Dont do a weed wrote:Wraithbane wrote:"Creating"?? The game is *already* two separate games. You have the miners and haulers, and PvE types on Alpha, and the PvP and ganker types on Beta. Thats all the "balance" we need in actual fact. The game can be evolved rather well along those dynamics, and the story line I've out lined would back stop that rather well. All of this nonsense about "options, and risk, and challenge" is just code for wanting to be able to gank miners and haulers, and ruin other players experience. I find it difficult in the extreme to believe that some of you aren't aware of this, and its implications.
The game does not exist as two separate games unless your actions include exclusively driving around in light bots with t1 fittings you are competing against someone.
Every action in this game is a competition against another player unless you exclusively use light bots or arkhes with t1 equipment.
This is an assumption also what authority do you have that decides what balance is needed?
Wraithbane wrote:Attempt at provoke failed... Perhaps you need more EP in that extension? <grin>
Other, lets be realistic here, and look at not only past history, but the dynamics involved, shall we? What at its most fundamental, is the natural CONSEQUENCE of allowing these changes in the rule set that some of you are advocating? Miners and haulers get ganked, and PvE types have to deal with PvP types, when they clearly do not wish to(other wise they'd be over on Beta). One doesn't have to look very far (that history thing...) to realize what the very possible motivations involved are. Now shall we continue this discussion in a more civil fashion, or are you going to waste more EP in that extension? ^^
What is this past history?
Why is it bad that players that engage in all but one form of player competition now must pay attention to the potential all forms of player competition.
If I do not wish to engage in market competition why am I not given the luxury of free robots of my choosing?
Instead if I choose not to interact with players I must run transport missions in a light bot perpetually or roam the alpha islands not shooting at or mining anything because that would deplete a resource and time investment that another player values
Wraithbane wrote:Ah, the sacred "sand box"... Have you ever seen what happens in the typical "sandbox"? Not only do the Dev's end up having to protect their business model(think about the evolution of Concord in EVE), but they have to waste valuable time(and believe me they never have enough of that resource) on dealing with the on going antics of the gankers and griefers.
The time investment on the Devs part is not the most efficient one if the game is not being developed into a play model that advocates real world currency exchange for in game goods or services the game is now inherently flawed because it does not use that business model.
Wraithbane wrote:Why? Because such types make up a SMALL percentage of the player base, and they tend to drive off many other types of players unless checked. Thats NOT good for the companies bottom line. Make no mistake about it, in todays gaming market, the closer a game is to a "sandbox", the more narrowly it niches itself. Thus limiting the profits to be made, and also the expansion possibilities. In a very real sense, such games become self limiting to the extent that they stay "sandboxes". Is that what we want for Perpetuum?
Once again if the bottom line is the primary focus a cash for ingame goods or services system should be implemented
Wraithbane wrote:Exactly. We are not asking to inflict our play style on the PvP types I might note(they are more than welcome to Beta). To the contrary, they are the ones advocating inflicting their play style on us. Not to mention that some fly off the handle when one mentions the obvious motivations of some. ^^
What are these obvious motivations?
Your playstyle is already inflicted on players that engage in all forms of player interaction due to the influence of the market
Wraithbane wrote:First in the market sense, you are not out NIC, because you still have what ever it is you wished to sell. If you can't compete with that item, then try something else. If its time you are worried about wasting, you are in the wrong hobby. MMO's are infamous for costing a LOT of time to take part in. ^^
You are out NIC because of the transaction fee.
How can you tell me that if I cannot compete with a player I should do something else when the threat of further player competition on equal fields will apparently ruin the game?
We both make time investments we both participate in the market but participation in direct nonconsensual combat is a no?
Wraithbane wrote:Adding the ability to attack people farming a given spawn, would have no doubt interesting consequences... Such as larger and larger numbers of people at the spawn site(ganking anyone who comes near). That may sound like "heaven" to certain types, but believe me, it gets OLD fast. Not to mention the spill over to miners and haulers. Making it possible to ruin others play experience, doesn't make good business sense, nor is it necessary.
No one said anything about spawn sites being free for alls against players who enter them, even so what is the difference between shooting npc’s over and over again as opposed to shooting players over and over again. Would these both not get old fast?
Being undercut or over bid on the market ruins others play experience but this is ok?
Once again business sense comes down to making the game into a $ for perpetuum goods and or services system.
Wraithbane wrote:This is not flying off the handle?
Other:
"You suspect my motivations? I suspect your motivations. I think you just want a futuristic version of WoW. Maybe you're a Chinese NIC farmer building up your reserves so that you can sell it through third party websites full of malicious software.
Try to make an intelligent argument instead of casting aspersions or STFU and let the adults talk.
kthxbye"
It certainly has all of the ear marks of such... Including the final kthxbye, and STFU...<face palm> ^^
Notice my remarks have always been general(not directed at anyone in particular), and include "suspect" or some such. You took yours personal. Notice the difference?
You accuse people of assumptions and talk of intelligent arguments but you are making constant personal attacks towards individuals.
"Constant personal attacks towards individuals"? Thats a rather broad generalization. Is that in some recent posts, or all posts? Are you perhaps refering to my teasing Other about his attempt to provoke me? That was a rather measured response on my part(and clearly indicated to have been made with humor).
As for assumptions, I'm as guilty of those as anyone. Also of using past history as a guide to the future. But that is what we humans tend to do, as we go about our daily lives.
Turning to some of the other(I really dislike this editor system).
So, all levels of player competition are, or should be equal? The ability to gank miners and haulers, should be allowed, because of competition in the market sector of the game? Do you really consider the two examples to be equal?
You answered your own question in regards to non consenural attacks. In the market competition, all parties consent to take part(by virtue of being in the market). In the PvP area, unless the player is on the Beta island, they have not consented to take part in PvP.
As the rule set stands now, there is something for everyone. If one wants to mine, haul, PvE then stay on the Alpha Islands. If one wants to PvP, then stay on the Beta Islands. Thus everyone gets what they want(except for a small percentage, but then making them happy, makes MANY others unhappy).
If you can't kill it, don't make it mad.