I voted to allow gold loss, for reasons already stated 394485192341 times.
Maybe so, but it was the same 20 players saying it 19,724,259,617 times each...
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:09
I voted to allow gold loss, for reasons already stated 394485192341 times.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:11
I voted to allow gold loss, for reasons already stated 394485192341 times.
Maybe so, but it was the same 20 players saying it 19,724,259,617 times each...
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:20
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:23
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:26
I voted to allow gold loss, for reasons already stated 394485192341 times.
Maybe so, but it was the same 20 players saying it 19,724,259,617 times each...
Which doesn't make the reasons any less valid.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:29
For those 20 or the entire FS community? Because they post more on the forum their opinion should count more?
Like I said, the only way to get a true read on what everyone thinks is to announce the Poll in game for everyone to see. If not it serves no purpose but to open up another thread that mirrors those that they have already locked.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 01:46
For those 20 or the entire FS community? Because they post more on the forum their opinion should count more?
Like I said, the only way to get a true read on what everyone thinks is to announce the Poll in game for everyone to see. If not it serves no purpose but to open up another thread that mirrors those that they have already locked.
wow. :roll:
Go ahead and post it on the homepage, the poll's going to be pointless no matter what you do.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:03
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:13
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:14
yet you played for this long in a pvp game without an opt out? Now they give you one, you complain?let me get this straight. I can now pay ridiculous amounts of fsp in order to avoid (for far too brief a period of time for the amounts charged) an aspect of this game that I strongly dislike (if you like PvP, more power to you. I don't and so we will likely not see eye to eye). Seems to me I can avoid the PvP aspect for free by taking my money elsewhere and letting my account like so many others in FS go inactive.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:28
+1 on the protect XP only, and lower the cost...
Or better yet, why not just disallow the taking of XP unless on the bounty board? The bounty board is supposed to be the punishment, yes? Then perhaps that is the simple answer to this entire mess. The PvPer who attacks doesn't (apparently...correct me if I am wrong) get the XP from whom she or he attacks, but they get the gold and rating. So why have XP loss at all outside of the bounty board?? This has never made sense, since no one seems to gain from the XP loss.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:30
yet you played for this long in a pvp game without an opt out? Now they give you one, you complain?let me get this straight. I can now pay ridiculous amounts of fsp in order to avoid (for far too brief a period of time for the amounts charged) an aspect of this game that I strongly dislike (if you like PvP, more power to you. I don't and so we will likely not see eye to eye). Seems to me I can avoid the PvP aspect for free by taking my money elsewhere and letting my account like so many others in FS go inactive.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:32
+11Is there an option that says you hate any type of PvP protection? Seems like neither of these options are acceptable to me.
I think that the answer is this: When you are PvPing you should be forced to choose an option.
Attack for?
Gold
PvP
XP
You can pick ONLY one option and the other items CAN'T be lost. So gold thieves steal ONLY gold not XP or PvP points. PvP Farmers steal ONLY PvP points and not gold or XP. And when revenge is needed, XP is taken and nothing else.
Gold thieves don't WANT to take your gold AND XP. They want the gold (and would actually like you to keep your XP). The FS Police Departments (I call "Sherriff" first) want your XP. It is how we keep bio's semi-civil and some order in a game of internet tough guys.
This poll is a extrememly biased. It's like asking which way you'd prefer to die and not giving an "I'd like to live" option.
Maxwell
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:33
point missed. The option was never available previously. It now is.yet you played for this long in a pvp game without an opt out? Now they give you one, you complain?let me get this straight. I can now pay ridiculous amounts of fsp in order to avoid (for far too brief a period of time for the amounts charged) an aspect of this game that I strongly dislike (if you like PvP, more power to you. I don't and so we will likely not see eye to eye). Seems to me I can avoid the PvP aspect for free by taking my money elsewhere and letting my account like so many others in FS go inactive.
I would guess that for the majority of the players in FS that they don't have $400 laying around to "opt out" of PvP for a year. I know I don't.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:34
I would guess that for the majority of the players in FS that they don't have $400 laying around to "opt out" of PvP for a year. I know I don't.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:38
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:44
yet you played for this long in a pvp game without an opt out? Now they give you one, you complain?let me get this straight. I can now pay ridiculous amounts of fsp in order to avoid (for far too brief a period of time for the amounts charged) an aspect of this game that I strongly dislike (if you like PvP, more power to you. I don't and so we will likely not see eye to eye). Seems to me I can avoid the PvP aspect for free by taking my money elsewhere and letting my account like so many others in FS go inactive.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:46
Given then that you know how not to be a target, it's even cheaper to keep doing what you always have. Many people do, and will continue to. It's nice to have an option there, should someone want to use it. Though improvements can still be made to it.yet you played for this long in a pvp game without an opt out? Now they give you one, you complain?let me get this straight. I can now pay ridiculous amounts of fsp in order to avoid (for far too brief a period of time for the amounts charged) an aspect of this game that I strongly dislike (if you like PvP, more power to you. I don't and so we will likely not see eye to eye). Seems to me I can avoid the PvP aspect for free by taking my money elsewhere and letting my account like so many others in FS go inactive.
I was never a target of pvp after level 34 or so. therefore I really didn't give a rat's behind what they did with PvP. I never hold more than a small amount gold after a hunt so gold farmers aren't clammering after me. I don't complain that an opt out has been given, I merely did a spit take when I saw the price
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:47
wow then I got half a years worth this week aloneI would guess that for the majority of the players in FS that they don't have $400 laying around to "opt out" of PvP for a year. I know I don't.
A player level 700+ gets attacked for EXP loss exactly how often to begin with?
If you want to be completely immune, yes, it costs 400$. In practice, you MIGHT be hit for exp loss a half dozen times in a year at that level of population, even with the new update.
The entire fact that an opt out exists is completely against the spirit of the game. Of course, it panders to exactly what some people want, so we'll ignore what it does to the general game and risk dynamics. I guess it's time to edit my sig.
Posted 03 December 2010 - 02:51
wow then I got half a years worth this week alone
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users