Yes you can't this BG is about facestomping the competition in the center, not capping the nodes. double capping is usually a game winner, it is the big come back mechanism, but it is not the mainstream strategy, focusing on that is the best way to win against an otherwise better team, is is also the best way to lose against a lesser team. If you double cap you should do it as late as possible in the game, and not at too much expense, if you lose 4 men in stage 3 in (a) failed attempt(s) at capping a node you handed 4 x 5 = 20 points to the other team, odds are doing that you also allowed them to carry 6 orbs to their pylons awarding them 60 points, and the bads in your team endlessly brought themselves 2 by 2 against a 4-6 in the middle to the slaughter netting the enemy 10 kills for 10 x 5 = 50 points all of which you only netted 1 or 2 kills on your side and 0 orbs so in phase 5 they score 20 + 60 + 50 = 130 points and you only score 10 so they caught up 120. if you did the same during stage 2 they caught up 96 points 120 + 96 = 216 > 168 and don't forget that doing that you allowed them a very good opportunity to pull the double cap on you while you where trying it on theirs which fortunately for you they did not attempt or managed to pull.

Well, there is already trouble : Filling the queues in ranked WZ Filling the queues in un ranked WZ Solving the bolster riding problem (people in HL pve gear exploiting the bolster mechanism to maintain stuff imbalance over casual Wzners, in dailies stuff or partisan) Nerfing the few classes and specialities that perform a bit too well in WZ. Buffing the few classes and specialities that globally underperform a bit in WZ. All with the current staff. They need to adress the long awaited for X-server ranked WZ. They need to adress the long awaited new maps for WZ. Creating arenas of 1 vs 1, 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 would be pretty simple on the paper, but that would make some new problem arise. 1 vs 1 already exists and it will never be balanced the few Fotm duellists spec will be overrepresented and the scene will be dominated by the few that play well enough to perform decently against everything else and hard counter the fotm duel specs played by the masses of bads. 2 vs 2 can never balanced, healer + tank will dominate 90% of matches and the same scenario as above will repeat, the happy few who can hard counter that combo will dominate, the rest will mash at each others for 20 minutes because lets face it when 2 (tank + heal) fight noone ever dies. So the fun will begin in 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4, and it will either become more popular than Wz and Wz will be deserted and people who find 3 vs 3 or 4 vs 4 DM dull will go away play another game, forgoing all the work that has been invested so far into the Regular Wz and pvp. or be a 2 month fad people will get bored of after 2 or 3 months and will be underpopulated most people going back to regular Wz, so it is going to become a niche for a very tiny minority of players unless there is something that bads accept to be endlessly farmed for as a counterpart. most people who really enjoy 1 vs 1 will hate 4vs 4 just as much as 8 vs 8. most people who enjoy Wz will find the dumbed down 4 vs 4 of TDM to be a subpar gimmick to regular 8 vs 8 WZ. I am betting ( hoping ) on arena's meaning some new maps for regular Wz, cause i'd hate to have waited that long to receive a 3 vs 3, 4 vs 4, simplistic arena system that will become either a niche or the end of the other kinds of PvP in this game. There is a reason why Capture the Flag, King of the Hill, Protect the Nodes, Tug Of War even have a name, it is because Team Death Match though plenty enjoyable from time to time gets boring pretty fast if you are bound to do that and only that, As far as I am concerned that is why I left WoW 7 years ago and never came back, I enjoyed Wz and arenas but being forced out of Wz and into Arenas to stuff myself became dull very quick, adding something that is boring to avoid bored people to go get something that is less boring on another game can only be a temporary measure so I hope they don't invest too much ressources in a TDM small group arena system, at the detriment of something else. more brackets will mean longer queues, prioritized queues would create more in Wz/arenas ongoing game leaves. arena's will not solve the following problems casual bads will be facestomped 6 times a day in exchange for dailies commendations and will make bad Pgms and skilled casuals feel all warm and cozy inside. skilled Casual and Bad PGMs will be face stomped by skilled PGMs, the formers will blame stuff and the latters will blame class balance. skilled PGMs will enjoy small grouping but will be only be facing other small groups of skilled PGMs, casuals bads will call them cheaters/exploiters, ranked Wz will disappear cause it is easier to find 3 men than 7, after a few months they will find the same teams over and over in simplistic death match dull and leave for another game/server anyway or go back in regular 8 men Wz where they can faceroll people at little effort cause a bit of fun can never hurt.

noone was complaining operatives/scoundrels were sitting ducks and useless in hutball, For being the only class without a sprint, without a friendly or enemy gap closer, a friendly or enemy pull, without a single/ae knockback. scoundrells/op move fast know they ll get the ball first in the first round of a huttball, that is their thing, whatever other class you play you can do something awesome in huttball that other classes can't do operatives included. assassins/shadows have a aeKB, sprint and some even have an enemy pull, all being extremely usefull in huttball sorcs/sages have an aeKB, a friendly pull and some even have undispellable snare all being extremely usefull in hutball vanguards/pts have physics immunity, a enemy pull, and some enven have an enemy gap closer and a zone undispellable snare all extremely usefull in HB commandos/mercs have physics immunity, and zone knockback and undispellable electronet all extrmely usefull in HB sentinels/mara have a enemy gap closer a group sprint and an all damage immunity all being very usefull in HB juggs/guardians have an enemy gap closer, a friendly gap closer, and enemy throw, all being extremely usefull in HB Snipers/GS have a long roll that dispells snares and roots and a zone knockback, some even have a an enemy throw all extremely usefull in HB Ops/Scounds have Scamper/exfiltrate which alone is extremely usefull in HB. So if you want to nerf the Ops mobility then lets nerf the whole rest as well, that being said, Operatives can only dispel 2 randomly chosen tech effects every 6 seconds, they are easy to keep snared forever and then roll becomes a total waste of their mana. They'll get the ball first in the first round of HB get over it, have the one on your team do a better job than the one in the other team or jump to him and burn him down before he can pass. For the whole rest of situations, snare people, it works much better on operatives than it does on PT/Sins/Sorcs/Mercs. Huttball is about mobility,stuns, snares and physics, if you forwent those talents/GCDs in favor of damage you are going to perform subpar in huttball, it is not the operative's fault it is you who don't understand how to properly template/play for HuttBall. And as usual there is no need for a nerf, operatives heals are overpowered, yeah just the same as sorcerers and mercenary healers, it is the healing output that needs a blanket nerf certainly not the operative class, and certainly not their roll ability.

And they rightfully look surprised because Ops can be lept to cover or not, bloody hell, i have been pulled and lept to, and interrputed, while in cover and i have interuppted, lept to and pulled enough covered operatives to know that. operatives don't go into cover unless their "explosive probe" is available, then they leave it right away to go on running around.

We certainly don't, your problem is I am at the right page and you still don't , neither were you on the previous post, neither on that one even before. I have a bloody operative, I have been tossed around enough while in cover by mobs players and whatnot to know I am not immuned to KB and pulls whatsoever. Entrench protects SNIPERS against Roots / KD (knockdowns) / Stuns / Mezz Cover protects SNIPERS against Interruptions / Pulls / KB / Leaps (Knockbacks) Cover protects operatives against NOTHING Go get your facts straight, stop wasting my time. you know jack**** about operatives, you put it on display every single time you post.

The gear gap is mild, and nowhere game breaking, besides as small as it is it would still lead people into finding 7 friends and going in ranked, it would create premades. or more probably another premade of 4 to pair with to go ranked and get the next tier of stuff and start the big deal things against other serious contenders. you need 7 friends if you want to elite and ultimate pve gear, what is wrong about asking the same amount of social commitment to PvP player who desire the top pvp gear ? It is on those two principles my proposition was founded, in now way do I want a steep gear gap, I like what they are trying to do with gear in this game. If you take street fighter IV and give 10% more health to a character in a mirror match you already seriously screw the balance, If you give him 10% more health AND 10% more punch AND 10% more stamina AND 10% more meter generation (mana) then you are kind of trumping the game, that is what that game aimes at. pit 8 vs 8 with that gap and you ahve a no match 1.1^8 = 2.13 it is something like a match of 7 vs 16.... I certainly wont defend the previous 25% gear gap there was in PVP cause it is ridiculous unless you want to cleave the casual / hardcore playerbase to the point they can't even try to play with one another.

Again if you knew the class you 'd know it necessarily has to, since there is no other benefit to cover for an operative outside of accessing "explosive probe" and "sniper shot". forgive him, me, and others for assuming people knew that much about operatives cover's. Only Snipers and GS are made immuned to interrupts, KBs and pulls with cover from level 10 and only they get a baseline 20% avoidance based mitigation buff. For the aforementioned reason think you assumed wrong. how can you come here claim so much about Operatives and what should be done to tweak them when you know so little about how they currently are. Avoidance is a form of damage mitigation , there is nothing wrong calling avoidance mitigation or calling a square a rectangle, it didn't serve you well to be nitpicking on the other threads why would you want to start here. it doesn't help your cause, and can only eventually result in a flame-war which helps no-one and decridibilize us all in front of readers, among which game designers. The fact you told and keep telling nonsense about operatives is valid, The validity of the aforementioned hints how little you qualify at grasping the problem, or even at grasping if there actually is a problem to boot.

They could start to fix the ranked warzone desertification by 1 - stop, handing over ranked commendation to people not involving in ranked, ( through the vendor, and the dailies) 2 - making the bolster mechanic way harsher to stuff without expertise in ranked than in unranked. 3 - implementing X -server ranked. 4 - top ranking premades braging rights and decorum fluff. That would draw a lot of the good premades back into ranked, but more importantly also all the bad premades. currently the problem is bad premades have more fun roflstomping pugs and they top gear themselves easily, good premades (who are those who are mopping the floor so hard with PUGS and cause all the hatred ) are dragged into unranked because the matchmaking engine has noone else available to pit against them. The best premades need opponents, brag rights to keep on doing ranked, or they ll hop to another game, when they get bored of bodying pad premades, pugs, and dailies riders. The bad premades need a good reason to get dragged in the universe of good premades, and that has to be proving themselves, and the incentive of enhanced stuff. But they don't really cause much problems to pugs since they are very deafeatable. the checkbox thingy shoudl still be implemented for PUGS who really can't stand premades or even uncomplete guild groups, even the defeatable ones.

technically you are right if you speak about cover "state" But he is right when he speaks about cover mitigation,as it only works if you stay ducked, as soon as you use a gcd or a channelling ability the character loses cover mitigation for the duration of channelling / animation, but he stays in "cover state", so he is rooted has access to a useless version of sniper shot, and can throw his "explosive", but loses access to some other skills like backstab, but already selective mitigation goes away, until he stops doing things. also note that ops cover only work if there is actual "cover" to cover against, and only mitigate regular attacks IF they are not doing anything, it doesn't affect tech-force and dots. Operative 's cover is a gimmick and accounts for something like 0.2% damage mitigation over the duration of a WZ, operatives use it as such on very rare occasions, cause it totally negates their mobility which is a WAY better mitigation technique. People ranting about Operatives cover are really conceding their blatant ignorance of the class and should really play one for a week or two to get a better grasp of exactly how they work.

I am sorry to inform you that no map can ever be designed to enhance the dipwits' performance without further enhancing the performance of halfwits, and crazily bolstering the performance of players fully witted. You want the dipwit at the pylon where he is going to be ninjaed / overpowered in a duel (bad move), and you don't want him in the center to feed points to the enemy team (sounds reasonable). Also aparently you don't like to sit idled at the pylon yourself. Lets just skip ahead, dipwits are detrimental to chances of performing well, don't play with them, group in a premade with people who are at the least halfwits and leave the Hypergate map alone, it works reasonably well, also that is totally your right to not like it.

dude sorry that is off topic, and maybee it is me not getting your english but it looks riddled with mistakes, 1. only if is => , you wrote <=> aka "if and only if " 2. you seem to imply that (A ∧ B) <=> C <=> ( A ' ∧ B ' ), which could be proven for a specific set of (A, B and C) but in no way can you use this (A ∧ B) <=> C <=> ( A ' ∧ B ' ) so far unproven statement to transfer the logic state of (A ∧ B) onto ( A ' ∧ B ' ) or vice versa if (A ∧ B) <=> C is your premise the only things you can directly conclude with logic is C ∧ ( A ' ∧ B ' ) = NULL and stuff in that taste. certainly not ( A ' ∧ B ' ) <=> C is anywhere de facto logically linked to (A ∧ B) <=> C In that case the logic is laughable too. Avoid implementing premises through flawed logic, it gives unexpected results and generallly speaking doesn't allow to conclude. So here you are defining [ ( A ' ∧ B ' ) <=> C = FALSE ] ∧ [ (A ∧ B) <=> C = FALSE ] on ground of experimental result, start with it, instead of starting with " lets say (A ∧ B) <=> C = TRUE " and the following illogical blabbering disguised under math symbolic. globally speaking your post looks like lets assume ABCD is a square we know that if "ABCD is a square" it transfers into "FGH cannot be a triangle" lets not argue, since everybody knows that FGH is a triangle and that ABCD is not a square. The metaphoric scene with football is good, stick to that next time. @Sharee Stop trying to tackle kontaz on logic, he overpowered you on this one, and to summarize he is right about logic and you are not, it is of very little interest for the subject and it doesn't mean he is right about the premade/pug argument and you are wrong, or vice versa. so lets move back onto the right debate

No flashpoint requires ultimate PVE, the best that can happen is that in conqueror gear you actually get something called "challenge" and pride should you overcome that challenge. I do PvP cause i like PvP and so should you, I like that the new system gives expertise to people who don't have, and I like the new system where exertise on PVP sets is a free stat so we can do a bit of PvE with it every once a week with guildies. I'll get conqueror, cause I do PvP, I don't care wether it is good or bad for PVE, and I am very glad the PvE oriented players can come join a BG every once in a while and can come instead of being deterred in fear of being a useless part of the team they join.

when building a template, people can chose talents providing +0.75% dps per point, or talents providing 0.75% health per point, or a multitude of utility talents like, snare procs, gap closers, pull, knockdowns, root procs, Aoe snares, reduction of cooldowns on CCs or aforementioned roots and snares. bad players always go for the damage talents. good players always go for the utilities. movement is key, keeping your ability to move while denying the others is what wins games. But bad players think 0.75% of dps is what is going to help them beat the dps chart records and provide eternal recognition among their peers. then they come here complain about enemy's sprints and mobility, NEWSFLASH, someone has to snare, it could be YOU, it SHOULD be YOU.

i was playing MMOs when you were suckling your mom's ****** dude. why should I try RIFT, is it better than this one ? If so *** are you doing here caring about my MMO curiculum. Yes I formulated the hypothesis, that 90% of PUG players couldn't care less about premades. I could be wrong, in which case read what sharee said, if 90% of pugs hate to join premades, the solution is still good, even if it is for diffrent reasons, that is why I found this solution so appealling, The check box is is the only reasonable alternative to the actual SMART machmaking engine, because it gives more data for the smart matchmaker to crunch, it tells the matchmaking engine what people really want. This checkbox is not my idea, but it is brillant so I promote it.

You don't understand, i play in premades, and when i play solo i don't mind facing premades, not even ranked ones, late at night when they don't get ranked matches anymore. Also you don't understand that such a checkboxes doesn't increase the matchmaking time for anyone else but those who check it, they are the one left out of a [4 + 1 + 3 ] vs [ 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1] not the four not the three not the 2 pairs and not the 5 ones who did not check the box and who will be matched immediatly, those who checked the box are left out waiting for a next match, when enough solo have been found. at the moment the engine will delay that match trying to match more fours with fours more threes with threes, more twos with twos, and more solo together, and when it cannot occur, it will become more and more tolerant to the point where this match still happens 15 minutes later but among the ones some will be angry to have 2 premades in the opposite team. those ones checking this box will only get a few matches per day, but at least they will get matches with no premades, everyone else will wait less and play more often.

yes because you are mistaken on the 'objective', AH is a TeamDeathMatch the objective is to have your team's core, bully the ennemy's team's core in the center of the map, what you call objective is the TRM/ninja gimmick , that has been added to a TeamDeathMatch to increase a bit the otherwise inexistant Metagaming. The pylons are the 'gimmick number 1'and only here to force the teams into investing ressources ( 1 ninja alone, a couple of duellists or even a part of their core ) into cutting the grass under the enemy's feet, by stealing them the pylon they had chosen if the winning team refuses to sacrifice ressources to its defense and prefered keeping a strong grip on the center. The orbs are "gimmick 2" and there to force the losing team to try to get back at the winning team and throw them downhill, by allowing the winning team ( that one that owns the center) to score points even if the losing team refuses to engage in the fight for the center. At the same time, hauling the orbs are "gimmick 3" and costs some team ressources as well, forcing the winning team ( the one that own the center) into chosing between maintining its grip on the center or investing team ressources into hauling and weakening its grip on the center, increasings the odds of a comeback from the losing team. Last mechanism of AH is the killing respawn wave and increasing wager. Every 2 minutes the game is reset that is "gimmick number 4" and everyone who is not fighting for the center is given a fresh start without awarding point to the opponents, it is a generally misunderstood mechanism where the losing team throws their bodies in the center with the risk of being killed for points, while they could just die in the energy wave giving no points to the winning team. Each phase awards more and more points, once again, enhancing the chances of a come back and keeping the WZ on the run, instead of having people give up cause a comeback is out of reach no matter what. You guys don't like hypergate because you think it is a WZ where the objectives are the pylons and that every one focuces on zerging the center instead, and get *** rewarded for not playing the pylons. In fact the objective is to WTFpawn the other team in the center, while still keeping an eye on a pylon. I don't blame you I focused on the pylons too when I was a newb.

you are digressing sharee, Did kontraz try to influence credibility by pushing credit into a false conclusion with the help of a flawless reasonment concealing a false hypothesis behind it. yeah maybee it is one of the oldest tricks in the book. Nevertheless, his second iteration is much better and much more difficult to be proven false, you have to give him that. No matter how you like to take it but he managed intetionally or not to make you trip on something you probably generally grasp but that you are obviously not trained to formally speak about, probably because it is not your strong suit, or it is a bit dusty in your memory. It doesn't prove anything definetely, as he said, but neither can you, he just sounded genuine, while you sound loopholing. you also have to give him modesty in the way he presents claims, premises and statements something most posters can't be awarded. all this doesn't change anything to the fact that this problem's current's best solution is still the : "I dont wan't premades in the WZs I am queuing for and i understand it might take accordingly longer to enter a match" CHECKBOX

in which case i had rather the healing toned down to more reasonable, than the taunting/guarding, cause toning down guard/taunts, will dumb down the game making those mechanics forgettable gimmicks and hence the classes/spe that bring those spells to the table, healing will not be a forgettable mechanic if toned down, it has a lot of leeway for nerf.

And so should you because that is what it is Ancient hyper gate is a symetric TeamDeathMatch with respawn wave coupled with a team resource managment / ninja gimmick King of the hill archetype if you want. It is working fine , and yes it has a difficult metagmae to read for beginners Alderande is a failrly symetric and rather small ressource gathering map coupled with A strong bias towards toward defensive game play toned down team resource managment / ninja gimmick (read : it is very easy to defend most nodes even with very little mobility and foreplanning ) RTS style map if you want this map shoudl be made bigegr and the bias towards defense mitigated to make it stand out a little more from other maps. Novare is a tiny doubleway Tug Of War map coupled with A mitigating reinforcements bias mechanism toned down team resource managment / ninja gimmick censored out sudden death mode ( usually in a TOW when one side pushed the other to the step of its spawn the game ends immediatly) TOW style really this map is fine, it resembles alderande too much but if alderande becomes bigger and a bit less defensively biased they will feel much more diffrent. Voidstar is a sequential oneway Tug Of War map couple with A strongly mitigating respawn bias mechanism toned down team resource managment / ninja gimmick ( so the fights are bloodiers and mobility is much less important) This maps need a big overhaul, to have it mechanism not so reliant on itemization changes, it worked( works ) very well at level 50, (for baby WZ) but the current Tank/healing scores make it a bit stalemeated and rarely do we ever see the second room at all in 55s. Huttball is a American footbal/ rugby rip-off it is a fine map, that could benefit from a couple of alternate arenas.

bah then why not, i ve never been against paying a bit to get better stuff, I think the enjoyment/€ and enjoyment/Hour are some of the best on the market, all games categories included. they sure have some more leeway with our coins, so for the very fisrt time in my life I am willing to say that the "beancounters" have a lot of common sense about that game, or that the guys who negociate with them about game developpment are excellent managers, or a mix of both.

Rofl and it is me who waited the game had a year of seasoning and could only be attracted by the f2p offer who is the fanboy, don't bother arguing with me pal you are nowhere near my level when you dig your own rethorical grave in the first sentence. Couldn't care less about this game, the day I don't like it, I'll quit and I won't be making a fussthread here to tell it to the rest of the world cause the rest of the world has his own agenda and doesn't give a damn about mine. You are a disgruntled game hopper, doing all the prelaunches cause the grass always looks greener in the advertisement campaign. and you are always dissapointed because the games starts to suck when it gets older and more balanced. If you don't like it make suggestions I mean real suggestion where you actually invest a little thinking effort, and that you think about with a little empathy, and try to see how they could be flawed, that is what game designers do. If you can't be bothers doing some efforts, don't come ranting cause noone cares about your rants, we all want a better and entertaining game, naysaying doesn't help, and your complaints we don't share, dare I say. Lets assume a devs comes here and tells we are very well aware that Yes we know armory lacks, Week's most valuable rank team statues on Ziost's deck lacks, PvPvets only decorum/tattos/fluff/armors lacks Coupe new WZs With original mechanics lacks Couple new arena's of Huttball could be enjoayble A tug of war "alterac style " 25 vs 25 WZ opened on weekends lacks A better data collection tool for accurate and faster rate, for pvp balance tweaks, would be appreciable A fix to the bolster system is needed X-server ranked PvP Lacks Objectives and realm guild bonus lack in open PVP, ( and the population imbalance bolster that goes with it) it would be pretty understanding from him cause none of these things really lacks, but nevertheless these are all very cool features. but we need an average of 4 weeks to develop any of these things in what order should we implement them, also please note that any time we implement one we forgo a PVE content update, so this will all depend on the temperature on the PVE forums as well what would you answer to him : **** it i can't be bothered deciding, and I can't be bother waiting, and I can't be bothered sharing with the bloody PVEers, do your job, I am off you don't get a cent more of my money.

nope formal logic was not broken, it is formal logic after all, the very one you use fluidly when you open the trashbins cap before dropping the trash atop of it. a premise is .... well a premise, the logic is the link if pushing the trashbin pedal will not open (because the pedal is broken) the trashbin's cap then your logical conclusion of pressing the pedal before droping the trash into the bin is erroneous, because the premise "the pressing of the pedal will clear the cap away from the trash's fallpath" was false while you assumed it was true. the poster said it, premises can be false , and you quoted it, too bad you did not read it. and indeed the premise he used is false, but i don't remember him saying it was true. It very well maybee if the premise used as a start point is false, which the poster never denied could be the case. in fact it can easily be proven to be false, queue, end up in a match against a premade with no premade on your side, win. You will have proven that the premise is false using the same logic he used to say that if the premise was right the conclusion "when I queue alone i have a desire to lose" was de facto right as well. but don't forget the IF

Yes cause you are so cool, and hop from game to game every six month because you can never find a game that is easy for you and hard for tothers that makes you feel special, there is none, cut the chase enjoy the good things when you find some. Chess can be fun and it is only pieces of wood on a piece of wood, and dead simple rules, what people like you want is that we reinvent chess everytime, and you'd complain about chess all day until they fixed the PvP on chess by nerfing the enemy's queen to a pawn and not yours. chances are you'd still suck. You wan't artist carved pieces with gold ligning and silver engrave and mahogany chess board but you don't want to pay anything for it, and six month in you label it **** and kick the board, burn the pieces, piss on the ground and roll inside it crying until mommy buys "checkers deluxe mahogany" cause you've seen an advert saying it is the next best thing with a revlutionnary pvp system.

You might very well be both in the truth the formula i proposed was as follow The only thing they should bolster in 55 Bgs is expertise, and it is pretty simple bolster to program. if Player[Total_expertise ] =< 2018 then Player[Total_expertise ] = 1800 + ( (2018 - 1800) * ( Player[Total_expertise ] / 2018) ^ 3 ) else Player[Total_expertise ] = 2018 all the other stats should be left alone. this way people with no expertise get a minimum of 1800 in BG and people who have a little are nudged a bit, and then even more and more until they reach the 2018 cap. if people have more than 2018 they get kept back in line at 2018. Problem solved pvp is fair, itemization is safe. this bolster would give the following results Out of BG expertise : in BG expertise 0 : 1800 300 : 1801 600 : 1805 900 : 1819 1200 : 1846 1500 : 1889 1800 : 1954 2100 : 2018 2400 : 2018 etc... If there is an itemization problem the code fix is very simple, replace 1800 in the formula with 1700, or lower, or even lower it can be changed every tuesday to tweak the pvp balance until it works as intended. and so can the 60% damage bonus the 40% damage reduction and the 40% healing bonuses, fast easy, coding free, weekly balance tweaks.

@Halex Are you serious ? So you were about to phisically injure a bum that lost at real world PVE itemization and force him into non consensual real life PvP with a BlackHole sprayer Type 4, only because he was taunting you while you were showing off your new real life Mount to show the rest of your street how well YOU did in real life PvE. good fun bro.