Quote:
AFAIK, advancing PvP beyond the boundaries of the PvP zones is the ONLY idea that generates such frustration that multiple people threaten to leave the game over it. It's certainly the only thing I know I'd leave the game over. PvP should stay where it belongs--it's ugly enough where it is.|
Originally Posted by TresCool
lol. thats ridiculous.
You guys cant wave the "subscription cancellations"-flag at EVERY idea.it makes u lose credibility.like massively  |
Quote:
|
Also it would help if people who want to express they dont like an idea, would at least READ what the idea is about. Guy talks about raid-like adventures into zones of the opposing side -> nay-sayer talks about STARTING in Atlas after outbreak! I mean at least TRY. Is that asking too much? |
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
@Samuel Tow:
Thats much better.
@Prof Backfire:
I understand your concern.But then again, PvP implies that there is always one loser.
If u let a single villain enter ,say,Founders Falls ,Croatoa or Peregrine Island for a mission, there will be no noob characters that just rolled a new hero waiting for him.
Also there should always be the "no pvp" button. as mentioned before.
@Luminara and Zekiran Immortal:
I am sure you thought this was a really good (even though low) argument there.
But I am Austrian. My mother language is german. And given that I speak english pretty damn well.
To tell you the truth I dont give a rat´s *** about in wich case u think it is appropriate to use "u" instead of "you".
What I value is everyone who can make a relevant argument based on WHAT I say, no matter if he/she shares my opinion or not.
What on earth makes you think adding a "no Pvp button" will solve anything? Have you played games where people have worldwide PvP-even with the option to disable? Most of us have, and we know it's far from a cure-all. It just encourages people to grief you until you get angry enough to turn on your PvP flag, or trick you into accidentally targeting them through use of perimeter powers, etc.
The typical response to this is something along the lines of "grow a thicker skin". Unfortunately, altering the sensitivity of the playerbase or forcing them to continue playing despite exposure to abuse isn't an option--if it were, marketing a game would be a lot easier. If you add a "feature" like a PvP flag, lots of players, many of them long time veterans, will leave the game. Try again.
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
Quote:
If you're educated enough to use English properly, there's no good reason not to do so. If you're communicating in a text-based medium, there are more reasons than can be listed why you should, not the least of which is clarity of communication. Being that English is a second language for you, clarity of communication should be even more important.|
Originally Posted by TresCool
@Luminara and Zekiran Immortal:
I am sure you thought this was a really good (even though low) argument there. But I am Austrian. My mother language is german. And given that I speak english pretty damn well. To tell you the truth I dont give a rat´s *** about in wich case u think it is appropriate to use "u" instead of "you". |
But if you prefer to try to impress 12 year olds and AOL/cellphone junkies/"gangsta" wannabes instead of presenting yourself as an intelligent, worthwhile contributor, go right ahead. It's a free world (mostly), and I don't give three stars on a rat's whatever either. Don't make the mistake of singling me out and telling me that I'm not contributing, though, because I'm not a 12 year old, I don't pretend to be a "gangsta" and I don't speak like a chimpanzee on meth.
I do occasionally speak like an lolcat, but that's an unfortunate side effect of owning an lolcat. And being mentally unstable. They're both habits I'm trying to quit (with varying lacks of success).
Quote:
| What I value is everyone who can make a relevant argument based on WHAT I say, no matter if he/she shares my opinion or not. |
Quote:
Look, I'm going to keep saying this no matter how you spin it - I do NOT want to engage in PvP. I want to be exposed to PvP. I don't want the share the same zone as PvP. I don't care where, how and why it happens as long as it's off in some place where I don't have to run across it unless I specifically choose to go where it's happening. No "PvP off flag, no amount of fairness, NOTHING is going to make me agree to this.|
Originally Posted by TresCool
I understand your concern.But then again, PvP implies that there is always one loser.
If u let a single villain enter ,say,Founders Falls ,Croatoa or Peregrine Island for a mission, there will be no noob characters that just rolled a new hero waiting for him. |
It's high time you understood this - no matter how you try to sell it, a certain percentage of the people are simply going to keep saying no. We do not want PvP in PvE zones. Period.
Not to mention the technical difficulties...
Quote:
| To tell you the truth I dont give a rat´s *** about in wich case u think it is appropriate to use "u" instead of "you". |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
Quote:
I'm going to second this statement, as it sums things up nicely - and this is coming from someone who *likes* PVP, on occasion. I've helped others learn what they're doing (or doing wrong) in PVP, had some good fights, written guides that have gotten people who weren't interested in PVP before into it. |
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
Look, I'm going to keep saying this no matter how you spin it - I do NOT want to engage in PvP. I want to be exposed to PvP. I don't want the share the same zone as PvP. I don't care where, how and why it happens as long as it's off in some place where I don't have to run across it unless I specifically choose to go where it's happening. No "PvP off flag, no amount of fairness, NOTHING is going to make me agree to this.
It's high time you understood this - no matter how you try to sell it, a certain percentage of the people are simply going to keep saying no. We do not want PvP in PvE zones. Period. |
I like my PVP *right* where it is, thanks - somewhere *I* choose to go to engage in it. PVP on or off flag? It's called entering or leaving the PVP zone (or Arena.) The most anyone can do when I'm not in zone is send me a /tell, at which time I laugh at them and, if they're being complete twits, put them on ignore. The people who really like it will spend more time there. The people who absolutely don't want it can completely and totally ignore its existance. I *like* that solution.
I PvP pretty much never in the current game environment. I think I would more often were there a global PvP option. However, I do not want it if *any* of the following is true:
1) It's so intensive, time consuming, and cost too much to implement that it'd draw Dev resources away from other things I want *alot* more.
2) It isn't any fun, whether thru grief-ability, bad mechanics, whatever...
I don't think anybody here who is advocating global PvP is doing so unless the above were also dealt with. If *either* is true, no arguments - I don't want it anymore than some of you more vehement protesters.
And again, if only #1 is false (it does turn out to be relatively easy and cheap to implement, which none of us really know) and some of the PvP mechanics were fixed, then one Server Only (make it a brand new server) dedicated to global PvP should solve griefing. You don't want to deal with griefing and other less savory aspect of PvP - don't go to that server
Despite that most don't want PvP in this game, I believe that one server would have a healthy population - I know I'd give it a try
And Finally, everybody quit getting worked up - we all know *none* of this is going to happen 
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Socorro
I PvP pretty much never in the current game environment. I think I would more often were there a global PvP option. However, I do not want it if *any* of the following is true:
1) It's so intensive, time consuming, and cost too much to implement that it'd draw Dev resources away from other things I want *alot* more. |
Quote:
| That opens up the can o' worms of split codebases. Adding that option to one special server means that it's going to by definition have different settings/code than the normal servers. That means whenever the devs add a new patch/Issue they'll at least double their debug/QA cycle time since they'll have to test all the new codes' interaction with both the default server code and the "pvp server" code. It'll make isolating bugs harder and more time consuming, make issues take longer to get resolved (and Issues longer to get released) and it'd serve at most ten or perhaps fifteen percent of the playerbase. That's a lot of time and money that'd be in effect pissed away, and it would become an ongoing expense since it's not like the designers and the coders sit on their butts for 2.5 months and then bang an Issue out in two caffeine-fueled crunch weeks (I hope ) so they'll be doubling or more their workloads every day for their forseeable futures. |
Quote:
| 2) It isn't any fun, whether thru grief-ability, bad mechanics, whatever... |
"Duel me"
"No."
"Duel meh nao nub!"
"No."
"You suck-go *perform obscenity*"
"Leave me alone. I just want to PvE right now"
"Hey (in broadcast)! This guy is a chickens*** loser who won't fight me!"
etc, etc, etc.
Quote:
| And again, if only #1 is false (it does turn out to be relatively easy and cheap to implement, which none of us really know) |
Quote:
| and some of the PvP mechanics were fixed, then one Server Only (make it a brand new server) dedicated to global PvP should solve griefing. |
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
Quote:
Not to mention you'd have to have enough folks TRANSFER to this server or start over on it, to make it worthwhile.
|
Originally Posted by Solicio
The best evidence you can find for this is in other games that already have worldwide PvP, which many of us have played. Even with conditions like PvP flagging, you still get smacktards following you around trying to goad you into turning on your PvP flag.
"Duel me" "No." "Duel meh nao nub!" "No." "You suck-go *perform obscenity*" "Leave me alone. I just want to PvE right now" "Hey (in broadcast)! This guy is a chickens*** loser who won't fight me!" etc, etc, etc. You'd be surprised. We have some very educated guess floating around, and none of them point to "easy" on the coding and resource scale. It wouldn't stop griefing, but it would concentrate the bulk of it in one area. You'd need to hire people specifically to police the new server. You'd also (as mentioned earlier) have to maintain two different sets of code. Not easy or cheap, especially for something with as little interest (and as much to lose in the bargain) as worldwide PvP. |
Blazara Aura LVL 50 Fire/Psi Dom (with 125% recharge)
Flameboxer Aura LVL 50 SS/Fire Brute
Ice 'Em Aura LVL 50 Ice Tank
Darq Widow Fortune LVL 50 Fortunata (200% rech/Night Widow 192.5% rech)--thanks issue 19!
It would be a blast to to be able to have an impromptu duel in a pve zone. I'm sure there are ways that this could be implemented that would increase the popularity of pvp while minimizing the distress caused to the anti-pvp establishment. That is my speculation of course, but that is what the majority of the content of this thread is: speculation.
Resistance to the idea expressed here boils down to a few points:
1. My fear and loathing of possibly being involved in pvp is so intense that I will immediately nerdrage quit over something like this being implemented. People ragequit over changes all the time. I knew a guy who guit over vigilance. When the dust settled the majority of these people would still be here.
2. Speculation over the technical infeasibility of doing something like this. Yeah, there might be code-based limitations that would prevent this. Only the devs know for sure. Concern over technical limitations shouldn't prevent someone from forwarding an idea.
3. You spelled "you" as "u", ergo I reject you and your ideas because you fail to uphold the standard of grammatical perfection that I set for this forum. When all else fails, flame someone over how they are communicating.
Try this--if you cannot understand someone's point because of their grammar mistakes, mispellings, etc. ask for clarification. If you can understand their meaning (e.g. I believe most people here are bright enough to get that "u" means "you"), then don't make an issue of how they say it.
Blacklisted
"I'AM SATANS FAVORITE CHILD!!"
Solicio, I said *IF* it were easy to implement... You (and others) don't have to keep going around pointing out hard it'd be for the Devs to do (Split code bases, etc). You simply don't know. If it *IS* hard and time consuming, I wouldn't want the Devs to work on it either at the expense of other development, but really, that's their call. It could be something they could do relatively easy (personally I suspect it would be, but I have no more real info than you do...)
Now, griefing is a valid point, *but* if global PvP were limited to one server, I don't see where griefing should be that great an issue. By the very act of making/transferring a toon to that server, you are opting for global PvP and should be expecting challenges, and be prepared to answer most of them. Viola, a large chunk of griefing gone...
If you don't want that, play on a PvE only server. How hard is that, really...
Finally, I don't expect any of this to ever be implemented (things are gonna stay how you like them). That said, I personally think it'd be interesting (again, if limited to one server)
Quote:
I think we'd see *alot* of folks making new toons on it. I would. I'd like to try a server where everything is just as it is (same missions, same TFs, same arcs) but I could fight another PC just about anywhere. |
Originally Posted by Aura_Familia
Not to mention you'd have to have enough folks TRANSFER to this server or start over on it, to make it worthwhile.
|
Maybe someday we'll see...
Quote:
Have you ever played EverQuest?|
Originally Posted by Socorro
Some sort of open PvP would certainly be in genre. While I think the fear of challenge spamming is real (if presented a bit over dramatically), it would be cool if there was some way to implement it without having to go to specific zones/arenas.
|
The problem with allowing players to challenge other players openly is that even if there is a way to ignore incoming challenges, you then have players tell spamming other players to turn off their ignore challenges flag. This already happens with players that flag them selves as not wanting to accept invites.
Like others have said, there is not real way to control players no matter how well you control the mechanics.
~ Infinity Heroes ~
Dark Voltage - 50 NRG/NRG/EM Blaster
Shure Shot - 50 Arch/NRG/MM Blaster
Silent Shadow Blade - 50 Katana/SR/BM Scrapper
Uphir - 50 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster
Quote:
I actually agree with you - that's why I said (in some other posts) that allowing it on only one server would solve 90% of griefing issues. Those that don't want the grief stay on a PvE server. I have no idea how easy it'd be to limit it to one server (and neither do you |
Originally Posted by CodeJunkie
Have you ever played EverQuest?
The problem with allowing players to challenge other players openly is that even if there is a way to ignore incoming challenges, you then have players tell spamming other players to turn off their ignore challenges flag. This already happens with players that flag them selves as not wanting to accept invites. Like others have said, there is not real way to control players no matter how well you control the mechanics. |
), but it would work, IMO.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Socorro
I actually agree with you - that's why I said (in some other posts) that allowing it on only one server would solve 90% of griefing issues. Those that don't want the grief stay on a PvE server. I have no idea how easy it'd be to limit it to one server (and neither do you
), but it would work, IMO. |
Yes, we do have an idea. Because we have been specifically told, regarding "let's have one server be x" that it is NOT possible and NOT going to happen. People ask "why can't we have an old-school "issue one" server!"
Because issue 1 doesn't have anything that we have now. It's like a different game. So if you want to find an old install disk and create a server for yourself, ... well, that'd be illegal, but that'd be the only way. It's not possible to have the same database split like that into "this one has different rules" because the rules MUST be the same on live servers.
If you wanted to pay for a *separate game*... sure. Why not. But still - it'd be something that your existing characters may never be able to be ported to. They'd likely have to be entirely recreated and could never be brought *back* to the other servers for the same reason.
Please read my FEAR/Portal/HalfLife Fan Fiction!
Repurposed
The solution is simple. More "costumed" villains on the hero-side and more "costumed" heroes on the villain-side. Beating up mobs of gangs on hero-side may be a public service, but on villain-side it seems a bit like pest control.
"Samual_Tow - Be disappointed all you want, people. You just don't appreciate the miracles that are taking place here."
Quote:
The only way they could setup another server with a different rule set, ie: open world PvP, the internal game mechanics would have to allow for rule sets to be defined so that this would be possible. The game was not designed to work like that, although with issue 15 I believe the devs did do some internal changes to allow for different rules for PvP and PvE regarding powers. While it is possible for them to apply such mechanics to the game world as a whole I don't see them expending the effort since PvP in this game is not very popular. The other reason is that in order to setup another "server" would require more equipment that would go virtually unused. Each server consists of not just one computer, but a server farm to handle all the zones and instances and what not.|
Originally Posted by Socorro
I actually agree with you - that's why I said (in some other posts) that allowing it on only one server would solve 90% of griefing issues. Those that don't want the grief stay on a PvE server. I have no idea how easy it'd be to limit it to one server (and neither do you
), but it would work, IMO. |
So yes, in short, I do understand what it would take to do something like this.
~ Infinity Heroes ~
Dark Voltage - 50 NRG/NRG/EM Blaster
Shure Shot - 50 Arch/NRG/MM Blaster
Silent Shadow Blade - 50 Katana/SR/BM Scrapper
Uphir - 50 Fire/Fire/Fire Blaster
What I often see on this board is the typical "senior employee/junior employee" syndrome.
The juniors are enthusiastic (and sometimes naive) about what it is they do, and constantly come up with ideas.
The seniors have seen many(or all) of these ideas fail before,(they may once have BEEN the junior once, and failed themselves) they think they know exactly where this is going, so they are pretty much against everything the juniors say.
In a perfect world, the seniors should bring in their experience to figure out ways how it COULD work.
Note I am not a junior to this particular game, but yes, I havent tried out any other MMORPG so the people who have , clearly have more experience there.
What just came to my mind...
forget dueling for a second.
Is there actually a plan for the level cap to be raised?
PvP could make great 50+ content.
It would be even easier, and nearly nothing would have to be changed.
Just make it so that in order to get to the new 50+ areas , you HAVE to go through a CoV 50+ area. and vice versa.
Is there NOONE who would find this exciting?
Quote:
Entirely your opinion, but it would annoy everyone else who was going about their business in the zone. I don't want to have to deal with the lag, and I don't want to have to deal with the associated griefing of others trying to goad me into combat. PvP isn't appropriate in a PvE zone. You might consider it fun to do it elsewhere, but that doesn't mean you have a mandate to do it. I'm sure there are people who want to smoke in a hospital, but that doesn't mean they should install ashtrays next to the hospital beds. Go outside and smoke in the gazebo like you're supposed to.|
Originally Posted by FrozenDeath
It would be a blast to to be able to have an impromptu duel in a pve zone.
|
Quote:
| I'm sure there are ways that this could be implemented that would increase the popularity of pvp while minimizing the distress caused to the anti-pvp establishment. |
Quote:
| That is my speculation of course, but that is what the majority of the content of this thread is: speculation. |
Quote:
|
Resistance to the idea expressed here boils down to a few points: 1. My fear and loathing of possibly being involved in pvp is so intense that I will immediately nerdrage quit over something like this being implemented. People ragequit over changes all the time. I knew a guy who guit over vigilance. When the dust settled the majority of these people would still be here. |
Quote:
| 2. Speculation over the technical infeasibility of doing something like this. Yeah, there might be code-based limitations that would prevent this. Only the devs know for sure. Concern over technical limitations shouldn't prevent someone from forwarding an idea. |
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
Quote:
No. Never.| Is there actually a plan for the level cap to be raised? |
Quote:
| PvP could make great 50+ content. |
Quote:
| It would be even easier, and nearly nothing would have to be changed. |
Quote:
| Just make it so that in order to get to the new 50+ areas , you HAVE to go through a CoV 50+ area. and vice versa. |
Quote:
| Is there NOONE who would find this exciting? |
Most if not all of the rest, would certainly not like it at all. Once more it brings the forced pvp into play - I don't want to do that, so you're saying I *cannot* reach a certain zone? What exactly am I paying for in this game? Oh yeah - to play the game on the servers they provide. I give them money, they let me play where I want to be playing.
So no. Bad idea all around.
Bringing PVP to people it's not already being used by is NOT an endearing factor of any idea. Keeping PVP to its own area, and making it optional IS endearing. It keeps people like me who DO like to have gladiator matches and will pvp in the arena with friends, interested just enough for there to be a system in place. Anything more than that is NOT what I came to this game to do. PVP did not exist until LONG after I started playing, and the fact that it wasn't IN the original game was an attraction point for me. I don't like pvp in general, I don't play "against" other people. I like cooperating with them, not popping a cap in their rear. I don't find it funny, fun or entertaining.
So... no. Keep the pvp zones optional, for those who enjoy them. Do not under any circumstance interrupt anyone else's pve game for the sake of someone's gank count.
Please read my FEAR/Portal/HalfLife Fan Fiction!
Repurposed
Quote:
I'm really sorry that you see it that way, but it's just not the case. It's not a situation where the forum veterans are just shooting holes in this idea because it's new and the veterans hate changes. Trust me, if this idea was a GOOD idea that just had a few problems, you wouldn't be getting this kind of resistance. People would be offering solutions. This suggestion, on the other hand, starts from a bad premise--"Let's take this new feature, which simple datamining has already determined is unpopular even in areas set aside exclusively for itself, and apply it to the entire game." If you applied it to your business model, it would be like if a young junior executive stood up at a meeting and said, "Ladies and Gentlemen, I have an idea to increase revenue. First, we shoot one of our customers in broad daylight. Wait, where is everyone going? Hear me out!"|
Originally Posted by TresCool
What I often see on this board is the typical "senior employee/junior employee" syndrome.
The juniors are enthusiastic (and sometimes naive) about what it is they do, and constantly come up with ideas. The seniors have seen many(or all) of these ideas fail before,(they may once have BEEN the junior once, and failed themselves) they think they know exactly where this is going, so they are pretty much against everything the juniors say. In a perfect world, the seniors should bring in their experience to figure out ways how it COULD work. |
The idea isn't a good one with hurdles to overcome, it's a bad one with hurdles that aren't worth overcoming--it's built on a bad premise. No one will help you fix it, because the idea is bad at the very core. It doesn't matter how you sugar coat it with conditions like PvP toggles, the opportunity to go to 50+ levels, cutscenes, badges, etc. You're just pouring sugar on turds, and almost no one wants to eat them. Period. I'm sorry you consider yourself an unsung genius, tirelessly fighting for truth and justice, but to almost everyone else, you look like someone who refuses to give up a bad idea, no matter how strong the logic is to the contrary.
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
Quote:
Congratulations for shooting any credibility you may have had in the foot. "Resistance to the idea expressed here boils down to wah wah wah." Great, if that's your way of forming an argument, expect people to disagree.|
Originally Posted by FrozenDeath
It would be a blast to to be able to have an impromptu duel in a pve zone. I'm sure there are ways that this could be implemented that would increase the popularity of pvp while minimizing the distress caused to the anti-pvp establishment. That is my speculation of course, but that is what the majority of the content of this thread is: speculation.
Resistance to the idea expressed here boils down to a few points: 1. My fear and loathing of possibly being involved in pvp is so intense that I will immediately nerdrage quit over something like this being implemented. People ragequit over changes all the time. I knew a guy who guit over vigilance. When the dust settled the majority of these people would still be here. 2. Speculation over the technical infeasibility of doing something like this. Yeah, there might be code-based limitations that would prevent this. Only the devs know for sure. Concern over technical limitations shouldn't prevent someone from forwarding an idea. 3. You spelled "you" as "u", ergo I reject you and your ideas because you fail to uphold the standard of grammatical perfection that I set for this forum. When all else fails, flame someone over how they are communicating. Try this--if you cannot understand someone's point because of their grammar mistakes, mispellings, etc. ask for clarification. If you can understand their meaning (e.g. I believe most people here are bright enough to get that "u" means "you"), then don't make an issue of how they say it. |
How's about this: I don't want PvP. I will not have it in a coat, on a boar or with a goat. You drive me nuts, that's really true. I've really had enough of you.
-Johnny Bravo, who likely ripped it off from somewhere else.
Believe it or not, some people simply DO NOT WANT THAT. Either respect their right to their opinion which differs from yours, or go to hell. I don't have to defend my opinion to you. I don't want PvP in PvE zones. Period. You're not going to change my mind by browbeating me with straw man arguments. I don't want it. It doesn't matter how good you try to make it sound or how little you claim it will affect me. I don't want it.
Either accept this and stop treating people who disagree like whining children, or give up on trying to argue for it if that's what your attitude is going to be.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
That's exactly it Samuel. You are not interested in pvp under any circumstance, which is crystal clear. For me, you have no credibility or relevance to this idea because you are clearly dead set against it. It would be like somebody starting a thread about new badges. And then I post that I hate badges and don't want more included in the game under any circumstance.
There's no point in trying to change your mind. The challenge to the devs would be if they could possibly implement such an idea in a way that would minimally impact someone like you. This would involve serious discussion of HOW this could be done, in which you are clearly not interested in being involved.
Solicio--
Quote:
People said they would immediately quit if something like this were implemented. On principle. Is it really innacurate to describe this sentiment as fear and loathing?| Here's something you need to grasp in a hurry--you can't insult or shame people into agreeing with your idea. This attempt to ridicule and belittle your detractors is exactly the sort of attitude we expect to see from people trying to goad us into PvP. "You don't want to fight? You're a carebear chicken baby!" It's not effective, and you're digging yourself a hole. |
Now in a following post, you write this:
Quote:
| You're just pouring sugar on turds, and almost no one wants to eat them. Period. I'm sorry you consider yourself an unsung genius, tirelessly fighting for truth and justice, but to almost everyone else, you look like someone who refuses to give up a bad idea, no matter how strong the logic is to the contrary. |
Are you really taking me to task for my attitude? Is it too much to ask for a degree of objectivity here?
Your substantive objection to my post is that it would give you lag and possible annoy you. Ok, those are concerns that would have to be evaluated, although I get lagged out by the AE crowd and get annoying tells frequently from that camp yet am somehow able to deal with it. BTW, I've played other games with different types of pvp flagging as well. There's no reason why this idea shouldn't be seriously discussed.
Blacklisted
"I'AM SATANS FAVORITE CHILD!!"
Quote:
Having no interest in PvP doesn't mean you have no credibility or relevence. It means you're representative of the majority of the playerbase in this game. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but PvP just isn't that popular in this game, and the problem isn't exposure. An ugly dog is an ugly dog, no matter how many times you try to force people to pet it.|
Originally Posted by FrozenDeath
That's exactly it Samuel. You are not interested in pvp under any circumstance, which is crystal clear. For me, you have no credibility or relevance to this idea because you are clearly dead set against it.
|
Quote:
| There's no point in trying to change your mind. The challenge to the devs would be if they could possibly implement such an idea in a way that would minimally impact someone like you. |
Quote:
| People said they would immediately quit if something like this were implemented. On principle. Is it really innacurate to describe this sentiment as fear and loathing? |
Quote:
| Your substantive objection to my post is that it would give you lag and possible annoy you. Ok, those are concerns that would have to be evaluated, although I get lagged out by the AE crowd and get annoying tells frequently from that camp yet am somehow able to deal with it. BTW, I've played other games with different types of pvp flagging as well. There's no reason why this idea shouldn't be seriously discussed. |
Feel free to try out my AE mission arc, # 473452: Praetorian Redemption
@Valerika
You guys cant wave the "subscription cancellations"-flag at EVERY idea.it makes u lose credibility.like massively
Except that the argument is valid every single time - because it is the truth.
And yes please, if you're going to talk about credibility? Please don't leave out letters in a 3-letter word. Thanks.
Please read my FEAR/Portal/HalfLife Fan Fiction!
Repurposed