Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Everyone Fight for 1.0 Changes during Beta!!! Bombard Trion to make the right changes!!

245

Comments

  • MadDemon64MadDemon64 Maplewood, NJPosts: 1,099Member Uncommon
    As much as I avoid PvP, I have to agree with you on this.  Trion making this change just isn't right.

    Since when is Tuesday a direction?

  • flizzerflizzer Manchester, NHPosts: 1,550Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Madimorga

    Also, the ffa pvp everywhere crowd who are complaining about this trade pack split should be screaming at Trion or some devs somewhere to please get carebears our own server or our own sandbox game so the PvPers don't have to compromise their gameplay in an attempt by developers to bring in the PVE players.  Because we don't belong in the same world with the true ffa pvpers.  It tends to lead to neither type of player ever being happy.

     

    We don't want you.  You don't want us.  The sooner devs realize it, the sooner we'll all be a lot happier with our gaming choices.

    The PvP types , of course, don't want separate servers because they understand most people would migrate to them as soon as the ganking started.  And contrary to the protestations of PvP types,  many, if not most, seem to prefer the one-sided battle where the ganker and friends jump on the lone player, or ideally the lower rated /beginner player.  Of course, everyone who posts on these forums is an "honorable" PvP player and only wants fair fights (eye rolling).  In game the truth is revealed and the number of people who really care for fair fights are extremely slim.  

  • kridakkridak orangeville, ONPosts: 10Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Madimorga

    Also, the ffa pvp everywhere crowd who are complaining about this trade pack split should be screaming at Trion or some devs somewhere to please get carebears our own server or our own sandbox game so the PvPers don't have to compromise their gameplay in an attempt by developers to bring in the PVE players.  Because we don't belong in the same world with the true ffa pvpers.  It tends to lead to neither type of player ever being happy.

     

    We don't want you.  You don't want us.  The sooner devs realize it, the sooner we'll all be a lot happier with our gaming choices.

     

    I actually would love to keep the pvp aspect.  The thrill of danger trying to deliver packs is fun.  But they just need to even out the risk vs reward.  I believe the pirate should keep all the trade pack contents and sell for themselves....but eventually when they get caught...oh boy their fun now begins.

    If they did that it would be awesome.

    I also disagree with people saying a pve server is what we need.  I think it would be boring without the danger.  But make it dangerous for the pirate and the trader.

    But again, i doubt there will be any change, it is what it is.

     

  • MadimorgaMadimorga Atlanta, GAPosts: 1,889Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by flizzer
    Originally posted by Madimorga

    Also, the ffa pvp everywhere crowd who are complaining about this trade pack split should be screaming at Trion or some devs somewhere to please get carebears our own server or our own sandbox game so the PvPers don't have to compromise their gameplay in an attempt by developers to bring in the PVE players.  Because we don't belong in the same world with the true ffa pvpers.  It tends to lead to neither type of player ever being happy.

     

    We don't want you.  You don't want us.  The sooner devs realize it, the sooner we'll all be a lot happier with our gaming choices.

    The PvP types , of course, don't want separate servers because they understand most people would migrate to them as soon as the ganking started.  And contrary to the protestations of PvP types,  many, if not most, seem to prefer the one-sided battle where the ganker and friends jump on the lone player, or ideally the lower rated /beginner player.  Of course, everyone who posts on these forums is an "honorable" PvP player and only wants fair fights (eye rolling).  In game the truth is revealed and the number of people who really care for fair fights are extremely slim.  

    Gankers aren't true ffa pvp players, they're just pests.  No one cares what they want.  True ffa pvpers want to pvp anytime, anywhere, with others who also want to pvp anytime, anywhere.  I like to think gankers are in the minority of pvpers.  I could be wrong, but I like to think that.

    image

    I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

    ~Albert Einstein

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,035Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kridak

    If you want realism then i say let's make it real.

    If you are caught stealing you lose a hand...permanently.

    Which means no weapon or shield in that hand.  You would have real ramifications for pirating.

    Steal again loose the other.

    Now we are talking realism.

    But all you pirates want is to steal and not pay a real price.

    A couple of hours in jail?  big frickin deal.

    Make it so that the pirate can lose something truly substantial, then you might have people not being pirates for fear of actually having to pay a real price (like their heads).

    But the keyboard pirates want to keep all the loot while they suffer no real ramifications to pirating...and do not tell me spending a couple of hours in jail is a big deal...please.

    Hey what about real permanent character death...ya..let's see how many big bad pirates we would have if there was a real penalty for pirating.

    Wow, just Wow... Losing bodyparts for severe crimes would be.... Awesome. I can just see a character with pegleg and a hook. :D

  • MadimorgaMadimorga Atlanta, GAPosts: 1,889Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kridak
    Originally posted by Madimorga

    Also, the ffa pvp everywhere crowd who are complaining about this trade pack split should be screaming at Trion or some devs somewhere to please get carebears our own server or our own sandbox game so the PvPers don't have to compromise their gameplay in an attempt by developers to bring in the PVE players.  Because we don't belong in the same world with the true ffa pvpers.  It tends to lead to neither type of player ever being happy.

     

    We don't want you.  You don't want us.  The sooner devs realize it, the sooner we'll all be a lot happier with our gaming choices.

     

    I actually would love to keep the pvp aspect.  The thrill of danger trying to deliver packs is fun.  But they just need to even out the risk vs reward.  I believe the pirate should keep all the trade pack contents and sell for themselves....but eventually when they get caught...oh boy their fun now begins.

    If they did that it would be awesome.

    I also disagree with people saying a pve server is what we need.  I think it would be boring without the danger.  But make it dangerous for the pirate and the trader.

    But again, i doubt there will be any change, it is what it is.

     

    I would like to see a ruleset where you can enjoy the entire game without dealing with PvP if you would like that, but if you want to go into PvP areas to trade, fight, or gather, you can.  The way it seems to be set up now is a tiny pvp free area, and everywhere else, for at least a good chunk of time, is PvP.  The worst for me is the posts on other forums by people trying to find a place to put a farm or house that is safe. They're being told there are plenty of places to put a farm, just go to the PvP areas.  This is not a good thing to tell a player who does not want to PvP.

    image

    I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

    ~Albert Einstein

  • Dagon13Dagon13 Posts: 269Member Uncommon

    I'm a little disappointed in the approach players are taking with this game mechanic.  Instead of being viewed as a fun mechanic to play around with many are viewing it as a min-max income generator.  The whole purpose of the mechanic is to incite PVP fun, not just as a means to make money.  The payout is just the reward for winning.

    That being said, risk vs reward should be equal for both parties, and I don't think payout ratios are the solution.  Someone mentioned that the pirates just swim around in the water, waiting for a target to appear.  This doesn't make any sense at all and is one of the first things I would take a look at.  Some sort of swimming endurance mechanic would be a good start.  How do pirates climb from the water onto a sailing ship would be another.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,461Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by kridak

    I actually would love to keep the pvp aspect.  The thrill of danger trying to deliver packs is fun.  But they just need to even out the risk vs reward.  I believe the pirate should keep all the trade pack contents and sell for themselves....but eventually when they get caught...oh boy their fun now begins.

    If they did that it would be awesome.

    I also disagree with people saying a pve server is what we need.  I think it would be boring without the danger.  But make it dangerous for the pirate and the trader.

    But again, i doubt there will be any change, it is what it is.

     

    I agree, the only issue here is evening out the risk vs reward.

    "no" the pirate should not get permadeath just like the Trader should not get "perma-death" if they are killed.

    Just make it so that if a pirate is caught the penalty is more severe.

    Also, the title of this thread needs to be changed. The OP indicates "fight FOR 1.0 changes" but he then says that those changes are not good.

    I suspect he wants "fight against 1.0 changes".

  • MadimorgaMadimorga Atlanta, GAPosts: 1,889Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dagon13

    I'm a little disappointed in the approach players are taking with this game mechanic.  Instead of being viewed as a fun mechanic to play around with many are viewing it as a min-max income generator.  The whole purpose of the mechanic is to incite PVP fun, not just as a means to make money.  The payout is just the reward for winning.

    That being said, risk vs reward should be equal for both parties, and I don't think payout ratios are the solution.  Someone mentioned that the pirates just swim around in the water, waiting for a target to appear.  This doesn't make any sense at all and is one of the first things I would take a look at.  Some sort of swimming endurance mechanic would be a good start.  How do pirates climb from the water onto a sailing ship would be another.

    That's ridiculous.  The sea obviously needs an infestation of sharks and stinging jellyfish.

    image

    I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

    ~Albert Einstein

  • MMOredfalconMMOredfalcon Mitchell, ONPosts: 132Member Uncommon

    Hafta agree with most posters here and not the OP.  PvE players loose everything and Pirates have nothing to loose. If they get caught, well anyone playing now will know the justice system is a joke. I'm all for 100% loss to the Traders.

    But in return I would expect a HUGE punishment for pirates/griefers. Rather than  minutes in jail...should be days or months. Homes/properties reclaimed. Loss of bank use or any kind of city vendor. You want realism....well what happens to a criminal on the run? Their names are known, and everybody is gunning for them. Now put that kinda realism on the griefers...see how long they last.

  • flizzerflizzer Manchester, NHPosts: 1,550Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOredfalcon

    Hafta agree with most posters here and not the OP.  PvE players loose everything and Pirates have nothing to loose. If they get caught, well anyone playing now will know the justice system is a joke. I'm all for 100% loss to the Traders.

    But in return I would expect a HUGE punishment for pirates/griefers. Rather than  minutes in jail...should be days or months. Homes/properties reclaimed. Loss of bank use or any kind of city vendor. You want realism....well what happens to a criminal on the run? Their names are known, and everybody is gunning for them. Now put that kinda realism on the griefers...see how long they last.

    This is the real point.  I go back to my earliest posts on this game.   THIS GAME IS A GRIEFER'S PARADISE.  There is little consequence for acting in this way.   Something needs to change. 

  • MadimorgaMadimorga Atlanta, GAPosts: 1,889Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MMOredfalcon

    Hafta agree with most posters here and not the OP.  PvE players loose everything and Pirates have nothing to loose. If they get caught, well anyone playing now will know the justice system is a joke. I'm all for 100% loss to the Traders.

    But in return I would expect a HUGE punishment for pirates/griefers. Rather than  minutes in jail...should be days or months. Homes/properties reclaimed. Loss of bank use or any kind of city vendor. You want realism....well what happens to a criminal on the run? Their names are known, and everybody is gunning for them. Now put that kinda realism on the griefers...see how long they last.

    If the game weren't free to play, meaning people can have multiple griefer accounts with no properties, it would be the best deterrent ever to let a jury of players award confiscated property to the aggrieved victims of captured thieves.  

     

    I wish some of the people posting in this thread were designing our games instead of the people who are designing them.

    image

    I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

    ~Albert Einstein

  • sludgebeardsludgebeard Tampa, FLPosts: 532Member Uncommon
    Just to be clear, Trion has made a proper solution with the 20/80 split. It's a decent solution, but I feel like the original way of trader taking all the risk is more realistic and that they should have player run insurance agency's.
  • udonudon Durham, NCPosts: 1,768Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by d_20

    I agree, as well.

     

    However, I wouldn't mind there being some sort of insurance, but the pirate should get 100% of whatever they take.

     

    It would be even better with player-run insurance companies that provided armed guards for certain shipments.

    Pirate's rarely got 100% of whatever they took.  Most of the time the Merchants that would work with them took a huge cut and it's not like you can trade it 1 for 1.  This doesn't translate into game very well but 60% of the value in gold is generous for a activity like this.  I'm not sure the person who lost should get the other 40% but the pirate's shouldn't get full value either.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,461Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Cetra

    The ganker has nothing to lose. While the trader has everything to lose.

    Why would anyone be a trader when being a pvper is so much easier??

    Its only 20%.  Give the trader some consolation and encouragment to do the trades.

    No need to cry a river over this.

    Again, just apply a greater penalty to the pirate if caught.

    Conversely, there could also be greater rewards for traders if successful.

     

  • blazehammerblazehammer Rio de JaneiroPosts: 20Member
    Ok, my 2 cents:

    Pirates get 100%, they stoled 100% so it's simple nonsense to get less than 100%. But if they are caught they spends 24 hour in jail and pay 200% of the loot to the victim; if they don't have the money so 48hs in jail (account jail, so no second char without another account).

    Traders pay a small tax everytime that they do a caravan (or whatever) and receive a compensation from the insurance company if they are stolen.

    Simpliest way, everyone happy, and it will not happens because what we want isn't important to 99% of the softhouses.
  • FoobarxFoobarx Poway, CAPosts: 451Member

    Game A is chess, game B is tetris...

    Player A wants tetris, player B wants chess...

    If logic prevailed, player A would buy tetris and player B would by chess...

    What usually happens is player A and buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris... 

    Player B also buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    Player A buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris...

    Player B buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, the we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    In the end...

  • rondericronderic gelsenkirchenPosts: 56Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by Cetra

    The ganker has nothing to lose. While the trader has everything to lose.

    Why would anyone be a trader when being a pvper is so much easier??

    Its only 20%.  Give the trader some consolation and encouragment to do the trades.

    No need to cry a river over this.

    Again, just apply a greater penalty to the pirate if caught.

    Conversely, there could also be greater rewards for traders if successful.

     

    Sorry, but just so many comments from people in this thread who have NO idea what they are talking about - have not even played the game.

    I have been playing it for over a year now and I can tell you it is the simplest thing in the world to do a trade run to the other continent and earn gilda stars. We do it with 1-2 tradeships about 3 times a day. Yes, sometimes (rarely) we have a fight and lose some packs - its fun. Tradepacks are cheap (and I mean really cheap), there is no loss of xp or anything else apart from the tradepack.

    It does assume you are travelling with a group - yes folks, this game NEEDS a group. If you want to play solo, play wow.

    Otherwise in the game it is completely possible to avoid pvp altogethter. The inner continental trade runs (thru safe zones) will still be there, albeit just for gold and not gilda stars. With gold you can buy ANYTHING off the AH - even house, boat and vehical plans.

    The 80/20 split is just a measure to try and placate the many vocal people like yourselves but even Trion has not yet made a final decision.

    Play the game first as it is now, and THEN make suggestions please.

     

    You can please some MMO-players all of the time and you can please all MMO-players some of the time but you can't please all MMO-players all of the time.

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 18,035Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by blazehammer
    Ok, my 2 cents:

    Pirates get 100%, they stoled 100% so it's simple nonsense to get less than 100%. But if they are caught they spends 24 hour in jail and pay 200% of the loot to the victim; if they don't have the money so 48hs in jail (account jail, so no second char without another account).

    Traders pay a small tax everytime that they do a caravan (or whatever) and receive a compensation from the insurance company if they are stolen.

    Simpliest way, everyone happy, and it will not happens because what we want isn't important to 99% of the softhouses.

    Change it to 5 days instead of 2 and I'm with you (even though I still liked that idea about losing body parts ;).

    Not playing a second day instead of coughing up a large fee is too lenient, that is one day of play or a huge sum.

    Risk Vs reward, I like it otherwise.

  • RylahRylah Tribal VillagePosts: 193Member Uncommon

    The whole system is borked . Non local auction house means that the artificial "trade runs" with generic "goods" make no sense at all for the economy but are only there as a risky way to gamble for income. So artificial limits and half baken reasoning are probably perfectly fine.

  • kridakkridak orangeville, ONPosts: 10Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by sludgebeard
    Just to be clear, Trion has made a proper solution with the 20/80 split. It's a decent solution, but I feel like the original way of trader taking all the risk is more realistic and that they should have player run insurance agency's.

     

    The solution is ridiculous on so many levels it is not funny.  

    As i have said before, the pirate should get 100% of the lootage.  

    Now what should the pirate get if caught?  That is the real question. Archeage will stay a pirates paradise.

    And as i said before, more power to them...if a system is this flawed i do not blame their abusing it lol.

    What people may find is that traders simply won't risk it as it is better to get 50% value in a safe zone than 20% in a dangerous zone because you got pirated.  

    shrug

  • coorsguyscoorsguys Sacramento, CAPosts: 272Member
    The "right changes"?  By who's definition?  Just reading this thread you have 50 different views of "right" but feel free to bombard them, I'm sure they have nothing else going on...
  • coretex666coretex666 PraguePosts: 1,928Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Foobarx

    Game A is chess, game B is tetris...

    Player A wants tetris, player B wants chess...

    If logic prevailed, player A would buy tetris and player B would by chess...

    What usually happens is player A and buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris... 

    Player B also buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    Player A buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris...

    Player B buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, the we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    In the end...

    I agree.

    When I personally do not like a game, I do not demand any changes to it. I simply ignore it. I would say it is an adequate behavior you would expect from an average adult person.

    Here you are reading about petitions and how the game has to change. People are making number of posts how it is griefers paradise and how people interested in PVE are screwed by this game.

    I think good old "if you dont like it, dont play it" applies here.

    Only if the developer sees the demand is below budgeted levels, then they may want to consider any eventual changes to the design. Considering that there is a decent demand for the Alpha package at a price of 150 USD, I do not think they need to consider any changes you are suggesting.

    Waiting for L2 EU Classic

  • IfrianMMOIfrianMMO BarcelonaPosts: 212Member

    Despite being a FFA PVPER i do agree with gankers having to run risks just as much as PVE players do.

    Right now, there is barely no risk involved in ganking but lots of profit to be done, whereas this is not true when it comes to PVE players, that run and trade entirely under their own risks and consequences.

    Put some (equally) hardcore punishement against gankers that fail to gank and see how many truly love pvp.

    image
  • MadimorgaMadimorga Atlanta, GAPosts: 1,889Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by coretex666
    Originally posted by Foobarx

    Game A is chess, game B is tetris...

    Player A wants tetris, player B wants chess...

    If logic prevailed, player A would buy tetris and player B would by chess...

    What usually happens is player A and buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris... 

    Player B also buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    Player A buys both games and then demands that they both play like tetris...

    Player B buys both games and then demands that they both play like chess...

    In the end, the we get games that are neither tetris or chess...

    In retaliation, player A demands that tetris be made and player B demands that chess be made...

    In the end...

    I agree.

    When I personally do not like a game, I do not demand any changes to it. I simply ignore it. I would say it is an adequate behavior you would expect from an average adult person.

    Here you are reading about petitions and how the game has to change. People are making number of posts how it is griefers paradise and how people interested in PVE are screwed by this game.

    I think good old "if you dont like it, dont play it" applies here.

    Only if the developer sees the demand is below budgeted levels, then they may want to consider any eventual changes to the design. Considering that there is a decent demand for the Alpha package at a price of 150 USD, I do not think they need to consider any changes you are suggesting.

    Or gamers could be smart about it and let devs know what we want, and if that happens to be a sandbox without gankers, be sure to say so.

     

    Because you better believe in every game I've played in the past few years that didn't have an open world pvp server, the pvp crowd came in and asked for one.  So I figure, us PVE players are making a big mistake by not doing the same in reverse.

     

    In the end, Trion can do what it wants  As can any game developer.   But we players need to be sure they know what we will and won't spend our money on.

    image

    I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

    ~Albert Einstein

Sign In or Register to comment.