A Terribly Broken Game Feature

[baka77]

I would agree to almost anything other then giving somone the ability to attack you while remaining invulnrable

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

[Dubanka]

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

/amen

also, whether 'good' or 'evil' you should not be able to respawn on another tribes land.

[Chevron]

this invulnrability being given to people who can attack you needs to be fixed or discussed by devs A.S.A.P as it is a broken game mechanic

[Doc]

I think/hope things will change once gates are implemented. Gates will truly give tribes the option to enforce their borders without relying on gimmicky flagging systems or silly rule sets. Don't want somebody on your land? Build a big ass wall around it & don't let them in!

I guess thats what we all are waiting for (And archery ;P )

Until then current mechanics is most optimal solution. Is it perfect? No.

And yah, compass, map...ASAP pls

[Zenmaster13]

this invulnrability being given to people who can attack you needs to be fixed or discussed by devs A.S.A.P as it is a broken game mechanic

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best. The mechanic you speak of could be viewed as beneficial just as easily as the opposite. You seem very emotionally tied to it. Let it go. Stay off others land. If you are a criminal in real life, and you walk into a police station, you can't really fight back. You could avoid the place or stick your face inside then run away. Same goes for private property. You don't belong there, and even if you do fight back, the law will side with the owner, not the trespasser.

Hope that helps your immersion complex.

[Zenmaster13]

double post ugh...

[orious13]

Heh.. I never attack first (can't tell alignment firstly). It's not about "being soft". It's about being realistic. Not even in an Apocalypse would I attack someone without reason. I ran through a lot of tribes yesterday...encroached by foraging and drinking. No one attacked me. I wasn't doing anything wrong. I had no reason to attack them.<--- That's really it.

While the current mechanic is in place, if you walk into someone's territory who instantly attacks you you will know what kind of people they are. That's the same as if the opposite happened.

I could careless if the mechanic stays or not. At the moment friends and "friendly" people will be welcome. Later on alignment will dictate how you act towards others.

Not everyone is going to straight up attack you for no reason. That's how a sandbox community should be. The notion of everyone's your enemy except your alliance that's in every combat focused sandbox should be done away with. Everyone should be neutral unless proven otherwise.

[Chevron]

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best. The mechanic you speak of could be viewed as beneficial just as easily as the opposite. You seem very emotionally tied to it. Let it go. Stay off others land. If you are a criminal in real life, and you walk into a police station, you can't really fight back. You could avoid the place or stick your face inside then run away. Same goes for private property. You don't belong there, and even if you do fight back, the law will side with the owner, not the trespasser.

Hope that helps your immersion complex.

That is the worst argument i have yet to see as a reason why the current game mechanic is not broken. lol

[Zenmaster13]

That is the worst argument i have yet to see as a reason why the current game mechanic is not broken. lol

Pick apart the arguement, dont' just say my opinion is right and your opinion is wrong. How is it the worst arguement? Working as intended seems very clear to me. Take off your emotional blinders for a few minutes.

Again, by definition, something that is working as intended, is not broken. Example(so you understand): A wheel rolls, so it is working as intended, but if the wheel is flat, it will not roll, so it is a broken mechanic.

[Zephyr]

Something that is working as intended does not qualify as broken. This whole thread is an opinion piece. It should be in suggestions at best.

/signed. All you people bandying about words like "broken" and "bug" clearly have never worked in software development. It seems to me people just want to get rid of the griefing-free zones. And that's an opinion.