Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 55

Thread: safe zones poll

  1. #1

    safe zones poll

    I have two questions for You. Please answer with YES or NO.

    1. Should safe zones (tribal safe zones) be removed?
    2. If You think there should be no tribal safe zones - should there be a wipe after this change?

    My answers:
    1. YES
    2. YES

  2. #2
    We get it, you don't like safe zones. Do we really need another "poll" to ask about this? There is already another one up that is resoundingly for safe zones.

  3. #3
    Xsyon Citizen Saorlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Animal Crackers
    Posts
    269
    NO, No just because we have enough polls about this already.

    Really need tighter moderation on this forum!

  4. #4
    There is a real poll about this, 75% voted on safe zones to stay. Try to find it.

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by robofriven View Post
    We get it, you don't like safe zones. Do we really need another "poll" to ask about this? There is already another one up that is resoundingly for safe zones.
    Hm, i like them in starting areas. :P But just cant understand why there are safe zones outside starting areas in a sandbox game. What were devs thinking?
    Ah, and sorry about another thread about safe zones. But the reason for this post was not a concept of safe zones, but rather consequences, we are all aware of now. There's only time needed to do anything you want - no challenge.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by paranoia View Post
    Hm, i like them in starting areas. :P But just cant understand why there are safe zones outside starting areas in a sandbox game. What were devs thinking?
    Ah, and sorry about another thread about safe zones. But the reason for this post was not a concept of safe zones, but rather consequences, we are all aware of now. There's only time needed to do anything you want - no challenge.
    PvP and safe zones have nothing to do with sandbox definition. Atitd is a sandbox and it has no PvP at all.

    The devs were thinking to create a game which can be played by any kind of players. The ones who like to PvP can do so, the ones who don't can live their lives in peace. Why did you buy the game though you must have known it has safe zones ?

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Jadzia View Post
    There is a real poll about this, 75% voted on safe zones to stay. Try to find it.
    only about 20% of the people who play this game use the forums- the only way to get a real count is to do a survey by email.

    All that shows is that the majority of the forum users want safe zones- i can go either way personally.

  8. #8
    For there to be siege warfare in any way other than a mockery of it, safe zones must be removed.

    However, you MUST also allow players to deny access to the areas they influence. Otherwise remove walls and the like because they are simply decorations. I can understand why safe zones are currently in the game. It's necessary for the devs to move forward with the improvement of the game in these early stages.

    I suspect once gates are established, and /unstuck is overhauled many peoples opinions will change. I think this question would best be asked after they implement area restrictions via player built structures. Until that is done, safe zones MUST stay in.

    And when/if they are removed, a player should be able to stay in their enclosed space without any fear of anyone getting in short of an army with siege equipment. Or maybe a burglar with some enormously high lock picking skills. But see now I've said too much, I'm getting ahead of myself.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Jadzia View Post
    PvP and safe zones have nothing to do with sandbox definition. Atitd is a sandbox and it has no PvP at all.

    The devs were thinking to create a game which can be played by any kind of players. The ones who like to PvP can do so, the ones who don't can live their lives in peace. Why did you buy the game though you must have known it has safe zones ?
    you should read the official faq's - it states that there will be no safe zones during prelude and that's all it says.

    However, joordi has stated in his announcments that tribes will be able to opt out of tribal warfare/siegeing, but he never say's anything about not having safe zones after prelude in those announcements.

    I think that at some point we will have the ability to lock people out of our cities so there will be no point in having a mechanism in place that doesn't allow attacking on tribal territory.

  10. #10
    1. No. I think there should be areas with safe-zones and areas without safe-zones as explained in this post: http://www.xsyon.com/forum/showthrea...er-territories

    2. No. I don't even see how a server wipe relates to safe-zone/no safe-zones. Please explain.

    Quote Originally Posted by paranoia View Post
    Hm, i like them in starting areas. :P But just cant understand why there are safe zones outside starting areas in a sandbox game. What were devs thinking?
    Ah, and sorry about another thread about safe zones. But the reason for this post was not a concept of safe zones, but rather consequences, we are all aware of now. There's only time needed to do anything you want - no challenge.
    As far as I understand what is going on. We are in the prelude of the game. Helping build up the political climate and characters we'll have going into the real game. Its confirmed they will be releasing new territory, in-fact the most recent updates have discussed that they are working on them right now.

    I at least get the impression that what is the entire map right now IS the starter areas. These new territories being released may what you are waiting for.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •