First of all, don't you have to defeat the opponents you need the gear to defeat in order to actually be able to get the gear? Your logic makes no sense there. Also, it's really hard to get goodpets most of the time, and they don't make very good non-pvp gear for lower levels.
Just saying.
~Esmee Watertalon, level 47
Your logic is the one that makes no sense. If you are low level, you will duel other low level players, ranking up and earning tickets. Then you can buy the higher gear when you start facing more powerful foes. If you are starved for pets and have a higher wizard, the high level wizard can "donate" a good pet to the low level wizard. In general, as you move up the ranks you fight harder battles, and you get way more arena tickets for fighting a higher level wizard. I don't see why you bring up the point of no good non-PVP gear for lower levels, this is discussing PVP. I use my regular Aquila gear simply because it's the best I have.
OK so you lose one match to someone of a higher rank but lower lvl, so what? Fighting someone 20-30 levels above you is not fair no matter how skilled or how much arena gear you have. You wanna know what happened to me a couple days ago? My lvl 22 ice had a rank of 1259 with full commander gear. He fought a lvl 40 ice commander with full commander gear. He had more spells, better power pip chance, the sky iron hasta, and he went first. Idk about you but that doesn't seem to fair to me. Even if I fight privates without commander gear they are grandmaster wizards. Must I tell you all of the advantages he had compared to my arena gear advantage?
I did not lose, by I won by a very close margin. I'm sorry that you got a bad matchup, that one is a bit unfair.
I am getting so very tired of you calling players who use tc in the arena "bullies" or "non-skilled players." You claim you can easily beat tc players but yet you complain about them all the time. You report people for using tc in the arena so the only bully I see here is you.
I never said non-skilled and I'm not a bullie either. You just put that in there and yes I call warlords tc warlords you must be one if you think you can make put other stuff in this. And I saw a commander be rude to a little girl last night in the pet place to hatch a pet. So who is really a bullie?
I think pvp is very unfair. I am just a private trying to move up but I can't because I keep facing warlords and other high rank wizards that spam treasure cards. Even when I do face privates, most of the time they are 20+ levels higher than me and they also spam treasure cards and have criticals. I think they should change pvp so that you are going against people in the same level range and same rank. Ex: level 40-49 wizards that are privates. This would help a lot of people level up and become good at pvp battles
I think pvp is very unfair. I am just a private trying to move up but I can't because I keep facing warlords and other high rank wizards that spam treasure cards. Even when I do face privates, most of the time they are 20+ levels higher than me and they also spam treasure cards and have criticals. I think they should change pvp so that you are going against people in the same level range and same rank. Ex: level 40-49 wizards that are privates. This would help a lot of people level up and become good at pvp battles
If you want to be good at pvp, and need to practice just do practice pvp. Warlords you battle will be lower level, giving them huge disadvantages. Higher levels will be lower rank, and usually for good reason, so they are generally not hard. If the system you ask for was implemented, my balance would almost never get matches. He is currently at 2358, level 50, so he would be at the bottom of the level tier. There are very few people, maybe 100, that I could get paired with. The last time I got a match within your level tiers was at around 1800 rating, when I battled an ice with around 2000 rating. Your system would make it impossible for me to pvp, thus losing Kingsisle money, as pvp is what I play the game for. I do not think that this system is necessary, and thus should not be implemented.
I know how you guys feel. I have a 37 with 2002 rating and all I get are legendary commanders that critical nonstop. KI really needs to fix this or many people will be quitting pvp
I think pvp is very unfair. I am just a private trying to move up but I can't because I keep facing warlords and other high rank wizards that spam treasure cards. Even when I do face privates, most of the time they are 20+ levels higher than me and they also spam treasure cards and have criticals. I think they should change pvp so that you are going against people in the same level range and same rank. Ex: level 40-49 wizards that are privates. This would help a lot of people level up and become good at pvp battles
Wow what is with all these complaints about tc? If warlords and privates or whoever you face uses tc then your solution is to use tc too. But, I do agree on the lvl cap on who you vs in the arena.
Treasure Cards are rather important to many Warlords, especially to those 1-10 level Warlords. I'm not backing up treasure cards a WHOLE lot, though. I only have Reshuffle TCs, incase I run out of cards. Any other times, I use 'em for PVE. Your system for PVP sounds good, though. While I agree with Aaron Spellthief about his point, ages will come and go. AKA: Resets in PVP ranks. The time I use Treasure Cards in PVP besides Reshuffle is when I get a Mastery Amulet...and I still need my Frostbit Boots, if you get my gist.
Hunter Mistsword, Level 70 Ice Wizard, but not exactly your average Ice Wizard.
If you want to be good at pvp, and need to practice just do practice pvp. Warlords you battle will be lower level, giving them huge disadvantages. Higher levels will be lower rank, and usually for good reason, so they are generally not hard. If the system you ask for was implemented, my balance would almost never get matches. He is currently at 2358, level 50, so he would be at the bottom of the level tier. There are very few people, maybe 100, that I could get paired with. The last time I got a match within your level tiers was at around 1800 rating, when I battled an ice with around 2000 rating. Your system would make it impossible for me to pvp, thus losing Kingsisle money, as pvp is what I play the game for. I do not think that this system is necessary, and thus should not be implemented.
Good point. My Balance is 1678 rank at level 30. I commonly face people with critical, and occasionally a level 50 Warlord. Now how is that fair? I still win most of them, but how can you call that "fair" for the Warlords?
Also, you say all Warlords use TC, that has a reason you know. Warlords use TC and then get that rank that privates can't seem to achieve. So why doesn't everyone take a hint and use TC? This something that bothers me.
I'm not sure I understand what the low levels in pvp are complaining about. I mean you are off the chart in Rank for your Level. If the game cannot find you an opponent around your rank and level what is it supposed to do have you wait forever in pvp queue status?
Level up. If you're not at max level you're usually at a disadvantage in KI's arena system anyway. You get more health every level.
This board is always filled up with low level Warlords crying that they lose rank because they went against higher levels with low rank if any at all. It's not the new pvp'ers fault your rank is 1500-2500 or whatever and NO low level opponents with that rank are playing at the time.
Level up your character and try and adapt to the spells and HEALTH and BETTER ACCESS to gear you will be granted simply by LEVELING UP!
If KI wanted to they'd have implemented a pvp system where Level 50 Warlords cannot face Level 90-95 Wizards. They haven't fixed this in all this time probably because the Grandmaster Warlord would wait HOURS for a battle of appropriate rank AND level.
I came across these people today arguing about how initiates being paired up with magus is "unfair."
Of course I didn't get involved, but I disagreed. If your rank is high, like 1400, you should be good enough to be paired with a low ranked magus, like 1000. It seems logical.. right?
High rank, low level, to be paired with low rank, high level.
For instance, I am a magus, and I get paired up with low ranking grandmasters. Their critical is a huge pain, but it's one of the perks of being a higher ranking magus.
I really don't see how people expect to be an amazing pvp player, yet not willing to accept more difficult challenges... it's bothering me to see all the negativity in the arena.
I pvp on 2 accounts, a level 95 storm and a level 60 Ice. On my level 60 ice with a rank of 1900, I pretty much ONLY fight level 95's. fighting a level 89 is pretty doable, level 90 is hard because of the hades gear, but I won't complain there. Level 95 with shadow magic is ridiculous. They pretty much just cast Shriek shadow magic and boom have 50% pierce with an additional 10-20% depending on their gear, and then proceed to just spam attacks because I can't defend against them any longer and I have much lower health at a lower level. This gives even the worst strategic player a chance at beating a great player 35 levels lower. I'm giving up on level 60 pvp and taking my ice up to level 95, because mid level pvp just died. -Adam Seafist
hey I am a lvl 44 I keep getting battles with lvl 50 or higher that have overpowered resist I don't think its fair than when I team up with higher lvl wiz they start complaining yet we still lose so its not fair that if you have high resist to go against some one that cant pierce I cant give a challenge to high resist wizards I suggest that if lvl 50 get that pvp gear with high resist we should also have lower lvls that have pierce in gear so it may be fair and we can give them a challenge
My level 34 pyro veteran has faced level 10-40 warlords and level 50 privates; she has beaten both.
I'm fine with fighting higher-level opponents, within reason. Like, a level 34 vet vs. level 50 private is more than fair~ yes, I agree with you that it's a lot more difficult, but I am a promethean wizard 3 times and can anticipate these things/usually prevent being taken out by the occasional lucky crit.
That said, a level 20 sergeant being paired with a level 60+ warlord is incredibly unfair. Without the commander set or expensive crowns gear (and even with), the level 20 wizard has absolutely no chance of winning that duel; most level 60 wizards have waterworks gear, massive health and resist, plus critical and an uber pet. A level 20 wizard can counter the resist with Infallible but only has about 1000-1200 health. So unless I get extremely lucky with pet heals or am in first and manage to get a shield up every time, the chance of me surviving multiple crits is nonexistent.
(I still don't know if that was a bug, or how it even happened. But I obviously lost.)
I went to pvp first match ever and i look at their hp its 3 times as much as mine first move out of the gate is a angel thing. that nearly kills me in a single hit he calls me a noob i looked at their level they are 30 levels over mine and im the noob. yeah it will be the last time ever pvping im done stick a fork in me - this is like many other games in this aspect coward high levels jumping people half their level -
Most of the time it just requires you to deal with it. Even if it is unfair, you can stop WHENEVER you want to. My favorite character is ranked at 1650 approximately at level 31 and he typically fights Warlord 50s and legendary privates..its annoying but it makes for good PvP stories My brother and I recently made a storm/fire combo team at Magus. We have done 2v2 up to Warlord and have already fought legendary teams with around 100 rank.
I have spent some time reading forums and I have to admit that Wizards101 seems plagued with a common problem that has plagued many other mmorpg pvp environments. I personally have been playing less than a week, just happened to download the game while looking for a turn based combat system. My wife happened to find the game cute, so I started playing. I am a former Guild Wars and World of Warcraft player, among others, and left playing those games because of the competitive nature of those games. One must run X or it isnt valid, blah blah blah. But i have to admit that the pairing of the pvp matchups in Wizards seems much more horribly done than the previously stated games. Although everyone must deal with pay to play and twinking to an extent, this game is riddled with it. That being said, I do have a few suggestions that I feel would help, and one is pairing by rank first instead of level. At higher levels it seems they do, but the lower ones they do not. A mid 400 that has played for a week should not have to suffer through mid 700 rank tc walls that pass for 30 minutes because they cant kill you. After he passed for approximately ten rounds while allowing his pet to heal him, I quickly figured out the strategy and decided to make an example out of him. Although he fled after about a half hour, I came to a few conclusions. Warlords shouldnt be paired with privates, and there should be a consecutive pass limit. Pets, tc, pay to play is all good. Being a Balanced/Life wizard, I can handle it. But the inability to play people of similar status or having people literally pass to a victory is all but pointless and can easily be rectified. In the end, I will probably just level my wizard and fall into suit when it comes to the twinking and tc issues, I truly hope that by the time I get there some of the more game based issues and not the issues of the newness of my account will be resolved to the point that it seems a bit more fair.
I agree that the current player vs. player rank battles are not fair. all my wizards are over level 70, all are privates in rank and when I enter a rank battle I battle warlords. you should change rank battle from wizard level to player vs. player rank level. I understand that high level wizard can be private level rank but it would be better if we battle no higher rank level than sergeant. that will make it better and make it easier to move up in ranks then when we go against a warlord rank it will be more even.
I'm totally okay with fighting higher level opponents, within reason.
I am a magus veteran; this often means that any same-level opponents I have are several ranks higher or, even better, that they're low-ranking grandmasters. Yes, their critical is a huge pain, but I've put enough effort into both my wizard and her setup that, with the exception of a full-pip judge, one lucky crit won't end me.
I agree, though, that there should be some sort of level cap. Here is my proposed idea (very rough, so feel free to offer suggestions):
level 5-59: private-veteran: your opponent can be, at most, 10 levels above or below your own and must be a similar rank.
knight-warlord: your opponent can be up to 20 levels higher/lower and must be a high-level private, corporal, sergeant, or vet. for example: if i am a level 34 veteran, my opponents must be a veteran or lower in rank + between level 25-45. level 60+
private-veteran: your opponent can be up to 20 levels above/below, but must be of the same rank group. knight-warlord: your opponent can be up to 30 levels above/below, but must be of the same rank group.
this would prevent level 20 sergeants from being paired with level 60 warlords in waterworks gear (and other nonsense matches that i'm sure go on in there).
-
-von "problem solved, you're all welcome" shadowsong pvp veteran, promethean noob of amazingness.
I came across these people today arguing about how initiates being paired up with magus is "unfair."
Of course I didn't get involved, but I disagreed. If your rank is high, like 1400, you should be good enough to be paired with a low ranked magus, like 1000. It seems logical.. right?
High rank, low level, to be paired with low rank, high level.
For instance, I am a magus, and I get paired up with low ranking grandmasters. Their critical is a huge pain, but it's one of the perks of being a higher ranking magus.
I really don't see how people expect to be an amazing pvp player, yet not willing to accept more difficult challenges... it's bothering me to see all the negativity in the arena.
I agree with disagreeing too. Today I was matched up with a life with 2000 health (I forgot the lvl). I guess I had a better ranking than here because I only had 1,200 is health. Though she was higher lvl than me (at least I expected she was higher lvl since she had a lot of health) I was still able to beat her. So ya, I couldn't agree more about disagreeing.
Pokebow Lvl 18 (I'm getting there) P.S. I'm not sure if what I said was relevant to the fact that about the topic but potato pototo
I'm totally okay with fighting higher level opponents, within reason.
I am a magus veteran; this often means that any same-level opponents I have are several ranks higher or, even better, that they're low-ranking grandmasters. Yes, their critical is a huge pain, but I've put enough effort into both my wizard and her setup that, with the exception of a full-pip judge, one lucky crit won't end me.
I agree, though, that there should be some sort of level cap. Here is my proposed idea (very rough, so feel free to offer suggestions):
level 5-59: private-veteran: your opponent can be, at most, 10 levels above or below your own and must be a similar rank.
knight-warlord: your opponent can be up to 20 levels higher/lower and must be a high-level private, corporal, sergeant, or vet. for example: if i am a level 34 veteran, my opponents must be a veteran or lower in rank + between level 25-45. level 60+
private-veteran: your opponent can be up to 20 levels above/below, but must be of the same rank group. knight-warlord: your opponent can be up to 30 levels above/below, but must be of the same rank group.
this would prevent level 20 sergeants from being paired with level 60 warlords in waterworks gear (and other nonsense matches that i'm sure go on in there).
-
-von "problem solved, you're all welcome" shadowsong pvp veteran, promethean noob of amazingness.
Yeah I could see this being nice, Ms. "problem solved"..there does however get to a point that needs attention, such as a rank from around 1300-2000 (at level 30)..who do they fight? Because right now they fight Legendary privates with WW gear and Grandmaster Warlords..with full Glendemming's. If you come up with a solution, much applause to you!
Yeah I could see this being nice, Ms. "problem solved"..there does however get to a point that needs attention, such as a rank from around 1300-2000 (at level 30)..who do they fight? Because right now they fight Legendary privates with WW gear and Grandmaster Warlords..with full Glendemming's. If you come up with a solution, much applause to you!
Wolf Legend
well, according to the (very-rough) system i created above, here's what i've got for a level 30 warlord:
her opponent would be level 10-50
~if paired w/ someone <level 30, opponent would have to be a knight or higher; ~if paired w/a L50 (the max level her opponent could be), that person would be a vet or lower.
again, this would prevent a lot of those nonsense matches from happening. no level 60 privates, no glendemmings (since, correct me if i'm wrong, but anyone lower than knight can't get that anyway), no level-60-warlord-vs-level-20-sergeant ridiculousness... it's all good.
I agree that the player verses player is unfair not the treasure card thing. All my wizards are a mid to high level, but in player verses player they're privates. I have the same problem I'm matched up with higher ranked players. I think that they should match players that are the same level and same rank. This would solve everything.
My brother and I recently made a storm/fire combo team at Magus. We have done 2v2 up to Warlord and have already fought legendary teams with around 100 rank.
