Anyone who prefers 49 and under PvP to level 50 is insane.

[rob_y]

I agree with what you say, but the opinions you say can be wrong are the ones that are actually mis-perception of facts.

 

The title of the thread is "Anyone who prefers 49 and under PvP to level 50 is insane" is not a fact, nor could it likely be supported by fact unless a large portion of the people who do prefer sub-50 have been proven to actually be insane. Then I would concede.

 

I was meaning to just merely say that I did not know why I was refuting some facts when the original topic of this thread really has little to do with those facts. The side conversations and excuses probably do.

 

We're all insane! The title of the thread was chosen so as to generate pageviews for my SWTOR Forum advertising scheme. I haven't yet figured out how to monetize it, but that's a small hurdle.

[Technohic]

We're all insane! The title of the thread was chosen so as to generate pageviews for my SWTOR Forum advertising scheme. I haven't yet figured out how to monetize it, but that's a small hurdle.

 

Step ?" Profit?

[TridusSWTOR]

There's not much you put worth responding too so I'll just laugh at your understanding of basic arithmetic. An operative can not (read:impossible) kill in 3 GCD. Video evidence otherwise. The rate limit on smash assuming perfect conditions is 8 seconds, that is one smash and 6 GCDs. So at best you are 8 shotting your opponent. Also yes if I need to actually do the division for you I will 14k is 42.8% less then 20k. 18k is 50% more then 12k, so mild exaggeration there. My damage pri numbers are not up for debate either, greater imbalance is achievable in pre-50. It often isn't, but again that's because everyone who cares is playing in the 50s bracket. You also claim a Jug can smash a recruit down to 20% in one smash. That is using your numbers (and I'll do the math since you are so prone to ridiculous hyperbole it invalidates any point you could possibly make) 14000(.8). I personally have never seen an 11200 damage smash, but hey I guess in your world it is possible.

 

Please do not use the word fact when your entire post is a shotgun spread of off the cuff reactionary fabrication. The FACT is that the theoretical imbalance in lowbie pvp is far greater then the theoretical balance between recruit and WH. This is not exploited for a variety of reason: majority of players are bad in lowbie, not worth it to run premades in lowbie, gear outleveled, no use in gearing before destination, I can perform adequately because everyone has the same gear = irrelevant mentality. What it comes down to is that lowbie is just something to enjoyably pass the time and ranked is where the competitive fun is at.

 

You get a D-, you used numbers, but you made them up and failed to do even basic division.

 

Edit: I just talked to one of the 'twink' snipers on Shadowlands (he has 1800 cunning and a damage range of 840-960; you see WHs with that range btw). He seemed to be under the impression that level 50 pvp was ridiculous yet completely oblivious to the suggestion that he had a damage range 2-4x higher then the people in lowbie pvps. His final statement was this, "so cause I can build all my own gear I shouldn't twink out my toon cuz others are lazy." I replied that this is the exact same argument fully augmented WHs use. He went on to say that level 21s own level 49s all the time. I facepalmed.

 

There is not much worth responding to but I'll respond anyway and try to look smart...I think my impression is good.

 

So even though you admit you are bad at math, everything you say should be taken as fact. Sorry but I don't usually trust people who flat out lie. Oh yea I talked to another guy on the shadowlands and he said PVP is still broken as hell and him and his friend kill people in 3 GCD's all the time in 50 pvp only. I guess we both know a "guy" that magically supports our position, go figure(You are really bad at debating fyi).

 

I love how butthurt you are about me proving your bad math wrong, I can tell you put a lot of effort into and it got easily debunked. Hey it's all facts though right? I honestly can't wait until the next "fact" you provide because I honestly think I'm debating with Mitt Romney right now.

 

Ah you want me to provide video proof, how about you first. Since you are all about the "facts" you can provide all the video's. Until then you can just sit there being wrong. You know how you lost a argument? When you declare your opinions as facts. It was fun but I'm sure you'll bow out of this conversation because it's getting a bit too adult for your mindset.

 

When all is said and done, 50 pvp is broken compared to pre-50 and that is the only fact that remains. So why can a level 10 stand a chance vs a level 49 but a recruit would get stomped by a WH geared player? Yup, the answer is clear as day, unless of course you refuse to face reality, in which you are hopeless(like the poster I quoted).

 

Gear> Skill and 50 PVP is imbalanced compared to pre-50. I still have yet to be proven wrong, I admire your courage in trying to debate but all you did was provide false math. GG

 

I give you a F- You used numbers, you admitted that you messed up at basic math and try to blame me for your bad numbers. Are you 12? I think so. Chalk up another debunk.

[rob_y]

I honestly can't wait until the next "fact" you provide because I honestly think I'm debating with Mitt Romney right now.

 

I'm not one for getting too interested in politics, but wasn't it the general consensus that Romney won the debate? citation - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82126.html

 

When all is said and done, 50 pvp is broken compared to pre-50 and that is the only fact that remains. So why can a level 10 stand a chance vs a level 49 but a recruit would get stomped by a WH geared player? Yup, the answer is clear as day, unless of course you refuse to face reality, in which you are hopeless(like the poster I quoted).

 

Explain how a level 10 player can beat a level 49 player of equal skill and gear (and if you're saying the gear isn't equal, then you're contradicting your own post). The level 49 has access to a ton more useful abilities. The fact that you seem to place no value on interrupts or CCs seems to imply that you have no idea what you're talking about.

 

I give you a F- You used numbers, you admitted that you messed up at basic math and try to blame me for your bad numbers. Are you 12? I think so. Chalk up another debunk.

 

You just called him 12! The last resort of an Internet argument. Come up with something better and get back to us, no rush.

[TridusSWTOR]

I'm not one for getting too interested in politics, but wasn't it the general consensus that Romney won the debate? citation - http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82126.html

 

I had a lot of reading to catch up on and I can't make a huge post as I would like but I would like to say this. Romneys campaign had to admit he was false about a lot of things (pre-exsisting conditions) he said during the debate. So if winning= Lieing to your face, in your view is okay then well...that's all I need to know about you.

 

As for the person that says opinions aren't always true, that in itself is false. pre-50 pvp is balanced and 50 bracket is not, fact. Easy to call someone else a fool when your anonymous ain't it?

[rob_y]

As for the person that says opinions aren't always true, that in itself is false. pre-50 pvp is balanced and 50 bracket is not, fact. Easy to call someone else a fool when your anonymous ain't it?

 

You're the one who called another poster a 12 year old, not me. So, I'm not sure what to make of your last comment about it being easy to call someone else a fool when you're anonymous (and by the way - it's "you're", not "your" when it's a contraction of "you" and "are"). In fact, it seems like the last few exchanges have been you making claims of people 2-3 hitting guys in recruit gear and then others asking for you to either post video of that or at least the chain of attacks required to do so, since it's more or less impossible to two-hit someone in Recruit without special circumstances (i.e. a Sorc can one hit the whole other team if he gets them all with one knockback off the bridge in Voidstar).

[Kyuuu]

Still trying to force people to have the same preference or opinion as your self I see, Attention whore much?

[Ryvirath]

There is not much worth responding to but I'll respond anyway and try to look smart...I think my impression is good.

 

So even though you admit you are bad at math, everything you say should be taken as fact. Sorry but I don't usually trust people who flat out lie. Oh yea I talked to another guy on the shadowlands and he said PVP is still broken as hell and him and his friend kill people in 3 GCD's all the time in 50 pvp only. I guess we both know a "guy" that magically supports our position, go figure(You are really bad at debating fyi).

 

I love how butthurt you are about me proving your bad math wrong, I can tell you put a lot of effort into and it got easily debunked. Hey it's all facts though right? I honestly can't wait until the next "fact" you provide because I honestly think I'm debating with Mitt Romney right now.

 

Ah you want me to provide video proof, how about you first. Since you are all about the "facts" you can provide all the video's. Until then you can just sit there being wrong. You know how you lost a argument? When you declare your opinions as facts. It was fun but I'm sure you'll bow out of this conversation because it's getting a bit too adult for your mindset.

 

When all is said and done, 50 pvp is broken compared to pre-50 and that is the only fact that remains. So why can a level 10 stand a chance vs a level 49 but a recruit would get stomped by a WH geared player? Yup, the answer is clear as day, unless of course you refuse to face reality, in which you are hopeless(like the poster I quoted).

 

Gear> Skill and 50 PVP is imbalanced compared to pre-50. I still have yet to be proven wrong, I admire your courage in trying to debate but all you did was provide false math. GG

 

I give you a F- You used numbers, you admitted that you messed up at basic math and try to blame me for your bad numbers. Are you 12? I think so. Chalk up another debunk.

 

So here I am using all the staples of reasoned debate; math/stats, rebuttal, anecdote, reason and you reply with what amounts to a long winded no u? Look there are already 2 posts questioning your basic comprehension of percentages and I'm telling you flat out that it's impossible to kill with an operative in 3 GCDs. You can ask any operative in the game; logically this means you do not play one. It's also impossible to do 80% of a recruit's health in one smash. It's also impossible to kill someone with a Jug in 2 GCDs as given perfect conditions it takes at least 8 GCDs to get 2 smashes in. There's a fair bit of mounting evidence that the gear gap is proportionally larger in lowbie WZs and theories have been posited as to why it isn't exploited much. I mentioned the twink because it seems a classic untenable example of exactly what you are doing in this thread, not because it provided some valid reason to support my argument. You've now referenced a political figure that has no merit in this conversation and called me a 12 year old. Are you trying to imply that you haven't learned percentages yet and thus my age seniority explains that failure? In fact the only point that remains of yours that hasn't been thoroughly dismantled is your personal anecdote of defeating level 40s with a level 21. I'll let that point stand self-defeated.

 

Seriously, did you get confused at some point when we were posting which post was yours? You were the one who failed basic math, there's a nice tribute to face palming where you mention 6000 is 40% regardless of the total amount. If you have some valid data to support any of the wild claims you've made in this thread let's hear it. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going nananana gear>skill lowbie>50 with the cadence of a super store greeter is not sufficient to even call your statement an informed position. Try to stay on topic with any response and prevent your posts from degrading any further into nonsense.

[rob_y]

So here I am using all the staples of reasoned debate; math/stats, rebuttal, anecdote, reason and you reply with what amounts to a long winded no u? Look there are already 2 posts questioning your basic comprehension of percentages and I'm telling you flat out that it's impossible to kill with an operative in 3 GCDs. You can ask any operative in the game; logically this means you do not play one. It's also impossible to do 80% of a recruit's health in one smash. It's also impossible to kill someone with a Jug in 2 GCDs as given perfect conditions it takes at least 8 GCDs to get 2 smashes in. There's a fair bit of mounting evidence that the gear gap is proportionally larger in lowbie WZs and theories have been posited as to why it isn't exploited much. I mentioned the twink because it seems a classic untenable example of exactly what you are doing in this thread, not because it provided some valid reason to support my argument. You've now referenced a political figure that has no merit in this conversation and called me a 12 year old. Are you trying to imply that you haven't learned percentages yet and thus my age seniority explains that failure? In fact the only point that remains of yours that hasn't been thoroughly dismantled is your personal anecdote of defeating level 40s with a level 21. I'll let that point stand self-defeated.

 

Seriously, did you get confused at some point when we were posting which post was yours? You were the one who failed basic math, there's a nice tribute to face palming where you mention 6000 is 40% regardless of the total amount. If you have some valid data to support any of the wild claims you've made in this thread let's hear it. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going nananana gear>skill lowbie>50 with the cadence of a super store greeter is not sufficient to even call your statement an informed position. Try to stay on topic with any response and prevent your posts from degrading any further into nonsense.

 

This is my favorite post of the thread. Tridus' math error would be fine (lots of people are bad at math or make the occasional mistake), but his aggressive attacks against other posters just make it funny.

[pqgarvis]

Gear> Skill and 50 PVP is imbalanced compared to pre-50. I still have yet to be proven wrong, I admire your courage in trying to debate but all you did was provide false math. GG

 

I would absolutely love to reverse the mechanics of level (10-49) and 50 PvP. I would be willing to bet as well that people would see and complain even more about imbalance, let me be specific about what I mean.

 

Reverse (10-49)

Everybody has 41 points to fill out their tree, however gear stats are based on the gear you are wearing and are not bolstered.

 

Reverse 50 Bracket

Gear is cosmetic only, all stats are normalized, however at 50 you have no skill tree points and must purchase them. (for arguments sake, getting 41 skill points takes roughly the same amount of time to get full War Hero currently)

 

This is essentially a reverse to the current system, question to all those that prefer 10-49, would you now prefer PvP at 50 over 10-49? Would you complain more, less or the same?

[MatticusFinch]

This thread has spiraled out of control!

[Wainamoinen]

I agree with what you say, but the opinions you say can be wrong are the ones that are actually mis-perception of facts.

 

The title of the thread is "Anyone who prefers 49 and under PvP to level 50 is insane" is not a fact, nor could it likely be supported by fact unless a large portion of the people who do prefer sub-50 have been proven to actually be insane. Then I would concede.

 

I was meaning to just merely say that I did not know why I was refuting some facts when the original topic of this thread really has little to do with those facts. The side conversations and excuses probably do.

 

And there you going being reasonable and forcing me to agree with you: no, you don't have to be insane to prefer sub50 to level50. They're different things and someone can prefer one over the other. I'll admit it, I was so irritated by sneering stupidity that I was forced to point it out.

 

Sub50 and level50 PvP are different animals and there's nothing inherently "funner" (that fun-is-subjective point again) about either, particularly as there is a fundamental difference in the nature of each.

 

Part of the implication of maximum level PvP is that you are seeking to play the best you can. This means you seek every edge you can for victory (within the rules): improve your skill, gear, play winning tactics, get comms, get teammates, form an effective unit. That's why the moaning about gear is ridiculous, because people have every right to make themselves as effective as they can, indeed your teammates should be able to expect that you'll be doing everything you can for your side to win. If you don't you're betraying your combined efforts. Saying people who try to perform to their utmost aren't fair is missing the point and complaining about being out-competed.

 

Sub50 is different, and more forgiving. Sure, people want to win, but they haven't even reached the simple limit of maximising their level. They don't know their class, they may not know PvP or tactics for the maps at all, they are missing abilities, their HP and damage are all lessened, and their gear is probably nothing like maximised given they can outlevel it in short order. All of this means that it's not fair to rant at people in sub50 PvP and doing so misses its point: to have some fun messing about, learning how to play and prepare you for level 50 PvP. If and when you mess up, you're less likely to get punished for it.

 

That's also why I don't have much time for twinks, who deliberately avoid competition in the playpen bracket so they can bully people who can't be expected to match them. It's a different case with level50 and war-hero-geared premades: everyone there is implicitly trying to be at their best so it's daft to insist some people don't, plus for a lot of premades or WH-aug types they play normal warzones because that is the best they can get if they are going to get any PvP, given the diificulty of getting ranked pops on plenty of servers. Plus, they need to earn their comms, dailies and weeklies like everyone else to perform at theri maximum. No, I don't play on a premade team (though sometimes with friends or guildies).

 

One thing I think is a problem is that the level 50 bracket needs some form of rating, because there is disparity in ability and those at the lower end should be able to get a game that matches their level of ability (I don't mean L2P, though that's a factor - ability's a combination of gear, experience, voice comms, everything) and let them get better without so many bruising stompings. If we have a solo-queue random warzones, give people solo-queue ranking, to match them with similar-level players and give everyone more even games. More fun for everyone, and most of the complaints about gear grinds, expertise, and all the other secondary causes people blame for their inability to match top players they encounter would evaporate. Plus a ranking would give people reason to play.

 

Apologies again, brain dribbled all over the screen.

 

TL;DR: Neither PvP bracket is more "fun", that depends on an individual, so can prefer either. They are different: level50 to play the best you can, sub50 to have fun learning to play. PvP is better standard in level50, that's why it's harder. Twinks are bad.

[Hambunctious]

TL;DR: Neither PvP bracket is more "fun", that depends on an individual, so can prefer either. They are different: level50 to play the best you can, sub50 to have fun learning to play. PvP is better standard in level50, that's why it's harder. Twinks are bad.

 

Your arrogance is astounding.

 

Fun is subjective. I have more fun not being dead in 6 seconds, and not killing someone in 6 seconds.

 

How freaking condescending is the statement about pre-50 pvp is just for learning to play? That is BULL-****

 

50 pvp is about gear, and premades. That's it. Most people don't care about requiring a premade group to pvp, and there are lots of good players pre-50. I imagine most of them have a 50, or several, already.

 

You want a challenge? Pug all the time, and try to coordinate a bunch of strangers to a win. That's a constant challenge, and it's always different. Running a premade with voice against pugs is rarely a challenge. If you want to run premades, then you should only be allowed in rated pvp, period.

 

Keep your smarmy butt in 50 pvp, and enjoy stroking your epeen. The rest of us will be running what we have more fun doing.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Hambunctious

[MonkeyCannon]

I'll probably get flamed but I'll inject my 1 month of playing the game experience into this conversation. This is my first +50 match:

 

I hit 50. Got a full set of recruit gear. Put it on and it looked awesome. Joined my frist +50 pvp and saw almost every inquisitor with same looking gear, sadface. But whatever. This is pvp, this is competitive. The less the enemy knows how new I am to +50 pvp the better.

 

However, I'm getting killed quickly. Holy crap a 7k hit. Dead. Damn that is frustrating. Okay then, I'll play like I should as a low level. Which means not being a hero, but playing smartly. Try to gather aggro, be the one to defend nodes, be the one to mark healers. Don't be the one trying to kill people constantly. I can't live long enough to see my target dead so I'll support instead. But what is this... I have 5 medals already? Oh look, I'm outputting 4k hits and 3k heals myself, not bad. I continued like that to the end of the match. We lost that game but I got 70 comms because I had 10 medals.

 

Ok so if I play smartly, then even if I lose every match, I'll have 380 comms by the time I finish my daily quest. That means in a week I'll get atleast 2660 comms. And this is for pvping for 2 hours each day and without counting any wins which also means not getting the weekly bonus. However because of real life, I did not get 2660 this week. But I now have 5 pieces of BM gear. I saved some commendations before I hit 50 because I wanted to go straight for BM. I had no idea I would get a set of recruit for free.

 

What I understand is that +50 pvp is highly competitive. I prefer that because it means I cannot faceroll top dps anymore, I actually have to learn to play. And I am learning. Before I got to +50, I rarely payed attention to my opponent's movements and casting bar, only for healers. But now I do it to everyone. I do it to learn what to interrupt and what I should do next. If I see a big hit coming, I'll try to pop a heal to mitigate some of that damage. And before +50 I used a cookie-cutter madness build but now I'm theorycrafting a hybrid build to better function in the unique situations pvp offers. I'm also rearranging my keybinds and adjusting my UI.

 

I do get killed faster, but that's because my gear was entry-level. And long ago I've stopped crying about how squishy my sorc is. We are the only class that wears light armor and we don't have much to show for it. But that discussion is for another day.

 

The point is that +50 pvp forces you to change in order to stay in the game. Some people don't like changing, and I am one of them. But I always want to be better. So I'll change for the better. I just wont be a jerk about it. I wont blame a fresh 50 for dropping the ball or losing a node, I was there before myself. I wont leave a group for being the only one in full BM/WH, I'll just try my best. It's the most that can be done anyway.

 

And you know what, all this changing makes me feel like my 50 sorc is a new toon. I actually feel like I just rolled a new lvl 50 sorc. +50 pvp has injected new life into a toon I was getting bored with. How bout that?

[Sock_Bramson]

Lol, really Ham? You thought his post was "smarmy" and "arrogant?" That was one of the few reasonable posts in this thread. He was really supporting both sides of this asinine argument by taking the middle-of-the-road approach.

 

Pre-50 pvp IS for practice, for learning your class. You slowly get used to playing a given character as you gain more and more abilities and talents. That doesn't mean that everyone who plays sub-50 pvp is a scrub, nor did he suggest that. Man, some people will fly off the handle about anything...

 

I have just as much fun in both brackets. I play 50s pvp when I want better competition (and usually better teammates), and I play lowbies when I want to continue to learn how to play a new class. I've been playing more lowbies recently because I have 5 alts I've slowly been working on. It's taking me forever to level them because I keep jumping back and forth between them. (and playing other games; here's looking at you, Dishonored, you magnificent bastard you) I'm fine with that, though, because I'm enjoying the hell out of all of them.

[Rigsta]

Pre-50 has been fun on my sniper. I ended up being ops leader every darn game (how is that determined, anyway?) and simply saying something like "watch consoles at all times, call for help early" was usually enough to make a game close if not an outright win. Judging from the way people sometimes started to focus me down apparantly above every other guy there I think the rep players had started to recognise me as well.

 

Now at 50 I have 14K health and seemingly everyone else has 20K, though my damage is ok thanks to WH main & off-hand. I have to pick my fights very carefully and pretty much stick to sniper havens (eg. upper walkways in huttball). This of course will improve as I get BM gear & augments but it does kinda suck to be at a 6K disadvantage in every 1v1 fight. At least the recruit set was free, no complaints there.

 

So there are a number of reasons people might prefer pre-50 PvP.

 

1. More level playing field, even with ability availability taken into account; everyone has about 12K health!
   
2. Less organised, makes it easier for a skilled player to make a difference. Eg. by clicking a console/door before anyone else would think to, communicating with the team, telling the zerg to move back from a side gun to the middle one before the enemy zerg defaults to "attack the middle" again, and so on.
   
3. No "this is a grind" feeling for the average player ie. someone not gathering comms for WH weapons at 50.
   
4. No barrier to entry for reasons stated above and by other posters, ie. gear.
   

 

I'm sure I've missed some. What it adds up to is that pre-50 PvP is more casual, but still just as exhilarating when you're playing a close match.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Rigsta

[DropbearSW]

Everyone who thinks differently to me is wrong

 

/cry

[Soull]

i used to love doing 10-49 pvp on all my imp alts...i'd win most of the time. if i'd lose, it'd be to another imp group, and they had a healer and we didn't. or a full premade vs. 8 pugs.

 

now that i rolled a repub toon, 10-49 pvp is horrible. i understand now. pre 50 pubs are terribad at pvp. sure, they get better at lvl 50....if they're in a full premade vs a full pug at 5am.

 

i cannot believe how horrible my teammates play. i try to make suggestions, then get called a baddie, cuz,you know, i'll lead the game in damage, kills, protection (as a dps vanguard) and objective points.

 

on the imp side, if i make a suggestion, they *gasp* try it out, and when it works, we win. imagine that.

 

i will say, i do enjoy 50 pvp more. having full use of my abilities, and knowing i killed another 50 in full WH gear with all their abilities, they have no excuse for dying to me.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Soull

[mulzii]

Pre-50 has been fun on my sniper. I ended up being ops leader every darn game (how is that determined, anyway?)

 

I believe the person closest to their valor level cap is selected as the OPs leader.

[Wainamoinen]

Your arrogance is astounding.

 

Fun is subjective. I have more fun not being dead in 6 seconds, and not killing someone in 6 seconds.

 

How freaking condescending is the statement about pre-50 pvp is just for learning to play? That is BULL-****

 

50 pvp is about gear, and premades. That's it. Most people don't care about requiring a premade group to pvp, and there are lots of good players pre-50. I imagine most of them have a 50, or several, already.

 

You want a challenge? Pug all the time, and try to coordinate a bunch of strangers to a win. That's a constant challenge, and it's always different. Running a premade with voice against pugs is rarely a challenge. If you want to run premades, then you should only be allowed in rated pvp, period.

 

Keep your smarmy butt in 50 pvp, and enjoy stroking your epeen. The rest of us will be running what we have more fun doing.

 

I'm flattered that you feel my post was such a well-composed threat to your delusions that you had to react so aggressively. Not coherently or rationally, but there was plenty of emotion there.

 

I was the one who said fun is subjective. I didn't say sub50 wasn't fun. Go cover someone else in your frothing outrage. Or read a post and think before responding, either works.

 

On the subject of failing to understand a clear point - I don't run premades, I do run pugs. About one fifth of my warzones are with whatever random PvE-oriented guildies or friends who are on and fancy some PvP company (not a premade team by any stretch), the remaining four-fifths are all solo pugs. And I declared this in my post had your rage not blinded you.

 

Sure, I've got good gear. I got it by that solo pugging in level 50 PvP. I earned it as I was having fun playing a class that some regard as so gimped it's unplayable (dps scoundrel, and my alt is an arsenal merc). So no, though you'd like to pretend otherwise, level50 PvP is not only about premades and gear. I had and have fun solo and earn/earned my gear that way. I also improved my play, learnt how to play against different classes, and made the effort to work out what stats I needed at what scores to get best output.

 

Where I do disagree - which, funnily enough, is where you're very obviously wrong: sub50 PvP is PvP with the training wheels on. There's no real argument to be had with it, when you spare a second to think. The players are, on average, less experienced. Both in general (more playing their first char than in level50, more who don't know tactics for the maps) and definitely in how to play their particular character (because - guess what? They aren't even level 50 yet). Their characters and their opponents don't have half their abilities (one tiny example: huttball with no Guardian Leap/Intercede to worry about or use? That's the Guardian/Jugg level 50 ability, if you don't know, you won't see it in sub50) so people can't harm you in half the ways they can at 50. It's PvP school, which doesn't mean unfun.

 

Sub50 PvP is fun. Level50 PvP is fun. I fully advocate people having in fun in sub50 PvP (go play it now folks!), where they can also earn comms - and more valuable, experience - to use if they move up to the greater challenge of playing in level 50 PvP. There the better players (there are good and bad in both brackets) will show you just where you're lacking, until you improve. If you personally don't like that it's more competitive, then go play another char in sub50 and have fun, no problem, and you're not insane. Just don't be ridiculous and claim sub50's a better average standard of play than level50, that would be insane.

 

At level 50 it's right that everyone try and make themselves as effective as possible in every way, within the rules. That's the point of it, and improving your own play, finding out how good you can be, so winning against better competition, is more fun for those with that motivation.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Wainamoinen

[Trews]

Everyone who thinks differently to me is wrong

 

/cry

 

/pats head

There there.....there there