Safe place or not?

[ArrakisTheDragon]

In other words, what I am hearing here is you guys dont want to be forced to do something any way but the way YOU like it and the game needs to be changed to match your vision.

I am totally sure it would make the game what you guys want, but there is a reason why people have also stopped playing DF or MO... bored with the same old same old.

It really kills my how you can spout words like diaperboy and carebear. Do you not realize how immature and childish it makes you sound? It does not take any courage at all to gank a newbie "carebear". It takes no character whatsoever to gang up 3 on 1 to kill someone minding their own business. What you are representing here is not skilled players, but schoolyard bullies that have no real personal worth at all.

First off, if your ever in a situation of a 3v1 thats your own fault for putting yourself into that position to begin with. Its called situational awareness, always keep a look over your shoulder to watch your own back. I dont know about you but for me, that just adds a whole new level to the playing field. The knowledge of knowing where something good is at but your not safe in the area in which its located. Being alert and always having an escape plan or route will save you alot of times from being 2v1, 3v1, 4v1, Zerg v1, need I name more? Keeping your stats above half and your stam at least at 3/4 will give you a whole heck of alot better chance of surviving a dangerous encounter.

AS far as the maturity level goes, its a forum about a game for one. Two the heading of the topic includes the word "carebear". Three as far as I know as long as my commentary doesnt cause discrimination toward a directed person (1) not person(s) or discriminate the game company or its staff members, I can type what I want. Four, you dont know me so how can you fully judge someones maturity level based upon what they type. Thats pretty much like asking a bum off the street to be a psycologist and give treatment to paying clients.

[Book]

They want to claim king of the hill and that hill be worth something to someone else, so that someone else will want to take the hill from them.

PVPers also want an open world of PVP so that, if you steal from one of their friends, they can go burn your hut down. Not a system where you turn grey for 2mins and then you are blue and cant be attacked.

I think the fact that a hill only has value to you as it pertains to its value to someone else is part of Drevar's point. For a minority contingent of pvpers, the fun is in denying others and imposing upon others.
The fun is in standing on top of a hill someone liked, for whatever reason which is actually irrelevant to you, and being able to say "hah hah, you can't haaave it!"

There are number of reasons people want open world pvp. For some of us, it adds to the reality and thrill of a good simulation. It really does.

Trouble lies in the fact that again, a small minority contingent of pvpers want open world pvp to better impose their dominance over others in a larger and more persistent context.

If I shrug and say "ok, take the hill, whatever." The fun is gone for you. Therefore, you want to have something be meaningful to me, so you can take it away and hope I will engage in your idea of fun to get it back.

In the grander scheme of things, it is that small minority of pvpers that winds up ruining the potential of open world pvp for the more casual week-end warriors. Safe zones wind up existing to limit a small minority from limiting the choice of the majority.

And then? The minority gets very upset with the majority and I won't say they cry or anything... let's say the stomp their foot on the floor and throw a tantrum?

[Drevar]

PvP'ers, who PvP because they like PvP...need a reason to PvP? *boggle*

I see no issue with having some sort of fame system, titles points, whatever, if that floats your boat. Penis envy of the others would have to be the only advantage gained by having "fame" though. This does bring up my issue with spending more dev time on this vs other features or fixes.

As far as the king of the hill argument. Sure I can see that, but how long before being king of the hill becomes boring? Is defending that hill 23/7 for the next 3 years from the same 10 guys something you find appealing? And yes, as Book stated above, the imposition of your ownership of that hill and denial of the resource to someone else appears to be a greater reward than anything you actually could do with the hill itself.

I totally agree with the stealing/killing/revenge issue. I also believe a scorched earth campaign is a viable retaliation. But I also believe, as I know you do, that it should be a campaign, not a 15 minute endeavor for lulz.

[MrDDT]

PvP'ers, who PvP because they like PvP...need a reason to PvP? *boggle*

I see no issue with having some sort of fame system, titles points, whatever, if that floats your boat. Penis envy of the others would have to be the only advantage gained by having "fame" though. This does bring up my issue with spending more dev time on this vs other features or fixes.

As far as the king of the hill argument. Sure I can see that, but how long before being king of the hill becomes boring? Is defending that hill 23/7 for the next 3 years from the same 10 guys something you find appealing? And yes, as Book stated above, the imposition of your ownership of that hill and denial of the resource to someone else appears to be a greater reward than anything you actually could do with the hill itself.

I totally agree with the stealing/killing/revenge issue. I also believe a scorched earth campaign is a viable retaliation. But I also believe, as I know you do, that it should be a campaign, not a 15 minute endeavor for lulz.

This would be like saying.

PVEers who PVE because they like PVE need a reason to PVE? *boggle*
I mean what if you went out to PVE and you got no loot for it, and no rewards. Wouldn't you kinda get bored of that? I don't know I think that's the main reason they give rewards to people for PVE is because it makes it more worthwhile and fun. Pretty sure people are not out there killing bears because its fun to kill a bear only. They want a reward for it, whether its skills or resources or epic gears.

About the king of the hill. First why would it have to be only the same 10 guys? I think the king of the hill and the rewards are 2 different types of rewards, just as a rare resource is a different reward than say a special title. People have different motivating factors. Some are driving by the fame, others by items, others still for the shear thought of "I can" and others still with the thought of "Am I good enough?". Plus more. More factors you can bring into the reward the better it will be for all parties going for that "item".

Trouble lies in the fact that again, a small minority contingent of pvpers want open world pvp to better impose their dominance over others in a larger and more persistent context.

Nawh, Im not really seeing that. Maybe a very very small % of the PVPers, but none Ive seen posting here. You just think that because people like Duh say "You cant have 2 rule sets" because if you dont enforce some of the same or all of the same rules on the other 1/2 then the other half will just take the easiest route and all of the fighting and hard work will be for naught.

[Book]

Let me see if I can boil it down a bit.

PvP centric players should not get more rewards than others because they are not first class, they are not that special, nor is the playstyle all that impressive.

The notion that they incur more risk and difficulty is not true. I won't say that PvE incurs more difficulty or more risk, but each playstyle has their own. One isn't more special than the other.

Safe zones had to be implemented because a number of PvPers feel entitled to impose their playstyles on people who don't feel like playing with them in particular on a particular day. I've had to deal with kids before and I understand how upsetting it can be when someone doesn't want to play with them this very instant but eventually, everyone just has to deal with it. Artificial mechanisms have to be put in place because of those who never learned to leave others alone. By alone, I mean away from the nuisance insisting I play their game with them their way whenever they wish.

Telling me that nobody here wants to impose their domination on others is not realizing how transparent their motivations are, regardless of how they want to spin things in the hopes of manipulating the outcome more to their needs.

[MrDDT]

Let me see if I can boil it down a bit.

PvP centric players should not get more rewards than others because they are not first class, they are not that special, nor is the playstyle all that impressive.

The notion that they incur more risk and difficulty is not true. I won't say that PvE incurs more difficulty or more risk, but each playstyle has their own. One isn't more special than the other.

Safe zones had to be implemented because a number of PvPers feel entitled to impose their playstyles on people who don't feel like playing with them in particular on a particular day. I've had to deal with kids before and I understand how upsetting it can be when someone doesn't want to play with them this very instant but eventually, everyone just has to deal with it. Artificial mechanisms have to be put in place because of those who never learned to leave others alone. By alone, I mean away from the nuisance insisting I play their game with them their way whenever they wish.

Telling me that nobody here wants to impose their domination on others is not realizing how transparent their motivations are, regardless of how they want to spin things in the hopes of manipulating the outcome more to their needs.

Im not saying either playstyle is impressive or not. I didnt say anything about "first class" or special. Im talking about difficulty vs reward. Tell me as a PVE player, do you risk losing your town? Losing all your items when you are in your safe area or go out PVE?

Because as a PVPer they do. When you have it more difficult, you should be rewarded accordingly.

If you dont want to play with kids, great. You might want to look for a game that's strictly for adults, instead of playing online games. Because these will have kids in it whether you like it or not. Its really not a choice anyone can stop.

PVPers are not looking to impose their play-styles on others, they are merely upholding you to the same standards. Meaning, if you put in x amount of difficulty then, they should get the same reward for doing the same, and if they do more, they should be rewarded more.
I find it more of a nuisance to play with people that I cant stop, and force to move away from me. I have to uproot and move to be away from them. I would rather have it where, my town is at risk, but I can do something about these nuisances that are near me.
But hey, that's why I believe in safe zones. So people like you can play your way, and people like me can play my way, its a good balance of the two.


I believe my motivations are very transparent, because Im open about them. Just as I believe you are. I dont think people here want to rule everyone on the whole server, I believe they want to have fun, there are different ways to have that fun, not all are the same as yours, nor mine. But I think there is a system that works for most people, and Ive yet to see any "PVPers" saying they are not willing to meet in the middle. Sure some take a stance that is pretty far to the one side, and same with PVEers but doesnt mean the system wont work.
I think EVE's system is a great system and I think a small change to that system will work nicely here. Difficulty vs reward is what most Ive seeing is asking for. I dont think its about domination, I think its mostly about freedom, and rewards.

[Book]

I get that there's nothing implemented at the moment that would threaten my home in a safe totem. It doesn't always have to be that way though. If they were to implement tornadoes, earthquakes, etc that might destroy my stuff, I'd be fine with that and it would be interesting.

Imagine having to choose your location with potential flashfloods in mind, or having to manage the forest near your place to lower the chances of fires in the summer.

I hope PvE will eventually be plenty difficult and interesting.

It would probably be more worthwhile to increase the challenge of PvE to meet the reward than increase the reward for PvP if there really is such a difference.

Don't really see myself ever finding much sense in rewarding people more just because they play the way they like. You can't imagine how difficult it is for me to resist the impulse to kill everyone in sight. People like me should get the most rewards because resisting that impulse is sooo very difficult! Except that nobody is asking us to play like this, it's just the way we play. No reason to give us more reward for playing the way we choose.

[Drevar]

PVE'ers aren't saying we need a reason to PVE. Being able to PVE IS the reason to do it. We like to build, craft, and advance our characters. Playing the game in itself IS the reward. Very simply, we are PVE'ing for the sake of PVE'ing some more. You don't like it, it's boring, whatever. I like it and it's what I am going to continue to do.

PVP'ers on the other hand really seem enthusiastic about PVP, but for some odd reason the ability to PVP isn't enough. They need to be given something else to entice them to do what they already said they love to do. That's whats boggling to me. The incentive in Xsyon is the fact that you can do it and advance your character at the same time, as well as loot the hell outta someone to boot.

Everyone pays the same subscription fee, everyone is entitled to the same satisfaction and reward. What you do with the time you have paid for is up to you.

PvP's play for the thrill, the risk (or total lack of it in the case of newb gankers). I play for the achievement of building, creating something. The fact that you get what you want out of it, and I get what I want out of what I do should be all the reward any of us needs.

[MrDDT]

PVE'ers aren't saying we need a reason to PVE. Being able to PVE IS the reason to do it. We like to build, craft, and advance our characters. Playing the game in itself IS the reward. Very simply, we are PVE'ing for the sake of PVE'ing some more. You don't like it, it's boring, whatever. I like it and it's what I am going to continue to do.

PVP'ers on the other hand really seem enthusiastic about PVP, but for some odd reason the ability to PVP isn't enough. They need to be given something else to entice them to do what they already said they love to do. That's whats boggling to me. The incentive in Xsyon is the fact that you can do it and advance your character at the same time, as well as loot the hell outta someone to boot.

Everyone pays the same subscription fee, everyone is entitled to the same satisfaction and reward. What you do with the time you have paid for is up to you.

PvP's play for the thrill, the risk (or total lack of it in the case of newb gankers). I play for the achievement of building, creating something. The fact that you get what you want out of it, and I get what I want out of what I do should be all the reward any of us needs.

So you are ok if animals didn't yield resources?
Or trees didn't?
Or scavenging off the ground didn't yield anything?

You are simply ok with the act of able to do it, even if you didnt get anything out of it, other than the act itself? Because that's what you are saying PVPers should get.

I get that there's nothing implemented at the moment that would threaten my home in a safe totem. It doesn't always have to be that way though. If they were to implement tornadoes, earthquakes, etc that might destroy my stuff, I'd be fine with that and it would be interesting.

Imagine having to choose your location with potential flashfloods in mind, or having to manage the forest near your place to lower the chances of fires in the summer.

I hope PvE will eventually be plenty difficult and interesting.

It would probably be more worthwhile to increase the challenge of PvE to meet the reward than increase the reward for PvP if there really is such a difference.

Don't really see myself ever finding much sense in rewarding people more just because they play the way they like. You can't imagine how difficult it is for me to resist the impulse to kill everyone in sight. People like me should get the most rewards because resisting that impulse is sooo very difficult! Except that nobody is asking us to play like this, it's just the way we play. No reason to give us more reward for playing the way we choose.

Hey Im fine with that, if they had tornadoes that would wipe your totem off the map if you are in that area, I believe you should be rewarded more for living there then in some other area where there was no risk of a tornado.

[Drevar]

Not even worth arguing anymore, since you have resorted to your usual word twisting and rediculous interpretation of terms.

I may disagree with 90% of what Dubanka says, but at least he spends his time making valid points instead of arguing stupid semantics.