They buff creeps, and buff creeps and buff creeps...

[Olympic]

I believe in a GAME there should be more to cost/benefit analysis than "just letting nature take its course".

The only reason to PvP in my opinion is to kill people on the other side. What more cost/benefit do you need to motivate a person to want to PvP? I personally don't need rewards, rank, loot or anything else. The fight is the reward in and of itself.

Why? Because human nature is nasty and disgusting and leaves us devolving into a completely un-fun game.

While this is true to some degree, it is also a matter of perspective. There are those actions that most of us would agree are nasty and disgusting, completely un-fun, but then there are other actions that people would see differently...so again, I find it better to just accept the "whatever happens" reality than the "I don't like the behavior of the other person, I need legislation to change how they act".

It's my opinion that games SHOULD, in fact NEED to, have mechanics that encourage competative, and cooperative, play. Rather than just anarchy where everyone does whatever they want despite the impact that has on other players.

Again, "competitive and cooperative" is defined by who? I have my own idea of competitive, and I don't even get "cooperative" in this context. I don't expect Freeps to cooperate with creeps or vice versa. (That is within the context of PvP in the Moors, not all issues in game). Other than exploiting, cheating, griefing, I think everyone has to accept the reality that PvP is in large part "people doing things that impact others". That is one of the fun parts of the experience imo. Its not anarchy out there as I see it. It is more like a public park where some are grilling burgers and others are playing volleyball. I tend to think of that as "freedom".

But I can respect your opinion as wanting a more "real life" war-like experience where anyone does anything, anytime. I just don't think that makes for the best game.

I don't view the game as an all out war. I view the game as "sport". We have rules, we play by them, sometimes you win, sometimes you don't.

[Olympic]

The extent to which individual players want them to do so will vary, of course, but by tweaking, updating and changing classes, Turbine is inherently trying to adjust the measure of competition.

I agree with that. But the way I see it is they are trying to level the playing field by managing what the character skills are able to do, not the human behavior behind the actions of the toon.

[Jamers]

I agree with that. But the way I see it is they are trying to level the playing field by managing what the character skills are able to do, not the human behavior behind the actions of the toon.

Touché. The example I gave was not the best for the point I was trying to make. Allow me to attempt to reiterate my response:

Seven months after the game launched, Turbine adjusted the rate of glory gain in raids, in response to raiders, particularly non-DPS classes, getting very little per kill from raiding. Unfortunately, they adjusted the rate upward too much, and there was no incentive to do anything but form raids of 24 players, because it was the most efficient way to obtain glory. Anyone who was playing at that point can corroborate this; I believe you were freepside and playing then so I would assume you would agree. Please correct me if I'm incorrect about that.

Since then they've adjusted it a few times. If Turbine didn't care about how people are playing in the 'moors beyond class mechanics, why change it at all?

[Olympic]

Touché. The example I gave was not the best for the point I was trying to make. Allow me to attempt to reiterate my response:

Seven months after the game launched, Turbine adjusted the rate of glory gain in raids, in response to raiders, particularly non-DPS classes, getting very little per kill from raiding. Unfortunately, they adjusted the rate upward too much, and there was no incentive to do anything but form raids of 24 players, because it was the most efficient way to obtain glory. Anyone who was playing at that point can corroborate this; I believe you were freepside and playing then so I would assume you would agree. Please correct me if I'm incorrect about that.

Since then they've adjusted it a few times. If Turbine didn't care about how people are playing in the 'moors beyond class mechanics, why change it at all?

I don't know, they make all sorts of changes that don't make sense.

Nothing they have done in the moors has changed anyone's behavior though. We still have the same debates and complaints as four years ago.

[Jamers]

I don't know, they make all sorts of changes that don't make sense.

Nothing they have done in the moors has changed anyone's behavior though. We still have the same debates and complaints as four years ago.

I disagree, I think there have been a lot of changes to the 'moors that have directly impacted how people play, including the rate of glory gain changes I mentioned.

[Thane9]

I agree with that. But the way I see it is they are trying to level the playing field by managing what the character skills are able to do, not the human behavior behind the actions of the toon.

I disagree. Although understanding their intentions is vastly different than analyzing their actual impact.

See below

I don't know, they make all sorts of changes that don't make sense.

Nothing they have done in the moors has changed anyone's behavior though. We still have the same debates and complaints as four years ago.

I couldn't disagree more. MANY changes to the moors have affected people's actions a LOT.

I think Bash cites the biggest and most obvious example with the raid renown bonus. It shifted gameplay so dramatically that they had to scale it back. They KNEW it was just going to be all zergs all the time.

But I'd suggest there have been several others that have dramatically affected people's playstyles.

SoP when the chieftains seals dropped from those chieftains only? Huge gameplay shift for a lot of freeps, and a lot of creeps who hunted them.

Flag room addition.

Removal of Hotspots...large, dramatic drop in the numbers of solo/small group freeps. Just like that...poof.

Strengthening of creeps. I'd suggest there are more creeps willing to solo than there were before. Particularly certain classes. We've also seen some negative behaviours from this change too...but time will tell how this sorts itself out.

Hunter DF. 'nuff said.

Furthermore there are skills/mechanics/whatnot that haven't changed but have CLEARLY dictated how people play. The way support classes are defined and function affects a LOT of gameplay out there. As do various levels of CC, and the core ranged/melee balance.

There are several mechanic changes that have altered how people play the game, and more importantly how those changes impact OTHER players.

And there could be more. I've suggested several over the years that I honestly believe would HELP gameplay for many and HURT gameplay for none. Ideas that would literally change how people (on average) play the game.

[Olympic]

Not that much imo.

But you are looking at it a way more micro-level than I am.

In general, the moors is largely the same as it always has been.

A little change here, big change there, sure it has "changed things" to some extent.

But things are largely the same as they always have been in regard to how people play. And what they complain about.

[Sujae]

Did you notice that within 2 minutes before that moment Isen flipped from red to blue? I think you're leaving that out of your story there.

We were heading out after flipping it. Common sense dictates that if you're entering an area that was JUST flipped, that there would be several freeps there. And in fact, that's exactly what had happened. I chose the Isen entrance to leave (btw, we were hurrying to LC where it was being flipped at that moment, and didn't want to burn our map) because there was a small and large drake in the lower exit and I was going to try to have the raid avoid being dismounted. When you were seen we all kinda shrugged and said "so much for not dismounting" and LC fell as a result. Not that it would've mattered LC was gone before we were even another 200m. Even mapping and riding from GV wouldn't have saved it.

Please note: for about the MILLIONTH time. I NEVER, EVER, take issue with getting rolled by a larger force. That's the nature of open PvMP. My frustration stems from players who when encountered solo are instead calling out for a swarm to map in rather than fight me.

IF for instance I wasn't in the raid at that time and I just happened to be killing drakes for the hornblower...and the raid went towards the west entrance to leave and hit Lugs...and I went east and ran into you...only to hit my bubbles and run west while calling the raid out to come back and smash you...that would be really terrible on my part. That, would NEVER happen. I would never do that. There are several very high ranked creeps who do just that, with the advantage of maps, all the time.

I hope you can see the difference. It's a massive difference to me. One is the risk of being solo. The other is being purposefully swarmed and ganked.

No Luc, there is no difference. The only thing that would make either of your examples different would be when there is a call out and nobody responds -OR- if you had turned your raid around and instructed them to not attack me. Fat chance of either happening in this 'lil sandbox, don't you think?

[Beerpong]

Just out of curiosity, why do you expect deferential treatment as a low ranked creep? Do you avoid engaging unranked/low level freeps? Additionally, do you always refer to being killed solo as a gank?

Of course I do not expect deferential treatment and am fully aware I could be ganked anywhere at anytime. However when Luc comes to the forums and says "Exactly how powerful does Turbine need to make you before you stop this garbage play and actually engage in PvMP rather than call outs, map-ins, and ganking?" then yeah I am gonna call him out for being a hypocrite.

Also I do not consider being killed solo as a gank. I see ganking as jumping a r1 etc. creep in HH while you are high rank and they are surrounded by hostile npc's. Since Mr. Honorable Soloer made this post claiming otherwise he has to suffer the consequences imo. That was the point I am simply trying to make.

~Cheers

[whitefox1313]

I think this is the heart of where we disagree. And maybe we should leave it at this.

I believe in a GAME there should be more to cost/benefit analysis than "just letting nature take its course".

Why? Because human nature is nasty and disgusting and leaves us devolving into a completely un-fun game.

It's my opinion that games SHOULD, in fact NEED to, have mechanics that encourage competative, and cooperative, play. Rather than just anarchy where everyone does whatever they want despite the impact that has on other players.

But I can respect your opinion as wanting a more "real life" war-like experience where anyone does anything, anytime. I just don't think that makes for the best game.



Did you notice that within 2 minutes before that moment Isen flipped from red to blue? I think you're leaving that out of your story there.

We were heading out after flipping it. Common sense dictates that if you're entering an area that was JUST flipped, that there would be several freeps there. And in fact, that's exactly what had happened. I chose the Isen entrance to leave (btw, we were hurrying to LC where it was being flipped at that moment, and didn't want to burn our map) because there was a small and large drake in the lower exit and I was going to try to have the raid avoid being dismounted. When you were seen we all kinda shrugged and said "so much for not dismounting" and LC fell as a result. Not that it would've mattered LC was gone before we were even another 200m. Even mapping and riding from GV wouldn't have saved it.

Please note: for about the MILLIONTH time. I NEVER, EVER, take issue with getting rolled by a larger force. That's the nature of open PvMP. My frustration stems from players who when encountered solo are instead calling out for a swarm to map in rather than fight me.

IF for instance I wasn't in the raid at that time and I just happened to be killing drakes for the hornblower...and the raid went towards the west entrance to leave and hit Lugs...and I went east and ran into you...only to hit my bubbles and run west while calling the raid out to come back and smash you...that would be really terrible on my part. That, would NEVER happen. I would never do that. There are several very high ranked creeps who do just that, with the advantage of maps, all the time.

I hope you can see the difference. It's a massive difference to me. One is the risk of being solo. The other is being purposefully swarmed and ganked.



First off, I never claimed to be honorable. Frankly this garbage attacking me with made up things like this is old.

I killed creeps in HH, um yeah...so? All while I was solo and at a greater risk anywhere on the map than any group of creeps or freeps.

What I did NOT do, is see a solo creep in HH and call out for help to map in and kill it.

I'm sorry you can't see the difference.

So I'm ganking if I fight in HH, I'm ganking if I fight around Grams, I'm overextending if I'm pushing in a raid. At least I'm not huddled up in my one shots waiting for a callout to map in 20 to kill 1.

I roam the ENTIRE map, the center STAB area more or less excluded, looking for fights. Sometimes I find relatively low ranks. Sometimes I find high ranks. Every time I fight.

I know creeps who can't say the same. Either because they refuse to accept the inherant risk of being solo, or becuase they won't step up to actually fight when they can just call in a group to zerg someone.


Note: I'm very clearly not saying ALL creeps, OR that freeps don't do this too...either by using stealth or whatever.

I'm just saying it feels like the game SHOULD encourage players to try and fight IF they're a reasonably close match rather than just waiting/calling out for/or encouraging others to come to smash the smaller force, be it a solo or a large group.

----

Frankly the level of animosity about this is just weird. All I'm asking is that people fight in the moors more often instead of waiting until they have some massive numerical advantage.

That doesn't, to me at least, seem like that radical of an idea.

All I can conclude is that people must REALLY like low challenge, watch my target explode, gameplay.

Of COURSE there will always be situations where a large group blows up a small group. I actually like that "risk" to the feel of the game. Heck, I know if I kill a low ranked creep...OR a high ranked one...anywhere NEAR a map-in I'm at a massive risk compared to even a small group. But I enjoy that risk. I enjoy knowing that I'm not safe.

But that's VERY different than if I were to just only engage when I KNEW I would win.

I hope that clarifies my position a little better for you.

[The_Observer]

We all need to just accept the fact that if the earth was like the Klingon homeworld of Qo'noS, we'd all be much happier.

Qapla'!



Right, Del?

[Jamers]

Of course I do not expect deferential treatment and am fully aware I could be ganked anywhere at anytime. However when Luc comes to the forums and says "Exactly how powerful does Turbine need to make you before you stop this garbage play and actually engage in PvMP rather than call outs, map-ins, and ganking?" then yeah I am gonna call him out for being a hypocrite.

Also I do not consider being killed solo as a gank. I see ganking as jumping a r1 etc. creep in HH while you are high rank and they are surrounded by hostile npc's. Since Mr. Honorable Soloer made this post claiming otherwise he has to suffer the consequences imo. That was the point I am simply trying to make.

~Cheers

You're not making your point well. How is Luc a hypocrite?

[Ornaith]

...I guess we will never find out now. And it's better that way. Personal attacks and name-calling, regardless of who or what it is regarding and much you may think it to be "deserved", is a violation of the Community Guidelines. Unfortunately, there has been of lot of that in this thread recently and, as a result, it now ends right here.