Celestial_Lad

"Hiyo Rikti! Away!"

"Think Rikti"

"Rikti Merit. Don't leave the War Zone without it"

"Rikti, take me away"

"Please don't squeaze the Rikti"

"Rikti Monkeys. Betcha can't take out just one."

"Good to the last Drop Ship"

"Got Rikti?"

"Dammit Jim! I'm a doctor, not a Rikti!"

Howdy Bert!

'Cautiously'? O Rly? I'd cry foul, but I'd probably get an Albatross thrown at me.

While I may tend to agree it is still only anecdotal and speculation with no way of verification.

I sense a paper cut coming to somebody soon.

Do we really have to keep referencing this man's mental state? It's doing nothing for the conversation and sounds like a cop out.

And Optical I have no idea what the point of your post was. I'm not being mean, I just don't get it.

[ QUOTE ]
I think increasing the xp/inf/prestige from normal content would probably be the best way to go along with a slight increase to mission completion xp. Especially the xp from bosses and lieutenants. Oh and remove hami mitos from AE.

[/ QUOTE ]

Increasing these things is a bad idea from a design point of view. The more items you increase the harder is to take away later, especially in regards to static things like xp caps. Where there is exceedingly high caps in place, like influence, and these are relationary to the player-base (ie. economy) these inter-ralationary models will become broken in time.

It's far better to lower (or do nothing) the parts that are having the earliest negative effect than changing things which are outside the scope of the issue.

In short, bad idea for numerous reasons.

Don't we all.

I mean the Edit button is screaming at me in the voice of Archie Bunker.

[ QUOTE ]
I think there's been some misunderstanding here. I'm not proposing to restrict AE TO level 25 and up, I'm saying that someone has to get at least ONE character up to level 25 on their account before AE access is granted. Then if they wanted to, they could roll up a new level 1 and jump into AE right that moment.

That's what I was saying.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is still limiting a player the ability to experience AE right away if they wanted. I don't think this is fair. Also, this begs the question if they can even use the AE to create missions/arcs before they have a character to L25.

It's easier for the Devs and more beneficial from a player's PoV to remove the buildings from the <L10 zones than what you are suggesting.

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, why is it in families that if there are two or more sisters, one is always smoking hot? Perhaps *THAT* is the conspiracy!

[/ QUOTE ]

On a similar note, when there are a group of 3 young ladies, why is one so much physically less attractive? Is the one on the lesser end of the hotness scale trying to make herself feel better. Although at the same time she is putting the other 2 that much higher on the scale.

It appears as though there are multiple consipiracies going on there and the symbiosis of that scenario seems a bit weighted.

I agree as well.

Have players make the journey to Steel or CAD without the need to change the fundamentals of AE (ie. keep the ability to do L1 missions).

[ QUOTE ]
Base salvage to brainstorms used to count, but this was stopped by a delieberate chnage.

[/ QUOTE ]

I remember a red name saying that Brainstorms to Salvage may be an option to count in the future and that they were mining how long it was taking to get to 1k crafts before making the decision. Or something to that effect.

EDIT: I wasn't completely correct. This is to what I was referring.

[ QUOTE ]
Longest. Birthday. Ever.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought we were ghosting this till his next birthday since he said there were 2 threads for it last year. Next year we use this one.

[ QUOTE ]
How can none of you see the Irony in getting the Doc badge, on a toon named Doc that doesn't heal...

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like jerk hacking to me and I think you just deth kicked Irony.

[ QUOTE ]
I was not so much shocked by my opponents being angry and as what they were angry about. If we were playing chess, and you got very angry that I moved my bishop — just moved my bishop, thats all — then I would be equally surprised.[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ] Makes me wonder what would happen if I cast Teleport Foe on that bishop.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is hyperbole and it's missplaced. There is no TP Foe in Chess.

What you quoted is actually where he makes a valid point. Which is that people whine even when tactics are used which are within the game rules, but often against social rules. This is compounded by the fact that it is entirely consensual for them to be there (they voluntarily chose to enter a PvP zone).

Furthermore, he is making the point that it is distressing, at least to him, when game rules are changed or removed because of the volume from the social rules.

I'm sure you are not saying that TP Foe should be removed from PvP play nor that using this power is exploitative or 'illegal'. Although one can get the impression that is what you mean.

All of this warrants further discussion, but for the moment I wanted to put some clarity on this.

Exactly.

Also, 2 game accounts are 2 separate entities and this in not frowned upon as the transfer operation reflects this since 2 characters from the same account can not be in game at the same time. The term logical springs to mind.

This is not discriminatory in any sense.

Your game account is not a consolidation of all your characters' earnings.

You are holding yourself back by way of the trappings in your head. If you can't take a relatively tiny risk by accepting the offers made by some here to help you in game then you're only causing duress to yourself.

After all this time you've been here you don't have 1 single friend you can trust enough to do a transfer? So sad.

It's too bad you can't change your handle to Silver_Platter_Surfer.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
TPing people into drones is griefing as others have said

[/ QUOTE ]

It's players like you that provided the basis for Twixt's paper. Your above comment goes to prove you know nothing about PvP. If it were illegal TP Foe and Drones would have been removed by the Devs a long time ago.



[/ QUOTE ]


How do you make griefing illegal?

[/ QUOTE ]

In how many instances can "griefing" be agreed to be labelled upon?

Griefing is a subjective title. Highlighted moreso in a PVP environment.

Is prohibiting forms of "griefing" in a PVP environment making it less of a PVP environment?

Is PVP considered a sporting activity? Should many prohibitive devices be imposed upon it?

When/ how is a PVP environment not "free" enough or too strict?

What is the capital of October?

[ QUOTE ]
Guy sounds like a non-gamer who thought he stumbled onto some brilliant gaming revelation which, to the other 99% of the gamers, is common sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

After reading his blog post from today and the consequent discussion in the comments section therein, he appears to be a gamer who is confused/conflicted/upset about social constructs being implented into games.

Here lies the hubris of his writings - he chose to do this in an MMORPG where community, peer groups, and structure are encouraged and, arguably, promoted as a reason for getting into the game in the first place.

His hopeful conclusion came first, and possibly as a reason for research, then actively conducted his experiments in such a way to encourage the forgone outcome. Therefore, this was done with bias in order to acheive the predicted result. This can also be seen by the examples he gives, wherein the lack of full disclosure is obvious.

He stands behind the defense of games need rules, although these rules are prohibitive to the goals of the game. Fine, that can be accepted. Where he is flawed is that, in a sandbox game of an MMORPG where game rules are the playground of the sandbox as well as the walls of said box keeping the sand inside (even the notion of sand), he neglects that these types of games (MMORPGs) have by nature, automatic extensions of the game (the people that pay to play) which creates a meta-game or even sub-games -- there is a multi-layer system which dynamically evolves (predictably, based on nature of the product?).

The social makeup of the participants gets distributed by of a kind of magnetics - similarity is drawn together creating social groups. This is inevitable and is by design, by the developers and participants agree to it whether knowingly or not.

The professor takes the 'game' mantra too literally within the contexts of his experiment, or rather he uses the wrong lab to conduct it in. Because of this he gets the conclusion he wants and even expected.

COX is more of a carebear game than some MMORPGs by way of the societal makeup which are drawn to it. That is why there is so much disparity in the discussion of PVP. The professor knew this and yet decided to proceed. The game-rules allow all sorts of things which are not exploits, yet can be disruptive to the social-game.

Are these things mutually exclusive? Yes, but not in the context of his experiment. He neglects to factor in the social aspect - skin of the fruit of the game which is surrounding it. He had to peel it way or work his way through it to get to what he wants - partaking in the game-rules without regard for the society surrounding it.

Concurrently, he feels the skin is what is destroying the fruit. I can respect that opinion. He may be correct within a meta-physical landscape of gaming from a philosophical viewpoint.

However, to conduct this action of his within the context of COX one must consider the societal game whether tangible or not -- game-rules are definately tangible. To continue with the sandbox imagery. You can do what you will to the sand or the box as the rules of physics allows, but when there are similar entiities as you in there there are a sub-set of conditions which must be met (societal standards) for you to be accepted. Expanding the sandbox to a beach - there is lots of room, but if you decide to yell, get naked, kick over sandcastles, the consequent reaction is predictable. Or if a person was to piss in the sandbox someone is going to tell them to stop. He does appreciate that his piss won't melt the sand, but if it did he's accept that too. He doesn't accept you telling him to stop because his piss in not affecting the sand.

The professor is myopic and the real conclusion to his study is he likes games although in the case MMORPGs he doesn't like the societal game that goes along with it by default. He doesn't appreciate the default nature of this side of a game or perhaps more importantly, the evolution of the non-tangible of the situation. We, as players, are outside forces (wind, gravitational force, etc) which create waves or the tide to his seashore and likely vice-versa. He/we wants to enjoy the pristine of the waters without these dynamics to enjoy the serentity it brings.

In the situation we have here you have to account for others than yourself or unhappiness of some form will come eventually if you only want to interact with the core when what is surrounding it cannot be avoided and creates an action-reactionary state. That is where he fails.

I think Tony is.

You're just our virgin sacrifice to them.

You could substitute EQ for UO in first few years of that game for your frist 3 paragraphs.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
*** You are ignoring this user ***

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for becoming my first ignored user! I felt...incomplete without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shucks for you 'cause I was about to ask O_I to enlighten those of us which are unaware of what is above our heads as to what is up there.

Good luck and have fun.

Cheers.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm wondering why nobody has been spamming his Twitter page. After all it's within the rules.

Also, Prof. Myers made a post on his blog about this, sort of. Some of his replies to comments below the post are more intriguing than the actual post.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, someone named Paul G copied my comment and Myers responded by...calling me names?

[/ QUOTE ]

And does so in pseudo kiddie-speak.
He's like, so gnarly, and, like, totally mature to the max.

I'm wondering why nobody has been spamming his Twitter page. After all it's within the rules.

Also, Prof. Myers made a post on his blog about this, sort of. Some of his replies to comments below the post are more intriguing than the actual post.