[Istanbul]

Originally Posted by Smaggler

Nor do PvPers disable the ability to participate in PvE activities.

A PvPer attacking a PvEer, forces a PvEer into PvP combat even as just a victim. A PvEer existing does not force a PvPer to partake of PvE activities.

This logic is flawed. There are a myriad of reasons that a "simple PvEr" would be a target for a PvPer other than griefing and annoyance factors. PvErs by their nature should they influence the game to have a completely "safe area" or are invincible may participate in economic warfare without fear of reprisal. They are forcing the PvE control over PvP. Among the other things listed such as scouting, trading, equipment, and money. They are all a great part of the scene behind the "war" in Jumpgate.

And in contrast to the "nose clean" assertion it doesn't happen. It would be the same as expecting all the PvPers to only fight for "honorable" reasons.

-Smaggs

By 'pissing off the pvpers, i did not mean soley (or even at all really) by being annoying whiny babies or the like. Perhaps I should have more specifically said, if what they engage in in their PvE activities puts them at odds with a PvPer.

The second asssertation you made was exactly why I mentioned pirates in my edit, when I realized I hadn't mentioned that form of PvP.

[Istanbul]

Originally Posted by Tritian

There are many reasons why killing people who dont DIRECTLY attack you can be necessary. I'd hate to see Jumpgate loss that ability to placate to the extreme minority.

duh. I never said that we should placate the minority and I agree that there are plenty of times where attacking 'secondary' targets is necassary.

Look at the safe zone polls. Also as others have mentioned, look at the population differences on WoW for the carebear/pvp servers. Is it really necessary to cater to these people when doing so limits the potential of interactions with everyone else?

I don't want safe zones (at least sure as heck not 'invulnerability' safe zones. Is there any reason not to have a server that caters to that crowd just because it might be somewhat smaller than the crowd that wants to be on the PvP server? If they both have thousands of people playing, it doesn't really matter which one has more. ND will be making money on the game which is what they want to do, and we'll have our universe that fits our preferences.

The very act of implementing rules to protect the carebears forces their gamestyle on all PvP'ers. Instead, the players should be given the tools to protect themselves, by encouraging patrolling, escorting, and bounty hunting.

I don't see the devs saying that they're going to force you to play on the PvE server, unless it's existence causes you to feel deathly rage even though you have a server that's dedicated to you (and me, I'd most likely play on both, depending on what they really end up being at the end of all this).

[Tritian]

I'm not completely against multiple servers, however I believe a true hardcore-type server will require extra infrastructure, and i worry that ND wont put the attention into developing this infrastructure. Or they will say "we will add that later after release" and then take 3 years to get to it, ala Episode 2.

Like I said earlier and in Wild-West style hardcore PvP server ideas, a 'hardcore' server will require things such as a fleshed out patrol/bounty/escort/mercenary system. In addition, it needs to be developed in a way that doesn't limit gameplay.

[Jump]

Originally Posted by Istanbul

PvEer existing does not force a PvPer to partake of PvE activities.

That's not true my friend. I can remember times I circled around the back gates of space on my way to the far reaches of Quantar. All to deliver a negotiated load of goods to a bad guy. It's called politics and smart dealing. I could have said no to the deals and faced possible persecution perhaps. And so could all the haulers. And then of course, the PVP'ers involved would have been forced to to haul their own goods and I and all the haulers would have the last laugh.

This is not fiction, this was everyday life in -=MACK=-. At least in the heyday. We, especially Hurricane, were always busy securing safe passage for our tows. Yes it takes work, yes it is risky, and yes they knew we also hauled the goods to the guys they were fighting that night. But see, there is a little secret that very few whisper in any corner of space. And I will reveal it to all today. Are you ready? Here it is.


It's just a game.

PVP'ers, for the most part, want to fight each other not haul goods. So they are just TOOLS for us PVE'ers if we want them to be. The key is, you have to be a TOOL for them as well. We got rich while making PVP happen all around us. And when Asshattery showed it's ugly face, we could call on these people or we had time to fix it ourselves. It's something called playing the game within the game. It's fun, it's exhilarating, it's what made Jumpgate special for us. I could only imagine how much more fun it would have been had the PVP'ers had a better way to make money on combat back then.

What this does is enable one group to have fun with the politics of it. Another to have fun with the hauling. And another to have fun in a furball. Sometimes all of the above.

The problems I saw in Jumpgate were from loners. People that had no desire to play a game with other people. Sometimes they were PVP'er and sometimes they were PVE'ers. Either way, it spells trouble for a multiplayer game.

I'm not a PVP'er, never have been. You can count on less than one hand the times I ever got involved in ship balance debates or PVP issues back in the day. It wasn't my business as far as I was concerned. I just wanted their cash and a fun night with the crew sneaking around the back allies or charging into wake with the goods. Fun stuff it was.

Online multiplayer games should never be designed with the single player in mind.

[dailatron]

So. Even though Scorch has said they are going to have a wild west style server people are still whining about a server they probably wont even play on. Oops sorry, discussing.

I personally dont have a problem with being civ ripped, more so if there is a valid RP reason. But what does irritate me is civ ripping for no other reason than "they can".

Im against an invulnerability safe zone but all for AI secured safe zones. Now thats RP, plus it takes out the OOC side of human interaction. We would then not be able to choose what pilots we allow to civ rip or act like an ass in reg space.

[Jump]

So people that disagree with you are simply whining eh?

[dailatron]

Originally Posted by Jump

So people that disagree with you are simply whining eh?

Right back at ya big Daddy. There is discussion and there is whining.

[Jump]

Whining about discussion is still whining.

[Tritian]

Originally Posted by dailatron

Im against an invulnerability safe zone but all for AI secured safe zones. Now thats RP, plus it takes out the OOC side of human interaction. We would then not be able to choose what pilots we allow to civ rip or act like an ass in reg space.

"Now that's RP"

Pshaw. How is AI attacking someone more RP then someone else attacking someone? Players determine and shape RP, not the AI.

And who are you to determine what someone's RP can be, or what classifies as RP? One factions killer is another factions hero.

AI should be a supplement to player policing, not a replacement for it.

[dailatron]

Originally Posted by Tritian

"Now that's RP"

Pshaw. How is AI attacking someone more RP then someone else attacking someone? Players determine and shape RP, not the AI.

Because with AI its not self motivated

Originally Posted by Tritian

And who are you to determine what someone's RP can be, or what classifies as RP? One factions killer is another factions hero.

But at the same time one factions killer can be another factions ass hat.

Originally Posted by Tritian

AI should be a supplement to player policing, not a replacement for it.

Exactly. AI security should do what players cant be either bothered or skilled to do.

I take it you wont be playing on the safe server, so whats the problem ?. Or is it discussion for discussions sake ?.

[dailatron]

Originally Posted by Jump

So people that disagree with you are simply whining eh?

LOL why make it personal. Its not a question of people not agreeing with me.