[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're not joking I'll be so 
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, not joking, but, yes, being pedantic. The point of economies being a form of PvP is mostly academic and not the idea of PvP most people, or even I, think of when they see the acronym. I was essentially just attemtping to show that there are systems beyond what most people consider and that there is plenty of room for improvement and change.
As for the "Quatloo/Quatlu" thing -- I'd forgotten all about the quote until someone else here on the forums used the term last week. Apparently, I made the same misspelling they did! 
[/ QUOTE ]
Too bad I can't snipe auctions in the auctionhouse like I can on Ebay.
[ QUOTE ]
You're not a badger or you'd know how difficult and challenging that truly is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sleeping while your computer runs overnight is "difficult and challenging"?
I think you meant "time-consuming and inane."
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're not a badger or you'd know how difficult and challenging that truly is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sleeping while your computer runs overnight is "difficult and challenging"?
I think you meant "time-consuming and inane."
[/ QUOTE ]
To each its own. To the others its known, but neither care to listen.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're not a badger or you'd know how difficult and challenging that truly is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sleeping while your computer runs overnight is "difficult and challenging"?
I think you meant "time-consuming and inane."
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah you and every badge-hunter out there agrees with the epic badges, which most badgers have the same feeling about as you PvPers have about the arena, the badgers want them fixed. Anyway most badges are not like that. Most required active play and most can be gotten through normal play.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, PvE environments are generally static, and not because they have to be, but because game designers claim they *must* be: that an evolving PvE environment creates all sorts of problems that would upset or unbalance the game. Can't have PvE players alterning the environment, because a constantly shifting backdrop to PvE would wreck PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't really know any developers who believe that. We look at games like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, God of War or Shadow of the Colossus and the innovative use of terrain involved there and think "How can we get things such as that into our game?"
[/ QUOTE ]
On paper, I think everyone from players to developers thinks the idea of an evolving PvE environment - of which modifiable terrain is a very small part - is a good idea. But *specific* ideas about player actions fundamentally altering the game environment tend to be shot down as either impractical, or too subject to abuse.
In fact, the whole concept of instancing is antithetical to players having control of the environment. And its not just a compromise solution, because very little developer time seems to be put into non-instanced content. We have a bunch of wandering monsters, burning buildings (which don't even have the decency to actually fall down when they explode), and Hamidon (and even Hamidon is pseudo-instanced now). Players cannot save the warwalls, because they really can't *fail* to save the warwalls.
Its not *technologically* impossible to do these things in CoH, but I'll bet its not seen as either practical, sufficiently interesting, manageable, or casual-friendly (can't have the mutant store closed on thursday because insufficient numbers of players stopped the trolls from sacking it, because it will piss off the casual players who play on thursday).
You take a risk in PvP: the risk is that the players will fix it, whatever "it" is, and temporary problems will be seen by the players as something *they* have to fix, because the developers themselves are really not very important except essentially as weapon's dealers. But that risk doesn't seem to be calculated as worth it in PvE environments (at least the ones I've seen) because the PvE environment is either seen as just a stepping stone to PvP (and therefore simple and stable is what everyone actually wants) or its seen as critical to the core playerbase (and therefore too risky to tamper with in unpredictable ways, and players can be very unpredictable).
In PvP you don't complain if the enemy destroys your forward base of operations, because its an article of faith that the purpose of the other side is to make life difficult for you. But in PvE, I don't think I see the same desire to take the risk that what the players were counting on yesterday might not be here tomorrow because of playerbase activity, because the developers do not want to be perceived as the "enemy" that took something way.
But I would love to be proven wrong. No one would be happier than me to see player-influenced environment (not synonymous with terrain: "environment" includes any alteration in physical environment and the NPC critters within it: spawning larger groups when a larger team walks by is an example of a very tiny non-permanent environmental influence) happen in I10, I11, or I12, and have to eat my words.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention in a more dramatic way regarding RV. That backdrop changes as a result of PvP and is something PvEers can only dream about.
[/ QUOTE ]
Last I checked the backdrop of RV changes because of PvE, not PvP....
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you're not joking I'll be so
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope, not joking, but, yes, being pedantic. The point of economies being a form of PvP is mostly academic and not the idea of PvP most people, or even I, think of when they see the acronym. I was essentially just attemtping to show that there are systems beyond what most people consider and that there is plenty of room for improvement and change.
As for the "Quatloo/Quatlu" thing -- I'd forgotten all about the quote until someone else here on the forums used the term last week. Apparently, I made the same misspelling they did!
[/ QUOTE ] I hope the most important thing you design in this game is what color the buildings are.
[/ QUOTE ]
Mykonos, I hope you get booted from these servers. YOU sir are the idoit.
In case you don't know what pvp IS, it stands for PLAYER VERSUS PLAYER. Whenever you are in competition, it is YOU VERSUS THEM. Therefore, any type of market or business where the PLAYERS are involved IS a form of PLAYER VERSUS PLAYER.
@OP
i quit the game for a few months and have been lurking in these here forum since then.. just had to log to say, excellent post
who lives in a pineapple under the sea?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't even know what griefing in a PvP zone is!??!?! Maybe someone can explain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me give you the most eggregious example of griefing I've ever seen in a PvP zone. Some novice came in and actually asked for someone to give him a hand and show him the ropes. What he got was chain teleported deep into the zoned, ganked half a dozen times, and then when his gankers grew tired, he wasn't allowed to leave the zone.
When he got close to the gate, they'd port him back into the zone. Over and over. He had to disconnect in order to escape.
You'll excuse me for saying so, but I think that being forced to run away from the game in order to avoid being harassed counts as griefing. Wouldn't you agree?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I could see how some could consider this griefing, but I certainly don't consider it to be such. Nor, do I necessarily believe it to be true based on the fact that it seems like a certain (very high) level of stupidity would be required to allow this to happen. Even without a travel power, I think you can leave all of the pvp zones within 30 seconds (the safe period after respawn). You mention that the player "wasn't allowed to leave the zone" and I guess I don't know how that can happen. I've been in the pvp zones hundreds of times, and I've never not been allowed to leave.
[ QUOTE ]
You'll excuse me for saying so, but I think that being forced to run away from the game in order to avoid being harassed counts as griefing. Wouldn't you agree?
[/ QUOTE ]
If you consider being killed in a pvp zone harassment, then you probably shouldn't go to pvp zones.
If you keep repeating the same behavior that got you killed before, you will likely be killed again. Playing against intelligent opponents forces you to adapt. If you don't adapt, expect to be killed the same way over and over again.
The OP's argument is basically:
1. PvP
2. ????
3. Profit!
Yes, WoW has PvP. So did Shadowbane, which tanked. It's just not that simple.
CoX's issues with its PvE content are contingent upon details of its design (which is a polite way of saying the devs screwed up). They're not indicative of problems with PvE play in general.
Current Blog Post: "Why I am an Atheist..."
"And I say now these kittens, they do not get trained/As we did in the days when Victoria reigned!" -- T. S. Eliot, "Gus, the Theatre Cat"
[ QUOTE ]
If you consider being killed in a pvp zone harassment, then you probably shouldn't go to pvp zones.
If you keep repeating the same behavior that got you killed before, you will likely be killed again. Playing against intelligent opponents forces you to adapt. If you don't adapt, expect to be killed the same way over and over again.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. GG
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're not a badger or you'd know how difficult and challenging that truly is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sleeping while your computer runs overnight is "difficult and challenging"?
I think you meant "time-consuming and inane."
[/ QUOTE ]
To each its own. To the others its known, but neither care to listen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Other than a handful of arguable TF and GM badges, I fail to see how badges could be classified as "difficult." Certainly not in the sense that PvP is difficult.
As a recovered badge collector with ~360 badges on my main, I can honestly say that Vae_Victus is pretty much spot on. There is nothing at all challenging or difficult about badge collecting.
Hold that thought... pillbox badges might be in this category, seeing how you're subject to PvP to get them. Maybe even the Warburg nuke badge. That's about it.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're not a badger or you'd know how difficult and challenging that truly is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sleeping while your computer runs overnight is "difficult and challenging"?
I think you meant "time-consuming and inane."
[/ QUOTE ]
To each its own. To the others its known, but neither care to listen.
[/ QUOTE ]
Other than a handful of arguable TF and GM badges, I fail to see how badges could be classified as "difficult." Certainly not in the sense that PvP is difficult.
As a recovered badge collector with ~360 badges on my main, I can honestly say that Vae_Victus is pretty much spot on. There is nothing at all challenging or difficult about badge collecting.
Hold that thought... pillbox badges might be in this category, seeing how you're subject to PvP to get them. Maybe even the Warburg nuke badge. That's about it.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think those Heroes/Villains in RV are a bit hard. But other then that and the Epic badges, easy in my opinion. Like I said though, to each its own.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now, if you have a real solution to dealing with "poo monkeys" I'm all ears.
[/ QUOTE ]
Shutting them down within the limits of the game seems to work. There is nothing a bully fears more than a united front willing to fight back.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, lets go back to the three things I identified as hurdles. To have a united front, we as the PvP community, must agree with at least a majority on a code on conduct that covers more situations than the "official" code of conduct and the EULA. That, IMO is impossible since we have no method of determining a majority nor do we have a method of determining when and if changes should occur. Even the most popular third party sites attract a small fraction of the over all population, so how are we (the community) going to debate? Until that is done, there is no such thing a united front, just some groups imposing their own point of view and others complaining about it.
Are there legit griefers? Absolutely, but only the game's official rules identify them and there is already a mechanism to handle them.
Thorizdin
Lords of the Dead
Old School Legends
Holy [censored]!
WB thor.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand, PvE environments are generally static, and not because they have to be, but because game designers claim they *must* be: that an evolving PvE environment creates all sorts of problems that would upset or unbalance the game. Can't have PvE players alterning the environment, because a constantly shifting backdrop to PvE would wreck PvE.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't really know any developers who believe that. We look at games like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, God of War or Shadow of the Colossus and the innovative use of terrain involved there and think "How can we get things such as that into our game?"
[/ QUOTE ]
On paper, I think everyone from players to developers thinks the idea of an evolving PvE environment - of which modifiable terrain is a very small part - is a good idea. But *specific* ideas about player actions fundamentally altering the game environment tend to be shot down as either impractical, or too subject to abuse.
In fact, the whole concept of instancing is antithetical to players having control of the environment. And its not just a compromise solution, because very little developer time seems to be put into non-instanced content. We have a bunch of wandering monsters, burning buildings (which don't even have the decency to actually fall down when they explode), and Hamidon (and even Hamidon is pseudo-instanced now). Players cannot save the warwalls, because they really can't *fail* to save the warwalls.
Its not *technologically* impossible to do these things in CoH, but I'll bet its not seen as either practical, sufficiently interesting, manageable, or casual-friendly (can't have the mutant store closed on thursday because insufficient numbers of players stopped the trolls from sacking it, because it will piss off the casual players who play on thursday).
You take a risk in PvP: the risk is that the players will fix it, whatever "it" is, and temporary problems will be seen by the players as something *they* have to fix, because the developers themselves are really not very important except essentially as weapon's dealers. But that risk doesn't seem to be calculated as worth it in PvE environments (at least the ones I've seen) because the PvE environment is either seen as just a stepping stone to PvP (and therefore simple and stable is what everyone actually wants) or its seen as critical to the core playerbase (and therefore too risky to tamper with in unpredictable ways, and players can be very unpredictable).
In PvP you don't complain if the enemy destroys your forward base of operations, because its an article of faith that the purpose of the other side is to make life difficult for you. But in PvE, I don't think I see the same desire to take the risk that what the players were counting on yesterday might not be here tomorrow because of playerbase activity, because the developers do not want to be perceived as the "enemy" that took something way.
But I would love to be proven wrong. No one would be happier than me to see player-influenced environment (not synonymous with terrain: "environment" includes any alteration in physical environment and the NPC critters within it: spawning larger groups when a larger team walks by is an example of a very tiny non-permanent environmental influence) happen in I10, I11, or I12, and have to eat my words.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the base idea creates possiblities for this. That's for PVPers, PVers and RPers. It's Sandbox and yet separate enough that it doesn't upset the people doing a set grinding thing.
In many games, those abilities do exist, but there is a cost. For example, SWG had player cities and houses, but this caused wierd generation issues so that you could be flying through what seemed to be empty unmarketed forest and boom you were in someone's living room. You couldn't see the player created content for more than a few hundred feet at best and sometimes you had to wait 1-2 minutes for it to load, thus the bike example above. There were at least 5-6 exploits people used in pvp that took advantage of that grid system. I'll place a video of one form used in pvp and caught in a video as an example (the exploiter was a player with the handle Neoc): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NSIjfDd4_Q
COX has a completely solid world. If you take this for granted, you'll have no idea how shocking it was for me and my crew, 15 months ago, to see things like Mercy island and look at things over a mile away. It was breathtaking and awe inspiring.
The depth of the common areas in this game are incredible. I'd like to see people be able to enter more of the buildings. I'd love to see more done with the arena and the bases to make it more player sandbox material. But, the areas from the flying ceiling on, are incredible.
Bases, don't involve the common area though. So to a certain extent, the bases are a cure for this on a permanent level, though many would desire more. Like the ability to sit easily from a radial like in wow or swg. Little things, I guess from the view of the player, but understandably big things on the math side the developers are working with.
Also, other instances in the mode, such as alternate dimensions and the moon base also opens up the possiblity of having that include hostile pve and pvp components for those that choose either or both. With luck on of the people on my server will comment on it, he has a lot of good ideas for the arena and such so that the player level of creativity can be increased, without the negatives that you pointed out.
I understand your point of view. So, I hope by pointing this out you might see a positive possiblity you hadn't considered.
There are ideas out their from the players that the devs might consider such as openning the rogue islands and Paragon city up to each other. Most of these ideas included things like the wow pvp realm system that allows the proper realm defenders to attack invaders if they choose, with the invader only able to defend hmself if attacked. The idea might sound wierd, but it could add a whole new element to the game in 3 areas: PVP, PVE and RP, with what we hope would be a minimum of development from the dev team. It might even be a holy grail for the badge hunters, though it would be risky for invaders. Dueling options might delight pvpers, the ability to marry toons might delight RPers, badges and loot based items (invention components) might delight PVErs.
Bignord's ideas on the Nemsis list could have functions for PVPERs, but it could also be used by creative RPers and wily badge hunting PVErs to accomplish their own goals as well ( http://boards.cityofvillains.com/showfla...e=2&fpart=1 ). This gives all three controls since his idea even included the safeties and gave unique options to show up in hero and villain missions.
The possiblties are endless. However, we must also acknowledge we are a group of infinite dreams. We are presenting them to a group that has a finite ability to execute these wishes based on real time and money constrants.
With luck, the brightest and the best of those ideas for the community as a whole will be possbile and acted on. For that we can hope.
And I am off to bed, sorry if I messed this message up, but I'm beat... =/
im one of the anti PVP-ers....a nd i agree with you. thought i dont partake in pvp, ive been with CoX since the get go. theres the actual STORY to read and recreate and relive and take alternate path to get to that have been keeping me entertained....
try listening to your contacts and you might get a mission worth fighting for!!
bust a head and Stay Safe, Heroes!!
I've been involved in Star Wars Galaxies and CoH when they were pre-Beta. Star Wars Galaxies was rushed to Live before the major kinks were worked out of the system, just like what happened with Bethseda's Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall.
Player Cities, mounts, vehicles, starships, and heck even Jedi were held back because they weren't ready to implement when the game went Live. There were major rubberbandings, mind-numbing lag (even in areas where you are the only one in miles around), memory leaks of the likes of Old Faithful, etc. Eventually the big features were brought into the game, but the actual content remained miniscule at best.
PvP conscent was a good system, allowing characters to duel in the streets, but it was easily griefed by those who went around goading people to fight. TEFs (Temporary Enemy Flags) was one of the worst parts of the system, which forced people who would have liked to be involved in the Factions but had character who weren't ready for PvP combat to be flagged as an open target to those who'd outclass them (high level/skilled and equipped players).
Getting rid of TEFs was the best part of the Combat Upgrade. People could still PvP, and be flagged for it when they want to, while those who perferred to blow up PvE enemy factions could do so without being ambushed by players. By no means did PvP dry up and disappear. It just meant there were less griefing.
Actually, a lot of people that I knew in the game was really excited about having Jedi when you had to unlock certain kinds of professions (which ones needed was random to the character). Personally, it helped temper the want to have a Jedi character.
Did half the servers disappear after CU and the Jedi 'grind'? Not hardly, though CU did put a hamper on the range of weapons players could have access to. Then again, the actual amount of weapons was slightly increased.
One of the worst aspects of SWG was that the content really centered on combat. If you weren't focused on a totally combat character, good luck being able to go on hunts, which was the only real way to explore and get/complete missions.
The only other real option was to totally focus on being a crafter/merchant. Nice to make cash, but if you're not all that interested in what amounted to a grind in a different respect....
At least in the begining, before 'New Game Experience', you had the choice of mixing and matching the professions your character had. I had a Master Pistoleer/Master Artisan/Master Droid Engineer. I was able to go along on hunts, and still be of use in the field.
NGE was shoved down players' throats, with little to no consulting with the players (or at least when they did, the community had no idea what was in store). It forced the game play to radically change and people were pigeon-holed into so called 'iconic' professions.
This system in itself was a bug fest all over again.
The only thing that kept SWG somewhat afloat is the concept that it's supposed to be a game based on Star Wars.
Games that were better implemented and had better features trounced SWG, not because of the degree of PvP over PvE SWG had/supposedly had. CoH and EQII drew a lot of disenfranchised players before WoW came along. And CoH didn't have PvP content at all at the time.
Everyone has their own idea of what level or degree of PvE/PvP that they are willing or wanting to play. Considering the number of people who don't want to constantly PvP in CoH, it would be a very bad business decision to pull out the PvE and concentrate on PvP.
If PvP is what rocks your world, then you are more than welcome to it, as there are areas for that to happen in CoH/V.
[ QUOTE ]
say you are selling "Progenitor Goo Mk XII" for 800 Quatlu's and I have one I want to sell.
[/ QUOTE ]
LOLOLOLOL!!! n00b! It's "Quatloos"!!! lrn2spell!! 
"OK, first of all... Shut Up." - My 13-Year-Old Daughter
29973 "The Running of the Bulls" [SFMA] - WINNER of the Mighty Big Story Arc Contest !
- The Stellar Wind Orbital Space Platform
[ QUOTE ]
Player Auction houses are a great example of PvP content that is typically embraced by PvE players....
[/ QUOTE ] I understand your point, however, I would submit that there are many traditional forms of PvP that could be employed that, imo, would be far far far more compelling than what we currently have. And more to the point, should be pursued long before we start looking for non-traditional ways to expand the player versus player envorenment. I swear you guys have gone out of your way to avoid the natural progression of CoV and CoH.
For example, I sent a detailed PM to Positron asking for changes to CoV mayhem missions. Let villians elect to choose mayhems that allow heroes to respond to the robberies instead of Longbow.
Here's another idea, let CoV VG's earn the right to invade CoH PVE zones...use a PvP flag to so that only heroes that attack them can be attacked.
I mean, come one...this is a super Hero game and as such should allow fights betwween good and bad/evil. This is such a fundamental aspect of the comics that I am amazed that devs seem so incredibly reluctant to give us PvP that actually means something outside of the PvP zone cheese (and yes, ganking in Warburg with your Ice/En blaster or Em/* stalker is cheese).
If ever there was a game that lends itself to PvP between two sides, it's CoV and CoH. Why are you guys avoiding the obvious? Bite the bullet, step to the plate, and do what has to be done. Give us the option for real missions with real PvP. I know you guys have the brain power and creativity to make this "fun." Yeah, you've got to fix some of the horrible PvP mechanics that currently exist (like the asymmetrical benefit of Break Frees), but that's what you're paid to do.
Nobody said it was going to be easy, but you've got to start opening things up.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that explains why almost all of the population is running PvE content, and the PvP zones are almost empty most of the time.
Wait...
(Tip: the importance of PvP in a game designed from the ground-up to be based on PvP is not the same as the importance of PvP in a game designed for PvE. Also, claiming you know the population behaviour for your servers when you aren't a dev and have no access to that information makes your entire message suspect.)
[/ QUOTE ]
numbers such as this: http://borkweb.com/story/007-of-the-...ld-of-warcraft
[/ QUOTE ]
A sizable chunk of WoW's population can be attributed purely to name brand recognition. Especially in the Asian market. WoW is the only MMO that counts its Asian market and US/Euro market together in its active account reports. There's a reason for this: Asian accounts work differently. Sure, they have lots of MMOs with millions of accounts, but a lot of those are net cafe bundle-pack accounts that may never even get touched.
There's also the fact that gamers are fanatical about anything Blizzard in the Asian market. So, that number proves diddly.
[ QUOTE ]
This: http://www.shadowsinmotion.com/news-...tion-revealed/
[/ QUOTE ]
SWG is suffering, true, but it's for FAR more reasons than their PvP status.
[ QUOTE ]
or this: http://www.mmogchart.com/
[/ QUOTE ]
Hasn't been updated in over 6 months, but....whatcha trying to prove there?
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
Oh Mieux I concur with your point but man am I chomping at the bit for the auctions...it's a whole mini-game where I can analzye, project, bid, overbid, underbid, coax and barter and lose myself for hours...and it lets me get some influence for my alts as an aside.
I have a buddy in Toronto...he's a day trader. Sometimes he gets a tip and can clear an extra $50,000 CDN in an afternoon. Sometimes he loses that $50,000 CDN.
But the most fun he has? When he gets that deal before one of his friends does; when he can zoom in on a hot item and profit.
I'm not "EvilGeko" (or is it Gordon Gekko 
)esque on the topic...but the Auction house will grab me and hold me long after my last pvp battle will have done so.
Questions about the game, either side? /t @Neuronia or @Neuronium, with your queries!
168760: A Death in the Gish. 3 missions, 1-14. Easy to solo.
Infinity Villains
Champion, Pinnacle, Virtue Heroes
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow, that explains why almost all of the population is running PvE content, and the PvP zones are almost empty most of the time.
Wait...
[/ QUOTE ]
It also explains why every server is green except for two and the majority of PvE zones are empty "most of the time"...
[/ QUOTE ]
The first half is mostly due to hardware upgrades since launch. The second half is due to the number of zones available more than doubling and HEAVY motivation toward instance missions rather than street sweeping.
Try again.
[ QUOTE ]
there is an eventual terminal point. Some players just reach it faster than others.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is true for any game with or without PvP. People will eventually get bored and leave. Or take breaks. Or whatever. The fact is that even with it's "weak" PvP, CoH is still a successful MMO at well into the 100k mark. In the MMO market, there are a couple of powerhouses that break into the millions, but most don't even hit 100k.
Virtue Server
Avatar art by Daggerpoint
[ QUOTE ]
Heh... when nobody knows anything.. everyones an expert. Isn't that right Jack?
[/ QUOTE ]
You're asking the wrong person. I know quite a bit, and am an expert on quite a few subjects.
[ QUOTE ]
Blaming other people... and calling the people who CALL PEOPLE names, is like... uh.. being a Poo monkey. Am I right? Don't look through the window with your eyes closed.
[/ QUOTE ]
Non sequitor much?
If I've decoded your sentences correctly, you're saying that pointing out an anti-social player's actions are anti-social is hypocrisy somehow? I'm scrambling to understand your... interesting... use of the language here, so if you care to translate, I'd appreciate it.
[ QUOTE ]
I think Castle hates pvp.
[/ QUOTE ]