with to do this.

Providing a way for people to avoid PvP, IMHO removes an important element from the game. We don't mind people paying to make themselves *safer*, but never completely safe.

[Peace]

At higher levels most of your experience comes from killing people. Having a completely safe place would seem to work against the flow of the game.

However, the bodyguards do need beefing up and there is a different thread about that here...

Why would that be at higher levels you have higher level forest fights worth more experience. So you should still gain levels through forest fights. What the game really needs is more depth not pvp.
Also, more forest fights.

[Peace]

Q:When does somone have time to earn 300,000 gold?
A: When they're 15th level, and don't have to worry about being killed anyway...

Guys, I'm sorry to sound rude, but get over it allready. I get annoyed getting killed all the time too, especially by the same 6 people over and over, but you know what, that's the game. Take it like a warrior and stop asking to be invincible.

I think they should remove pvp altogether unless they start using java script. I think attacking of line players just shows cowardice you have the advantage of being online. Then most people are choosing people lower them in level. Just get over the pvp idera and take the time it takes to level in forest fights. You get more experience per fight the high your level. It is impatience and cowardice that amkes people attack weaker players. If you must pvp attack someone equal or stronger. There is no honor in attacking the weak.

[Mitsuko]

If you must pvp attack someone equal or stronger. There is no honor in attacking the weak.

There's also a bit of stupidity when attacking someone equal or stronger. No offense, but sometimes attacking weaker players is caution. And this is an game. Cowardice shouldn't be a main concern. Also, if you're getting killed, you gain more money, buy better weapon/armor, and then let them attack you and surprise them when you're stronger. It's part of life, it's part of the game. Is it such a big deal?

[Peace]

If you must pvp attack someone equal or stronger. There is no honor in attacking the weak.

There's also a bit of stupidity when attacking someone equal or stronger. No offense, but sometimes attacking weaker players is caution. And this is an game. Cowardice shouldn't be a main concern. Also, if you're getting killed, you gain more money, buy better weapon/armor, and then let them attack you and surprise them when you're stronger. It's part of life, it's part of the game. Is it such a big deal?

Cautious you get penalized in forest fights for attacking a weaker opponent. If you get killed it slows down progress to the next level.
Attacking other people isn't normally a part of life where I live.
Maybe you go around attacking people eople who are ill equiped to defend against while they are sleeping. And, by saying it is part of life left you open for that. As, for a game a game can be changed.
And, there is simple way of allowing online pvp create the game in java other games in java allow online pvp which is better than attacking someone offline.

[Mitsuko]

*shrugs* Whatever you feel...I don't think it's worth arguing over. You can gain back what you lose. I had to, everyone had to.

[Peace]

*shrugs* Whatever you feel...I don't think it's worth arguing over. You can gain back what you lose. I had to, everyone had to.

And those pvping can gain it wihthout doing so.

[Mitsuko]

PvP's are a part of the game. Some use it, some don't. It's a matter of choice. I'd guess a lot of people would be a bit disappointed with the game if they got rid of it or limited it. They already have limits on it, reasonable ones.

[Peace]

PvP's are a part of the game. Some use it, some don't. It's a matter of choice. I'd guess a lot of people would be a bit disappointed with the game if they got rid of it or limited it. They already have limits on it, reasonable ones.

It should be limited to the field. You have to pay to use the inn.
If i have to pay to log off it should be proof against attacks.

[JCP]

Safe? Never.

More difficult to be attacked? Yes.

Putting an alarm system on your house does not mean that no one will ever break in, just that it is harder to do so.

[Peace]

Safe? Never.

More difficult to be attacked? Yes.

Putting an alarm system on your house does not mean that no one will ever break in, just that it is harder to do so.

And, if you killed a person in real life likemyour can here you would be jailed. So maybe pvping should get players put in jail or, the server puts a bounty on the head of pvpers who kill those without server bounty.

[Mitsuko]

Yes, but unlike real life, you come back to life when you die in the game. A BIG difference. If you were just ressurected in real life everyday then I don't think murder would be an issue. I think you're trying to twist the game into reality.

[Sneakabout]

It'd still be an issue....... but not as big an issue.

Emphasis would be put more on things like torture though.

[Voratus]

Speaking of which, thats one of the things I intend to develop eventually. Gaol, and some fun torture to go with it, for those whom are truly despicable.

[JCP]

And going into the forest to kill everything you come across would get you into trouble as well.

Especially killing a dragon - which would certainly be on the endangered species list.

[elinre]

WHAT?! :shock:

are you saying lotgd isn't like real life? are you saying computer games don't equal reality? that can't be true!!!

hmmm... some people might be better off if they lightened up a bit... 'tis just a game... and i'm sure there are servers out there that limit pvping (or have removed it entirely)...

maybe moving to another server that fits your idea of a good and honest gameplay style is a thought... or mellowing like i have is a good idea (i used to get REALLY aggravated when pvp'ed... now i just go with the flow, and pvp occasionally myself!) :twisted:

[Pwyll]

Attacking other people isn't normally a part of life where I live.

Oh, please. It's not real life, it's a game, a game which is, furthermore, based on killing things. Or do you think that Dark Arts and Thieveing Skills should also be eliminated because they're unethical?

If violent games offend your sensibilities, then pursue more evolved pastimes like chess. Oh, wait, that's based on war too...

[Mitsuko]

He can play Pretty Pretty Princess! ^.^ Though, when I played, theft and fighting was involved...^.^ THE BLACK RING IS MINE, I SAY! IT'S NOT BAD, THEY LIE!! *harbors the black ring*

[Peace]

I guess no one can see the obvious parallel iwas making.
JCP made the staement about like irl even your house isn't proof from attack. So if you keep with that line of thinking you get to conswunces of killing somebody. If there are no consquences for killing players then there should be a place that is proof again such actions.
It was JCP who made first link to real life not me.

[JCP]

I guess no one can see the obvious parallel iwas making.
JCP made the staement about like irl even your house isn't proof from attack. So if you keep with that line of thinking you get to conswunces of killing somebody. If there are no consquences for killing players then there should be a place that is proof again such actions.
It was JCP who made first link to real life not me.

I'm afraid I don't understand your logic very well and can only try to debate it on a point by point basis.

No barrier is impervious - all you can do is increase the amount of effort/energy necessary to cross that barrier. How does that analogy translate directly into the consequences of crossing that barrier?

The only connection I can think of is the social contract, where supposedly the consequences of violating a social more act are considered prior to violating that more. For example, before someone commits a crime they evaluate the entire situation including the penalties for getting caught.

That part I understand - but where does it follow that "if there are no consquences[sic] for killing players then there should be a place that is proof again such actions" ?

If there are no consequences, why should there be a safe area at all?

First, there ARE consequences. There is risk involved, both in losing a battle (severe experience loss) and in trying to sneak into the inn (there may be no available targets). There is a monetary hit to even attempt to get into the inn. And your pvp target may decide to target you next time - or, if you go out of your range, use the bounty system to make you a target for someone else (which is the intent of the bounty system).

Second, having players only "opt-in" to pvp, letting some players completely avoid the benefits and penalties of pvp, MAY work on the Central Server - we have almost 4000 players, after all. But such a solution might not work on smaller servers.

PVP is part of the game - a big part. Starting players are protected in order to stop them from being discouraged, but that's about it.

Most players find that they get frustrated paying money only to get killed in the inn anyway, and then start sleeping in the fields, where less powerful attackers try to face them - and it turns out to be a good way to gain experience.

And if you try to counter with role playing reasons, and how your fine, moral, upstanding character would not dare to attack other players, then that's great. It's one thing to not attack others when you are not being attacked yourself. It's a far greater test of character to not attack others when you are being slain every night in your sleep.

And yes, it can be done. The Honor clan on Central is committed to slaying the dragon without resorting to PVP. Maybe you can contact them for some pointers.

[Peace]

I knwo one way unless there is time out timer but it only works for those with always on internet conncetions like dsl. They could just never log out.
And, I am not against anyone defending themselves. But to have a someone with 105 hit points who has already at least once killed the dragon who has a familiar/mount and probably has a buffs. Go up against some who hasn't yet killed the dragon has 70 points and no familiar/mount seems grossly unfair. And, that was what happened once when I was in the inn.

[Deimos]

Familiars/mounts and buffs play no part in PvP, except for the "bodyguard" in the Inn.

[Peace]

Familiars/mounts and buffs play no part in PvP, except for the "bodyguard" in the Inn.

The system mail said e had his familiar/mount with him and that he started with 105 life and ended 105 life.
You mean if you get drunk the +3 attack or what ever count in pvp.
How about added hit points. I had mine up 91 today from drinks with a total of 6 extra turns today (including some earned from being resurected die with 2 turns and came back with 5).

[Pwyll]

Unless you play on a server where they changed the code, Buffs, being drunk, mounts, familiars etc. are ALL disabled during PvP. In fact, the attacker is usually given some sort of penalty such as decreased defense.

But the bottom line is, PvP is probably here to stay, and there will probably never be a totally safe place on the Central server. There are some servers that let you buy a house, which is completely safe from all attack, but not Central.

About the only change I could see in this direction might be this: you can be safe from being attacked, but choosing that option makes your character unable to attack anyone else. That would be fair, if a bit dull.

[Deimos]

Increased actual HP isn't considered a buff, and it is included.
The increased attack from ale is not included.

Resurrected turns aren't really "extra" as you are starting a new day, with 6 less turns.

I think you should stop being such a troll, "Peace".

[Pwyll]

OK, here's a thought: what if there was a *totally* safe place to sleep - a locked, guarded room at the Inn - but it cost ALL your gold to stay there for a night (with a sliding scale minimum set high enough that you couldn't go there with 25 or even 500 gold and be safe for the night)? Maybe even limit access to once every 10 game days or something. Then people who are getting massacred every night could at least have a day off from getting killed once in a while if they were willing to give up all their money for the privelege.

[Terron]

Theres a place, go visit Ramius and stay there. Nothing will happen to you till you log on again.

[mysticii]

Theres a place, go visit Ramius and stay there. Nothing will happen to you till you log on again.

the safest place for low levels is to visit MysticII, after that you wont be killed cos i'll take good care of you :wink:

[Pwyll]

Aw, c'mon, give the poor Farmies one day out of ten when they can sleep in peace! :wink:

[jrminga]

Aw, c'mon, give the poor Farmies one day out of ten when they can sleep in peace!
how 'bout one day a month? No Farmie Kill Day. Farmcreatures can kill each other; the rest of us have to go with Pages or above, or earn our XP in the "honest" fashion.
(I don't know how you'd make that stick in the system.. maybe a line of code saying if the user is a farmcreature, PvP att/def is x5 or something (to give them a chance against Gods)).

[Luinefirithion]

Theres a place, go visit Ramius and stay there. Nothing will happen to you till you log on again.

*applauds*

[Vladimir]

I think they should remove pvp altogether unless they start using java script. I think attacking ofline players just shows cowardice.

Um... The simple answer to that is: INCORRECT!...

Correction: You think that attacking offline players shows cowardice... The fact is that you haven't thought about it enough...

When you attack a forest creature, you are essentially attacking an "Offline Player"... They are *always* controlled by the server... The difference between a Forest Fight and a PvP battle is that the Forest creatures are randomly created by the game, and are very limited, while the PvP fights are against "Offline Opponents" who have a chance to make themselves into *much* more difficult targets!

Because they are more difficult targets, there is a greater bonus for defeating them.

In Any fight, the attacker is always, "Online" the defender is always, "Offline". The attacker has the advantage of using buffs such as Mounts, Spells, Class abilities, Ale, Lover's Protection, etc... *EXCEPT* during PvP combat.

During PvP, the attacker is stripped of everything except his temporary HP from ale, (The attack/defense bonuses are stripped) the bonuses from the weapons and armor that he is carrying, (Which he has paid for from gold earned in his current DK cycle,) and any Permanent Bonuses for being a longtime player. (Bonuses that you earn from slaying the Dragon repeatedly.)

... you have the advantage of being online.

I'm sorry, but this is similar to whining about a game of Chess because it is your opponent's turn to move. (Or any other turn-based wargame, for that matter...) Of *course* the "Active Player" will have an advantage... That's part of gaming... deal with it! If you would like to try a game where every single possible opponent is online and active, try one of the MMOs that MightyE has been describing in his Blog entries...

Then most people are choosing people lower them in level.

Peace, I believe that you are confusing "Level" with "Rank". "Level" refers to how many Masters you have defeated in your current DK cycle, "Rank" refers to how many *Dragons* you have defeated!

When I am looking for a PvP battle, it is almost impossible for me to find someone of higher Rank, and if I can, then they are so far above me in Rank, that any attack would be suicidal. That's no fun unless I am trying to suicide. I do, however, try to find the Highest-ranking and Highest-level opponents that I can... Why? Because by defeating them, I gain the maximum possible rewards at the time. From what I have seen, most other players use the same planning: If they want to suicide, then they find an opponent that will easily defeat them. (I've been a 'Suicide Assistant' more times than I can remember.) If they don't want to suicide, then they find an opponent that they think that they can beat, but one who will give them the most XP. The whole point of this game is to gain experience, challenge your Masters, then Slay the Dragon and start over.

PvP is not, "Picking on the weaker players", PvP is, "Playing within the Spirit of the Game" in order to win!

Just get over the pvp idera and take the time it takes to level in forest fights.

I agree that this is quite possible. On the other hand, it would ruin the entire purpose of hosting this game on the Internet. Without PvP, you might as well be playing the game on a decrepit old 80286 without a modem. If you want to play a game like that, then get yourself a deck of ordinary playing cards and learn how to play Solitare... there is very little difference.

You get more experience per fight the high your level.

True, but you *need* more experience per level as you rise through the Ranks! The XP from Forest Fights doesn't change enough from Rank to Rank. If a Level-1 farmboy defeats a level-1 forest creature, he gains roughly 10-15 XP... If a Level-1 Megagod defeats a level-1 forest creature, then he gains the same 10-15 XP... The difference is that the Farmboy only needs 100-200 XP to advance, the Megagod needs 1000-1600+! (I know this from personal play experience!)

It is impatience and cowardice that amkes people attack weaker players. If you must pvp attack someone equal or stronger. There is no honor in attacking the weak.

No. It is Intelligence, Cunning, and Good Gameplay that makes people attack weaker opponents, wiether they be offline players or weaker forest creatures... (I am not ashamed to go Slumming from time to time...) It is the Height of Arrogance and Stupidity to attack a player who is stronger than you are without taking the time to find out if you actually have a chance at defeating them. (The phrase, "Tilting at Windmills" comes to mind...)

A wise Gamer chooses his battles... a foolish Gamer attacks without thinking and usually gets reamed!

You need to remember, Peace... this is a *Game*!... the so-called "Real World Moral Standards" are not applicable here. This game has it's own standards.

-Vlad.

[Mitsuko]

*bows and worships the Vlad, wishing she had said it all herself..and if she did, she wishes she could remember all she said...*

[Ambrose Dimwit]

In my opinion PvPs should be limited to attacking someone within a reasonable range of your own rank (DKs). A character with, say, 3 DKs would be limited to attacking characters with 1+ DK, 4 DKs limited to 2+.

As things stand, the inn is a complete waste of money for a starting player - I've never survived a whole night there yet, bodyguards or not - and going to the fields as a farmie is tantamount to hanging a big sign around your neck saying "Free XP here tonight."

Knowing that when you next log in you'll have been creamed by some t**t at no risk to themselves makes playing the game about as much fun as a visit to the dentist, so I'm just not going to be logging back on.

[Pwyll]

Whine, whine, whine - just work your way up the food chain like the rest of us did. :P

[Pwyll]

And before you jump on my case for that last post, remember that I was the one who suggested an occasional day off from getting killed for Farmies!

[Voratus]

I still don't survive any nights, and I'm close to 20 dragon-kills. ;)

[Vladimir]

In my opinion PvPs should be limited to attacking someone within a reasonable range of your own rank (DKs). A character with, say, 3 DKs would be limited to attacking characters with 1+ DK, 4 DKs limited to 2+.

The problem with that idea is that in the upper ranks, there are players who would have no reachable or reasonable targets. Right now, I am about 15 DKs ahead of the player right below me in the Hall of Fame, and the two players above me are so far ahead, attacking them would be suicidal. There are similar gaps in the ranks all the way down to the Pages, Squires, and Gladiators.

This proposal would unfairly penalize the players who *have* stuck it out through the early ranks, and gone on to repeatedly slay the Dragon. After the first few DKs, you would be limited to a Very small range of targets... and that would invite the old whine about: "This guy keeps picking on Me! Waaahh!"

As things stand, the inn is a complete waste of money for a starting player - I've never survived a whole night there yet, bodyguards or not - and going to the fields as a farmie is tantamount to hanging a big sign around your neck saying "Free XP here tonight."

Yep! Been there, and dealt with that. I was routinely slain almost every "night" until sometime around DK#35... That's when I started to pull away from the pack of people wanting to PvP me. "Dying in your sleep! It's not just for Farmboys..."

Knowing that when you next log in you'll have been creamed by some t**t at no risk to themselves makes playing the game about as much fun as a visit to the dentist, so I'm just not going to be logging back on.

I can see where you are coming from, my friend, but I think you are taking this way too personally. You are empathizing too much with your Character... (See my earlier response to "Peace"...) Nobody is trying to hurt *You*... they are trying to build up their own characters to the point where they are tough to kill.

Now, if this were a major long-term Multiple Quest-type game, and getting slain in your sleep meant that you would lose that "Major Artifact" that you spent hours trying to find, then yes, I would agree with you that ketting killed every night would be a major Bummer and a game-killer... Here, though,... the most that you can lose by getting slain in your sleep is a small percentage of your XP (easily regained the next time you logon) and whatever gold you happen to have with you. (And if you are too foolish to bank it each game session, then you deserve to lose it.)

Just ignore the messages telling you that you were slain in your sleep, and look at each game day as a fresh start. And if you remember to bank your gold each night, you'll find that it increases rapidly due to interest. Think of it this way... you are going to lose a small percentage of your XP every time you logoff. The challenge of the game is to advance faster than you fall back... and that is *easy* as a Farmie!

Dying is part of the game, victory comes when you reach the point where you are difficult to kill. I don't know what else to tell you...

-Vlad.

[Deimos]

Of course, not to disagree with you Vlad, a lot of that last one is applicable mainly to dragoncat. Although I'm pretty sure Ambose is from dragoncat. Either way, I agree people are taking it too personally.

[Pwyll]

We're forgetting something here - you don't always lose when someone attacks you in the Inn or Fields. By the time I was a Squire, I was already getting the occasional "You were successful in the Inn/Fields" message. The gratification of having someone attack me and lose completely made up for the losses. In fact, on some days the XP gained was more than double what I lost when somebody finally killed me.

[Skyfire]

We're forgetting something here - you don't always lose when someone attacks you in the Inn or Fields. By the time I was a Squire, I was already getting the occasional "You were successful in the Inn/Fields" message. The gratification of having someone attack me and lose completely made up for the losses. In fact, on some days the XP gained was more than double what I lost when somebody finally killed me.

It would still be cool to have the Bodyguard Assistance Program upgraded to be able to buy better guards. Still wouldn't save ya from some of the real bad news types, but might be good anyway.

[KhalidTheMighty]

what?! this thread still active?

well never mind i asked this question... after all ive grown pretty powerful now, so no limits :twisted:

[neXus]

And so we come full circle...
Vlad, while you have very valid arguments, please be kinder on the delivery.
As for the bodyguards, they are not done yet, but current development is on other subjects, time will show what happens to them...

[Pastorious]

Something I was thinking, along these lines, but not quite:
Sometimes I'm in the middle of my turns and something comes up, be it a long phone call, an IBS attack, or whatever. An option to "Hide in woods" or something where I can't be attacked for an hour or so would be nice. That way I don't have to pay for 2 inns in a day if I want to use all my turns, but I still can't just hide forever without being a target. Dump the hider into the fields if they don't come back, and I think it balances well enough.

[Booger]

you only have to pay for the inn once per game day. you can log on and go back to your room for free if you want.

[Pastorious]

Doh, wish I'd known that.

Just realizing.. upgraded bodyguards would just make it harder for the even fights to challenge you.

Maybe bodyguards could add a number of points equal to the DK difference (or some formula derived from it) to the stats of the lower player?

[Salem]

Maybe bodyguards could add a number of points equal to the DK difference (or some formula derived from it) to the stats of the lower player?

Hey all,

I've only been playing for a few days now, but I never like to pvp, in any game.

But this suggestion Pastorious made sounds very interesting, since the only people killing me are people with atleast 1 DK, I don't even know how to find the dragon or how to kill it.
So to make the bodyguard improve equally to the person attacking u would be nice.

I mean anyone can win from a low lvl farmboy.

Greetz,

Salem

[BLOODDRAGON]

Maybe bodyguards could add a number of points equal to the DK difference (or some formula derived from it) to the stats of the lower player?

Hey all,

I've only been playing for a few days now, but I never like to pvp, in any game.

But this suggestion Pastorious made sounds very interesting, since the only people killing me are people with atleast 1 DK, I don't even know how to find the dragon or how to kill it.
So to make the bodyguard improve equally to the person attacking u would be nice.

I mean anyone can win from a low lvl farmboy.

Greetz,

Salem

not all the time, ive had messages when i log in say i was killed by a farmy, sometimes day after day it was a farmy that killed me (how do they max out there weapon and armor so quickly?)

[Salem]

not all the time, ive had messages when i log in say i was killed by a farmy, sometimes day after day it was a farmy that killed me (how do they max out there weapon and armor so quickly?)

That's what I would like to know, cuz it's pretty hard to max my weapons :P

And yeah, mayb not always, but I think those farmboys have had help from others to be able to do it.

Because I can't see how some new player like me struggling for gold and equip can kill anybody ;)

Greetz,

Salem

[Deimos]

The farmies who do max "quickly", which is a lot of them, are just progessing really slowly, what with the learning curve and the PvP and the dying in the forest. They have 60+ day DKs, so by day 20 when many are DKing, they're still at level 5, maxed. Of course, some might go slow on purpose too, but most are just not fast. Hope that all makes sense.

[Salem]

Well,

Not much, I checked my profile, I'm at day 7, I doubt I will ever be able to get maxed gear when I'm lvl 20 at the rate things are going now, I loose 40 xp when killed and that is alot knowing that I barely get any more xp from killing in the forest.

I know what you are saying, but I can't see how people can max their gear fast without getting gold from other people especially before lvl 20.

Greetz,

Salem

[Vladimir]

Um, Salem... which server are you playing on? Your comments are describing a game that is very different from the one that I usually play. (I'm usually on DragonCat.)

40 XP is less than 4 forest fights at level-1... It's about what I get for a single fight at level-2, and about 1/2 a fight at level 3... Beyond that point, 40 XP is negligible... :?:

More information, Please.

[Pastorious]

I maxxed my weapons and armor at level 7, hoping that this would help reduce the number of times I died at night. So far, I have 2 wins to thank for it, but still die nightly. At one point I kept seeing how long it would take to die by logging out and refreshing news until I saw someone kill me. Average of 1 minute.