Conflict, Death, Consequences and Decisions

[Ajax]

Kitsume wrote:

A PKer is a player who goes out and actively seeks easy kills for their own satisfaction, like a solo Ganker. That is how I have always seen the term, which is been quite a long time. If the definition has changed over the years, I guess I can use a different term. Pick apart my post how ever you like.

PvP is player versus player. My play style is more CvC character versus character. I won't hunt you down just because you seem to be an easy kill or are just there unawares.

No one likes being the target or attacked unawares with no chance of survival.

If we meet in combat and I inexplicitly happen to defeat your character, I won't gloat over your character's body, nor will I loot your prized possessions. I am more likely to watch over your body until you can recover and send you on your way.

But someone who constantly grief kills me, my friends or my tribe, then my character might not have the same compassion.

When I go into wild areas, I expect to be ambushed, but it doesn't mean I support the PK-Griefing play style of some other players.


Woo Hoo! I got the 15000th post!

thank you, for the PK thing. Yeah it drives me nuts only because I often refer to myself as a PKer in the sense that I kill players in pvp, but I am in no way a griefer. I pvp for the challenge of a good fight against something smarter then the AI. Often times if I start attacking someone and they don't fight back I won't kill them because there is no pride in killing someone who doesn't defend themself.

I typically seek out the griefers and gankers who run around tormenting newbies and crafters and have turn the role on them camping them and taking their stuff til they leave. So I guess I don't support griefing, unless your griefing a griefer? lol

[JCatano]

Jadzia -

Yes. Someone who doesn't want to engage in PvP is going to get ganked. Saying otherwise is simply being intentionally dumb.

I'd love to see a poll, too. Anyone who doesn't want to be forced into PvP won't play an open-PvP game (besides you), unless they are willing to see what it's like.

Subjective fact is exactly what it says. Same as subjective truth. Both can be based on observational fact/truth.

What trick...? It's not semantics... I asked you to show me where the people who don't want to be forced into PvP support their crusade with statements other than:

"I dislike PvP."

"PK'ers ruin my day."

"PK'ers are psychopathic serial killers."

"PK'ers are 12 year old assholes who hate life." (Paraphrase from you.)

"I shouldn't have to PvP if I don't want to." (Even though we all know it's open-PvP.)

So... No trick. It's a straightforward request. Where are the great arguments at?

A new server doesn't affect the code on normal servers. It's not a change to the fundamental design of their code. They just turn it off for a PvE server.

[Jadzia]

JCatano wrote:

Jadzia -

Yes. Someone who doesn't want to engage in PvP is going to get ganked. Saying otherwise is simply being intentionally dumb.

I think you should understand that your opinion isn't a fact...if you can't, I'll leave you in your imaginary world alone

I'd love to see a poll, too. Anyone who doesn't want to be forced into PvP won't play an open-PvP game (besides you), unless they are willing to see what it's like.

I have no problem playing a game with open PvP if random PKing and ganking is rare there. As far as I see from posts, others (non-PvP players or even some PvP players too ) have the same opinion.

Subjective fact is exactly what it says. Same as subjective truth. Both can be based on observational fact/truth.

Perhaps thats why you never understand others' posts ? You see everything only from your own point of view...you don't even try to see the world with someone else's eye. Try to use objective facts, you'll be surprised how handy they are.

What trick...? It's not semantics... I asked you to show me where the people who don't want to be forced into PvP support their crusade with statements other than:

"I dislike PvP."

"PK'ers ruin my day."

"PK'ers are psychopathic serial killers."

"PK'ers are 12 year old assholes who hate life." (Paraphrase from you.)

Can you please quote where did I say anything like this ? I said they are teens frustrated by their teacher, or adults frustrated by their bosses. Never said they hate life, nor they were 12 years old. I would never call a 12 year old kid an asshole, thats something only goes to adults

"I shouldn't have to PvP if I don't want to." (Even though we all know it's open-PvP.)

So... No trick. It's a straightforward request. Where are the great arguments at?

The arguments are in the thread called "PvP vs. PK and some general impressions". You know very well. I won't quote it for you, read it again. I did, and a lot of people (not only me) worded very clear arguments. Again, if you don't understand, its probably because you have a filter in your head, which seems to make some sentences invisible for you :P

A new server doesn't affect the code on normal servers. It's not a change to the fundamental design of their code. They just turn it off for a PvE server.

They didn't say PVE server. They said a safer environment. That can mean PvP zones, no loot, PvP flagging, anything. Definitely a change in code. You always read more into the sentences than what is really there.

[jessebfox]

Comical. Now you are changing from "Fact:" to "Subjective Fact:" of which many of those still don't apply. Perhaps you should be more clear next time.

You clearly did not get the point of my post at all, and still don't. The point was that a crafter sitting at an anvil does not make the pvper, or anyone else have to craft nor does he force them to change their play style, this is very clearly written in that post if you read the entire thing objectively. Others have gotten this and commented. The average pvp player does not truly impose his play style on others.

If the gatherer goes in to the woods away from safe haven, then they are entering a known danger. They better have protection or a careful eye.

Now here is the part where you will pick out a sentence and use it out of context because you don't read things objectively, by your own words. In what many call a true "open pvp" world, which already it has been stated that Xsyon is not, where anyone can attack anyone else without significant consequences, the anvil camping pvp player who is just out to ruin others' fun is not imposing his play style on others, because the game is built that way, and crafters simply should not play unless they expect to be constantly robbed and attacked without protection.

However, it has been stated numerous times by devs that there will be consequences. It has also been stated that the consequences are designed to prevent a "gankfest". It has also been stated that the head designer (Jooky) does not intend pvp to be a focus of the game. It has also been stated that the game will be rebalanced to prevent gank fests. Now you throw around the "open pvp" term a lot, quoting devs but ignore these other statements by them. From these statements many many people will say that it is not true "open pvp". That there will be too many limitations to call it "open". I have seen this argument many times before.

You also like to say "there will be consequences" but close your mind to the idea that they may be so heavy as to make it essentially a tribal pvp game with duals. You fall back to devs saying they want to make it viable to be both evil and good, but do not seem to understand, or acknowledge that they are referring to tribal alignments, and not necessarily random pointless pvp players.

You still never understood my post. It has not changed. Because you did not understand my point does not make it my fault. Others got it. I wasn't even saying it was my point of view, I just saw what they were saying. I also get the point of people who just want to play death match style games. They have a right to their opinion too. Not enough have been posted about Xsyon the game to really see what kind of game it will end up being. You apparently are omniscient and can tell us exactly how things will be even tho nothing is set in stone yet.

You obviously didn't get the point either I was making on Hamster's post, and I don't think you got his point either. Because it was pretty much the same as mine, but at the same time opened up a counter argument for something I said, and even after I point this out you STILL don't get it. These kind of things happen when you close your mind (as you said you did by not being objective when reading my post).

You copied my post, then highlighted individual lines, that if read out of context of the entire message would mean something different. It does not change the meaning of the original post just because you didn't understand the entirety of the message being conveyed.

So let us summarize:

You read my post without an open and objective mind. You still don't get the point being made.

You still don't know what a fact is.

You tried to go back and change to say you meant "subjective fact" which still isn't a fact, but continue to use the word "fact" to give things that are not facts. Read the definition.

You still take individual lines out of context and try to use them to make a point, when the only point being made is you are not understanding the whole of anyone's message.

Oh and for the record, me being Jadzia's alternate forum account is a complete joke. In game I very well could be someone she hates. I have been accused in other games of being an angry teenager raging against players. I pvp in every game I can, and I especially like ambushes. I won't have to worry about pvp being forced on me, because I will be forcing it on others. Of course this can all easily change based on how the game turns out, because frankly this is looking to be a pretty crappy pvp game but the other aspects are interesting to me. The combat does not seem as thought out and planned as the rest of the systems and looks like it won't be nearly as fun.

Just because I can see someone else's point, doesn't mean I am them. Or agree with them. I have my opinions but I acknowledge others have opinions too. I don't have the luxury you do of knowing all my opinions are facts (correction: subjective fact) and that no one else can possibly be right if they disagree with me. If so I probably wouldn't read other people's posts objectively either as I would know they are wrong by the name of the person posting (it's not me). Must be nice being you.

Btw, do you know what a subjective fact is? By admitting all those are subjective facts, you are admitting that any and all of them could turn out to be incorrect, as in not true. If you mean subjective fact, you should state as such instead of incorrectly calling them facts.

You like to use the "show me" a lot. Show me where the devs said that the consequences will be minor. Show me where the devs have said that they are trying to make the lone wolf pvp player who likes to target lone crafters by their workbench just as viable to play as a member of a community. Show me how that crafter forces the pvp player to craft. Show me one post by you where you concede a point (one that you did not agree with in the first place). Show me one time where I said that I don't want to be forced in to pvp.

One time you got all on someone (don't remember who) because they were using terms like pk and pvp and griefer together and you didn't like it and tried to make a whole point of just that. Yet you use "open pvp" when that is just as subjective. You point to that the devs used this term in the faq, but assume they mean what you think it means. I can acknowledge that my definition of open pvp is not the same as some others, so who knows what the devs mean.

That was rhetorical. I am aware you believe to know what they mean. Correction it is a fact you know what they mean. You don't even have to read their posts objectively.

*edit = oh btw "they just have to turn it off for the other server". you really think it's that simple? You asked a question and were proven wrong. Yes, adding another server would be a change to pvp. It absolutely would impact pvp in a big big way. You can't even admit you were wrong here?

[VowOfSilence]

Ajax wrote:

I find that a non-pvp'er coming to this game then complaining about open pvp would be much like me joining a football team and complaining that they tackle instead of touch.

No, it's like players choosing the "football manager" class and then complaining about the football simulation.

Why? Well, several teams of football players regularly storm the management offices and tackle everyone unconsious, then they scream TOUCHDOWN!! and do a victory dance on their desks.

These footballers also stubbornly argue that this is a valid playstyle in a sandbox football mmo, because sandboxes are all about player freedom and stuff, and carebears are simply too lazy and stupid to hire their own football team for protection/law enforcement/yaddayadda. Therefore, they deserve to be tackled unconsious as often as possible!

[Komaf]

I see tons of mmorpg theory craft on these forums - but has anyone had a chance to play yet?

[MrDDT]

I think everyone is going to far in the open PVP.
Open PVP or FFA PVP can mean a lot of things.

What if you kill someone you get 100% skill loss on your next death? Still open PVP/FFAPVP.

Key is here is what the devs want NOT what you want. He already stated he doesnt want people going around able to grief people, and he wants a few Evils, mostly neutrals and more Goods than Evils.

There are many ways to go about insuring that will happen, now just come up with ideas that fit into there, and Im sure he will take it into consideration. But saying "OMG I should be able to kill anyone any time and not have XYZ imposed on me" isnt going to cut it. Good ideas using the rules you are set with.
Just as someone saying "We need a PVE only server with no PVP" isnt going to work either.

[MrDDT]

Komaf wrote:

I see tons of mmorpg theory craft on these forums - but has anyone had a chance to play yet?

http://www.xsyon.com/forums/6-genera...-videos-thread

Reading before you post is great.

[jessebfox]

MrDDT wrote:

I think everyone is going to far in the open PVP.
Open PVP or FFA PVP can mean a lot of things.

What if you kill someone you get 100% skill loss on your next death? Still open PVP/FFAPVP.

Key is here is what the devs want NOT what you want. He already stated he doesnt want people going around able to grief people, and he wants a few Evils, mostly neutrals and more Goods than Evils.

There are many ways to go about insuring that will happen, now just come up with ideas that fit into there, and Im sure he will take it into consideration. But saying "OMG I should be able to kill anyone any time and not have XYZ imposed on me" isnt going to cut it. Good ideas using the rules you are set with.
Just as someone saying "We need a PVE only server with no PVP" isnt going to work either.

+1

[jessebfox]

MrDDT wrote:

Komaf wrote:

I see tons of mmorpg theory craft on these forums - but has anyone had a chance to play yet?

http://www.xsyon.com/forums/6-genera...-videos-thread

Reading before you post is great.

I don't think he meant has anyone played the game at all, i think he means with all the "consequence" features to know how the game even is in the first place before complaining. The answer is no, it is all theory and no fact (objective fact, which is what "fact" is when not coupled with the identifier of "subjective")