Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 51 to 57 of 57
  1. #51
    No perma death for reds <=> safe zones for all the others = balance in the game . Period

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Shukano View Post
    If you open up PvP with no safe zones then what is stopping a group like Goonsquad from zerging and razing all the villages, taking over the entire server simply because they have numbers, and ruining the game for everyone.
    Is that what you really want?
    That's the situation I most fear, because it destroys game worlds, but I am confident the devs can come up with a way to prevent it, given enough time. Say, 6-9 more months to work out the details, perhaps?

  3. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by ifireallymust View Post
    That's the situation I most fear, because it destroys game worlds, but I am confident the devs can come up with a way to prevent it, given enough time. Say, 6-9 more months to work out the details, perhaps?
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    My suggestion for tribal lands, safe zones, and...

    My suggestion: Allow tribes to have 1 (one) tribal area that can be designated safe. In order to keep safety they will need to pay tribute or an upkeep. These safe cities can only be created within certain, connected, zones that the developers designated. Within this area the only land that can be built upon and terraformed would be within tribal lands.

    Outside of this designated area, players will be allowed to build and terraform as they choose. To make this balanced, buildings should have obscene amounts of hitpoints and/or resistances. Terraforming on previously un-terraformed land, or land that was returned to its pre-terraformed state, will be like it is now; however, each additional type of terraforming (even if it's to undo the terraforming) would become more and more difficult, and require more and more resources.

    The lore considerations for this are thus: The "forces of good" have been able to drive back the "forces of evil" and have granted their protection over land. In order to keep the "forces of good" powerful and able to protect an area tribute must be paid to them.

    Edit: Idea: There could be buildings availible for tribes to build where they can pay tribute for certain buffs on their buildings outside of their safe zones, and, perhaps like in RTS games where one type of resource could be paid to increase members harvesting rate, or decrease the amount of items they deplete from a resource node of a different type.
    Edit: New idea to expand the first paragraph from my quote: A tribal city could have a building, like a temple, where they can do "research" to increase the number and kinds of expansion totems they could produce outside of safezones that would have different effects on tribemates withing a certain radius from the totem location.

  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by byrgar View Post
    AFK macroing to skill up crafting? are you for real? have you even done any crafting? do you honestly think people can macro picking up grass, selecting the recipe, placing the grass and the tools required into the craft window, and then craft something? all that with a macro?

    Also, you want everyone to have the option to do whatever they like? really? if that was truly the case, then you would want safezones as they are right now, left in all the time.
    Safezones as they are right now give everyone more choice than if they were not there at all.
    Right now with safezones, you have the option to go out and PVP if you want to, or stay safe and craft if you want to, or just sit around and chat, or leave the safety of your totem and go explore, pretty much do what you want anytime you want.
    With no safezone, anytime SOMEONE ELSE wants you too, you will be involved in PVP, forget crafting, if SOMEONE ELSE walks up and wants to attack you, they can and will, forget sitting and chatting with friends, if SOMEONE ELSE want to interrupt the discussion with PVP, they can and will.

    You dont want everyone to have the option to do what they want, you just want to be able to force them to PVP when you (or anyone else for that matter) wants.
    Yeah, im for real. Ive seen complex crafting scripts used in conjunction with third party programs that easily macroed whatever the abusers heart intended. The macro's were more complex than NASA's current systems for the spacecraft. I know, i copied/pasted them! Dont underestimate the human ability for motivation, especially involving a less input/max output scenario. Would you rather the devs/mods spend all day long every day policing this type of action, or taking care of the NORMAL things they should?

    Again, im all against exploiting and abusing the system. Just trying to highlight where it could go and prevent it if necessary.

    IF you dont want to pvp...make sure your city is completely defensible, hide safely in it, make sure you have plenty of people around protecting you at all times, and if you see someone encroaching your land and you are scared to death to potentially FIGHT for your right to live there...i dunno...log out until they are gone???

    Dont force the rest of us to NOT have the option of pvp. That is opening the door to soooo many bad things. Forcing a decision to have a safe zone is still forcing a decision to limit depth.

    Stating for the last time: Balance involving all, including pvp. Thats my opinion. You dont HAVE TO pvp if you take the proper measures.

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvadore View Post
    Yeah, im for real. Ive seen complex crafting scripts used in conjunction with third party programs that easily macroed whatever the abusers heart intended. The macro's were more complex than NASA's current systems for the spacecraft. I know, i copied/pasted them! Dont underestimate the human ability for motivation, especially involving a less input/max output scenario. Would you rather the devs/mods spend all day long every day policing this type of action, or taking care of the NORMAL things they should?

    Again, im all against exploiting and abusing the system. Just trying to highlight where it could go and prevent it if necessary.

    IF you dont want to pvp...make sure your city is completely defensible, hide safely in it, make sure you have plenty of people around protecting you at all times, and if you see someone encroaching your land and you are scared to death to potentially FIGHT for your right to live there...i dunno...log out until they are gone???

    Dont force the rest of us to NOT have the option of pvp. That is opening the door to soooo many bad things. Forcing a decision to have a safe zone is still forcing a decision to limit depth.

    Stating for the last time: Balance involving all, including pvp. Thats my opinion. You dont HAVE TO pvp if you take the proper measures.
    using third party programs is not macroing, that is more along the lines of botting, and the people that are willing to bot will do so regardless of safezones or the lack thereof.
    Nobody is trying to force non pvp on anyone, even with safezones, the choice is there, go pvp if you want to.
    regardless of how many times you say it, regardless of all the different ways you say it, you are still advocating forcing people into YOUR way of playing, and removing their choice in it.
    Balance involving all, including PVP, sure, leave safezones in and you have it. ;P

  6. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Salvadore View Post
    IF you dont want to pvp...make sure your city is completely defensible, hide safely in it, make sure you have plenty of people around protecting you at all times, and if you see someone encroaching your land and you are scared to death to potentially FIGHT for your right to live there...i dunno...log out until they are gone???

    Dont force the rest of us to NOT have the option of pvp. That is opening the door to soooo many bad things. Forcing a decision to have a safe zone is still forcing a decision to limit depth.

    Stating for the last time: Balance involving all, including pvp. Thats my opinion. You dont HAVE TO pvp if you take the proper measures.
    How is it forcing you to not being able to pvp? In the system that I outline you would have your PvP and I will have my safezone. You just wouldn't be able to PvP anywhere. If you cannot see that, then you are blind. I hate to attack you (since I'm such a carebear), but you are failing to see the BIG picture. Stop thinking about just you and think about the game and the game's population as a whole.

    There will be more than enough people that would want the resources and the items crafted from those resources in the PvP areas. There will be those people that want to conquest and take control of land in the PvP areas. You do NOT NEED the ENTIRE map for PvP. It's complete overkill.

  7. #57
    Using a third party program to do a repetitive task, such as creating the same thing over and over again for the sole purpose of gaining skill only, is NOT macroing? Call it botting if you want to or whatever else, its still not a person "playing" the game. Now add 1000 people afk consuming bandwidth when they arent actually on their pc and you cant do ANYTHING about it due to safezone. Enjoy the lag, i guess?

    Having a safezone is forcing non-pvp. No consequences for actions. Exploitable. I can place a totem right next to the biggest guild on the server with one purpose - re-tagging my entire tribe to be safe there and doing nothing besides "griefing" every single person that leaves the other tribe all day long. When we are done, we can just retag wherever we want, start macroing, log out. Repeat the process the next night. You can try to hurt us...but we are just gonna constantly run back to the safe areas (plural) that we will exploit until changed. You cant destroy our totem, so hope you dont mind us camping outside your village whenever we want!

    Does the aforementioned sound fun to me? Absolutely not. As much as I love pvp...i dont see that as "true" pvp. Putting in a safezone isnt adding a compromise, it is forcing a lack of consequence for those who can easily choose to exploit it. Im actually against "griefing" as I see it as counterproductive to the game.

    I DO NOT want to "force people into YOUR way of playing, and remove their choice in it." Im actually arguing for the other side of the debate which is freedom to choose to do anything. Fight or flight, not autochoose to "get to my safe zone asap, dont want to risk anything".

Posting Permissions

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