idc if im invading without their consent im a blue sentinel and you broke the rules so you pay the price u dnt kill someone in realife and when the cops come you don't say you don't have my consent to open my door and take me to jail. if you heal your a scrub and you suck the only time I heal is if the invader or host heals first. I used to do that heal bs in ds1 but I don't and especially if your in ng+ u shouldn't be plain and simple if you heal your a scrub reason dosent matter

You blurred the lines pretty thick there. Blue Sentinels =/= police. If you kill someone in real life, they don't respawn. If you kill a real person you deserve to go to jail and have your head kicked in along the way. Do you know why murder is a crime and killing someone's fictional avatar in a game isn't? Hell, if killing someone in a game was illegal, how many times have you become a criminal? Being a Blue Sentinel doesn't entitle you to any sort of authority - it's a fictional game that boasts invasion mechanics as an integral part of gameplay.

Brotherhood members can't heal when they invade, their hosts can. Just as you invade sinners and they can heal. That mechanic is based on the risk-reward of the invasion system, where the host gambles everything and the invader gambles nothing. You seem to have a problem distinguishing what fiction actually is. Please don't actually harm a real person.

Reasons always matter. Just saying "I don't need a reason" completely invalidates anything you have to say. I could say you're an idiot and refuse to give a reason, but the reason for saying that is plainly obvious that I doubt I have to say it anyway...

its not a duel if people run and hide. its bad etiquette. and u clearly dodge those few previous post, so im not gonna repeat myself. u urself still also just repeating urself and didnt give a response to that previos post

Look back to post #23 for a few questions you've routinely ignored. There was nothing in your post that wasn't already covered in previous posts, and me having to repeat myself is because you're failing to understand that what you perceive as a game or player fault is an engineered part of the game. I've said, countless times, that there is no disadvantage to either party, and I've asked you to explain time and again why you think there is, because this is the crux of the problem.

i mean u mention i talked about level design, im sure i've give more reasons and examples than that. u mentioned that but then that particular reason comes from your arrow comment and u didnt say anything back about it, just repeat what u said again and again same thing

That was the only reason. I mentioned using an arrow to interrupt the opponent, it wasn't integral to my point however. It was nothing more than a throw-away suggestion and there are other, far more important, issues that you've not replied to. See above for one of them.

u still didnt clarify what u mean about just taking 1 drink and called it tactics. coz thats, again, let me repeat, is stupid, so stupid what i've read there

and for that comment about the 1 estus drink tactic, again u didnt clarify, u just said i called u stupid, didnt clarify urself.

Strategy in using your estus is whether you can time its use so it doesn't leave you vulnerable to attack. Drinking 2 estus, back-to-back, increases the animation time and leaves you even more vulnerable, even if the risk pays dividends in reviving you to 100%. That risk factor, like with any higher-tier spell or miracle that are capable of one-shotting, is what you have to sacrifice in order to use that item. You won't always be able to keep up with your opponent, and they will be able to sneak in the odd heal, but I can't criticize anyone for using what is made available to them.

i mean u leave everything hanging, then ur comeback is the same thing over and over again.

and like i've said already, i'll repeat myself, if both sides can do something, doesnt mean it should. its called a duel. it should be conducted like a duel.

This is another example of why I'm going around in circles. I've asked you before to explain your perception of a duel, what your parameters define it as, and why you think real-world duels were any more chivalrous than your idealized view?

If we're comparing Dark Souls to trial by combat then there was most certainly a lot of foul play involved. As duelling became more of a gentleman sport during the 18th century it was a fixed engagement fought for pride and vanity, with clearly defined rules and conduct.

Dark Souls is neither of those. It's a game that breaks the boundaries of reality when it gives you items that can instantly heal what would be fatal wounds in reality. You're not playing Dark Souls for your family's honour, not your pride as a man, nor any sort of accolade or right. You're playing a game which, at the end of the day, you can shut down and stick on a shelf and never have it influence your life again, whereas the outcome of a real duel would stay with you for life, for humiliation or pride. People lost their knighthood over them, they lost status, land, property. You don't gamble your house or your sister on duels in Dark Souls, do you? No, because there is no gamble in an entertainment medium, and comparing reality with fiction like that is ridiculous.

So, the only definition of "duel" which is valid in Dark Souls is that which is fabricated by the players. These "rules" are not ministered or refereed, they are not enforced to give penalties and concessions, you do not play for anything other than to be entertained. They are guidelines and they can be disputed. So if the game presents both of you with equal options, the limitations on these guidelines is up to the individuals participating. If one person heals mid-match, the other is only handicapping themselves by refusing to do so. You don't retain any pride or honour for refusing to heal.

if your holding 1 million souls your going to be wearing a ring of protection

Since they and the choice of rings that I use are limited, no, I don't always have one on.

Please don't call someone stupid when you're incapable of proper grammar and spelling:

and i response with a how due to level design and spamming estus

*I *responded

u response

*you *responded

so here's my retort to whatever u wrote there, learn to read

There should be a colon after "there", since you're starting a syntactical deductive clause. Also, there's a spelling mistake for "you", and "so" should be capitalized.

response

Are you sure you know the difference between respond and response?

misguide thoughts on whats happening in the post

*misguided *what's - it's a contraction of "what is".

and ur still blind

*And *you're

i've

*I've

I'm not sure if you're actually reading what either of us are writing or if you actually understand which of us has more of a problem with the English language.

Your only complaint is that people, including yourself, are capable of healing in a game. You have no more basis for it because the environment that provides for it does so in a fair manner. Neither player is disadvantaged by it. If you're so sure it is unbalanced that both players can heal then explain to me why. Just being able to run, hide, and heal, is not a valid criticism of the game when you're capable of doing just the same.

So far you've only offered a response to your problem with the level design. I've asked you many simple questions that you've ignored.

I've tried to be cordial and all I've gotten in reply is ad hominem pejorative, so consider your posts flagged.

Brotherhood is hardcore mode :P I really only think it exists for masochists who want to really challenge themselves. I gave it a go but I prefer the more lax style of PvP that the Sentinels offer.

Your kills shouldn't reset but there's no way to actually check, other than you keeping a tally on paper. The Brotherhood also penalizes a loss with a -1 to your overall kills. So if you're on 16 kills and lose 2 matches in a row, you'll be demoted to 14. It's harsh and makes getting even to rank 1 so much more difficult, because you could win 100 matches and still not be there.

BB tags don't work, boo.

u dont take one estus every 3 secs. u can spam it. again, u have to stick close, but they have to always turtle and run away, thats not a duel anymore.

No, that's tactics.

if its a duel, then conduct it like a duel.

What parameters are you basing your definition of a duel on? Medieval duels and duels in a game that contain instant heal items are radically different. There are no official rules in Dark Souls that you must abide by.

and ur seriosly misguided if u think every estus drink is punishable. the world is not perfect. not every estus drink opportunity means its time to land a ko. its not hard to spam estus in some arenas. i dont care if u play arena duels as well. if u cant see some arena level designs, u can duck and run in circles, twist and turn to spam estus, ur blind. that said, if im sticking close, 7 out of 10 times, i land ko, becoz they dont know better, but i hate to chase. for those that run, i stick so close, some r smart enuff not to take estus.

If the world is not perfect, why are you complaining about a self-perceived imperfection? First you criticize me on the belief that I'm ignorant to the arena, and now you don't care because I'm not. I thought your point was that my opinion was based on a lack of experience. At least admit where you're wrong.

I can see level designs fairly well, and they haven't stopped me from winning matches where people ran and healed.

and some do manage to spam estus, it doesnt take 3 seconds, u can spam estus, they'll let u hit, but they'll survive, and thats bs.

So? You get one attack in and they're not fully at 100% then. If you're still refusing to heal then you only have yourself to blame for losing. If your opponent can heal and you can heal, where's the disadvantage? That only leaves your own skill as the deciding factor in the outcome of the match. Handicapping yourself by refusing to use an item that is granted to you is silly.

the game calls it a duel, but its not a duel anymore. and it doesnt take arrows. come up with some arena design levels where u can always punish estus. where??? how??? examples plz. even the best let some scrubs take estus sometimes, just look up vid on youtube. ur seriosly blind if u think the arena design level has not effect on how people can run and take estus. again, i take 7 out of 10, if people run, but those 3 still annoying. so dont tell me if my problem i let them, i allow them the opportunity to drink. its not that. they can spam estus, u can backstab them, but they'll survive.

Again, define "duel". You're making a real world comparison to in-game mechanics. If the mechanics of the game don't limit either player then it's fair and purely down to your own skill in winning. If you have to put up with your opponent chugging all their estus then just heal yourself and continue on with the fight and be patient.

so again, i have to assume u have limited knowledge on duel arenas if that how u see it. becoz i have to think maybe u suck at it if u think drinking is ok.

So now you do care about my experience. Make your mind up. I like that you just jump to the conclusion that I suck because you can't accept that the arena is balanced in terms of game-play. If you're looking for a duel that conforms to your expectations then go join the Dragons or use the Red Soapstone. Most players I've encountered will be courteous to their opponent in those circumstances (because the invited invader can't heal).

As to my "skill", I win more than I lose and I've solo'd most of the bosses, including Velstadt on NG++ as a dexterity-melee build. I generally enjoy the arena and have no complaint to estus healing, although I do it very rarely and only when I see my opponent doing it and I'm unable to land a smooth hit or reach them in time.

i mean i've given examples on the arena design, i've stated that u can spam estus, u can land a backstab, its fine for them coz they know they'll survive.

its not that its just your own fault that u let them drink. to prevent them from doing that, u have to keep close, but that eliminates the build vs build, strategy, the challenge. its harder to set up ur attack, thats probably the most important thing, becoz without that, its not a duel anymore.

But what is stopping you from doing the same? What restrictions are placed on you other than your own self-imposed ideals?

It doesn't eliminate the build-build tactics when a melee character still has to get within range of a sorcerer. The addition of estus use only increases the challenge, it doesn't diminish it in any way.

I think you have to be rank 1 and maintain a kill streak of at least 10.

Twerking. Or Moonwalk. I would troll the shit out of people with those.

I've played >100 duels in the arena and average anywhere between 5-15 duels a day now.

Let me ask you this: What disadvantage do you have by having the same lack of limitations as your opponent?

The only disadvantage to you personally is that you're treating the game as an honourable set-up, when in fact it's the opposite. Healing items are available for you both to use, but if you're too stubborn to use them while your opponent utilizes what he's given to win then you're handicapping yourself. It's not the game that's at fault; the arena doesn't limit or handicap either player and gives them a balanced set-up.

"its very possible to evade and find that split second to spam estus."

I don't think it is. If you're sticking as close to your opponent as you claim you are then you should be able to score a hit before he has a chance for the estus animation to complete (it takes 3 seconds from pressing X to being able to perform an action again). Using a large enough weapon you can interrupt and stagger them, stopping them from healing.

That's not always the case and if your opponent manages to heal, shrug it off and be patient.

You're hung up on this ideal that people are going to ignore what the game allows them to use. Stop being stubborn and just use your healing items when you need them. You're only driving yourself into frustration by refusing to do so.

Even medieval duels weren't entirely honourable - knights resorted to underhanded tactics and foul-play all the time. Also, real knights didn't have estus or instant heal items.

It's fine that an invader can't heal. The limitations on the invader are balanced by the invader not gambling anything when he invades - they don't lose souls, humanity, or game progress, whereas a host does. Keeping alive in that instance is the host's priority, not some knight's code of honour.

@PrinceRhymz: You can both heal; there is no disadvantage to either player. If your opponent runs away, chase him, or stick a giant arrow in his head. If you allow him to consistently heal then that's the fault of your skill, not the game mechanics.

As far as I'm concerned, the arena is fair and balanced.