Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Ajokoira

Testers
  • Content Count

    150
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ajokoira

  1. That was immature and even though you have obviously read it, I do apologize.
  2. omg...do your own research, the topic was PvP games, you figure it out.
  3. You said PvP games, you failed to specify, at any rate PS 2 went many years with no missions or story lines at all. So bad example for your point, great example for mine, once you let PvE in, it keeps on coming.
  4. Umm so, ok. Planetside 2, no PvE, Pick a lobby shooter, no PvE (required for PvP) Pick any Battle royal, a helathy share of MOBAs, No PvE required...do I need to go on? I have a rotation of games I play, so that question is moot as well. PS 2 recently added alliance Wars which is a GvG system that is outside the normal game play and therefore not required to participate in to enjoy the game for what it is. The point is, there are many many PvP games out there that have nothing to do with guild vs guild, PvE or any of that stuff. They are PvP games for the sake of PvP end of story. Ag
  5. Umm that isn't why PvE was added in but ok, the "leveling" which is a joke after it's been completed once is there to introduce players to the game/their character. That makes sense. I could argue against myself here and repeat (as has been done ad nauseum) that this game was originally supposed to be no levels no grind and I would much prefer that as the crucible of PvP is not going to be lessen no matter how good you are at PvE. However, I will take a correction here and even though I find your logic flawed, I will say "ok let's continue PvE creep". Which is exactly what you propose. A
  6. So...start the PvE game creep...great idea.
  7. You like to assume a lot and I am going to go ahead and let you know, don't put word in my mouth. I know you love to doom and gloom and proselytize people into your way of thinking. I do not entirely disagree with you, I just have the ability to be objective. No where did I say I believe their opinions are any different, I just don't speak for other people and only repeat exactly what they say to me and that has been, for along time now: Yeah I got into BETA I just do not have any desire to test/put up with wipes/deal with down times etc. That is all I am saying. As to your second point,
  8. I won't say "everyone I know" but I will say a lot of people I have spoken with that have been invited simply don't want to test and are waiting for live. I am not saying all of you are wrong or even off base however, I am saying there is a significant number of people (based on my unofficial, inaccurate) survey just waiting for "live". Now, what happens 20 minutes after launch is unknown, but right now some people just do not like the test environment.
  9. Oh...more grind...weird. Exactly what this game needs is more grind. This is as awesome as zero import campaigns because grinding for all the gear you just ground out in the last campaign is awesome too. Keep that grind coming, I feel greatness in the air! /s
  10. Very much agree, for a BR game they should just offer a free to play version with a cosmetics shop. I mean because the MMO side will certainly be dead, might as well try to cash in on that BR. Of course seasons, and other microtransactions to keep the money coming in.
  11. This game was started as "no grind" and yet here we are having to grind...so there is a downside. They just need to grind for 1 or 2 days? lol ok, so how do they get gear? Improve gear? It's all grinding mats, very little grinding levels, I grant that, but grinding better crafting equipment and gathering equipment (belts/Discs) so you can grind better mats to make better equipment etc. I mean the examples are pretty obvious. As I said previously, the passive system needed a serious revamp however, one really good example is the system eve uses where you can boost passive progression by pl
  12. I was sad to see the passive system go as well. I argued against it and was told it was the utopia that was needed to "fix" the game, or at least one of the major hurdles. But here we are, wish granted and seeing many of the downsides to losing that system. It was not the best iteration of a passive system in existence, it needed work, for certain but it was (imo) better than what we have now, another grind built into a non-grind game.
  13. WoW...I am surprised I need to explain this, I mean its been brought up time and again, but then again it's you, and you just wan to argue for the sake of arguing. It shouldn't surprise me any more. So, I said balanced towards that end, I never said that is all the game should be. I have mentioned it in other posts, there needs to be a lot of changes and balancing around solo play is not one of them. If you want to actually discuss and be taken seriously, read the entire thread before you start quoting single posts that only support your (faulty) narrative. Thanks.
  14. lol you're right, big guilds ONLY exist to destroy the game. Man...I wish I could remember that web site that was so useful for crafting...WB, Winterblades....man I just wish I could remember. Or the theory crafting site....hmmm. Anyway, yeah big guilds must exist solely for that purpose. Just like as I can see from your posts you exist purely to complain. Never offering solutions, just throwing out negative doom and gloom stuff. Love those generalizations. Keep em coming! Wartribe gear was a band aid that should have been removed long ago, and there is absolutely no good argum
  15. No one ever said that, I certainly didn't. I do not however, think the soloist and two person guilds are what the game should be focused on nor balanced around. It should be balanced around guilds trying to take each others castles and holding land to acquire resources. If you can have fun soloing within that criteria, great for you! If not, there is most definitely a game out there for you.
  16. You should re-read your posts, the things I speak against, you said. So you can try to paint any strawman you want, you said it, it's there. Why in the name of everything holy would I play a game that is designed to be a guild based game, as a solo? I get people like that, and there are many games that cater to them, this isn't one of them. It was never advertised as such even back in the KS campaign. I see this all the time in PS2. I am a lone wolf I can do it....ten minute slater OMFG this game sucks, all I do is die...yeah join a squad bud, this is a squad based game. I have no c
  17. It is, it's most likely only going to help hungerdome ergo I am against funneling more people that direction. Having said that I also believe given current circumstances within the game that hungerdome will be all that is left about 30 days after launch.
  18. How will removing or nerfing WT gear has a "disastrous" affect on population? I started playing when there was no WT gear and I would say we had more numbers back then than we do now. I cannot prove that, but WT gear certainly was not the catalyst for a population explosion. Not by a long shot. As to not defending the position, it has been, a lot, you just choose to not accept or read the responses evidently. The biggest reason would be a player driven economy. As to the "large guilds etc. that is absolute crap. It has nothing to do with "wanting to win" let me let you in on a secret, if
  19. I am against anything that pushed people into hunger dome.
  20. To each their own however, I am very glad this game is not being developed strictly by what you like or dislike.
  21. I do, I play purely in the hopes that the siege system and the campaign system will be improved, and I know many others that feel the same way. I play this as I thoroughly enjoy large fights and sieges however, I also realize and agree that there needs to be something for the small teams and individuals to do as well and ALL of these things need to have meaning and weight behind them. There is a way (as outlined by many posters in many threads, you can look at some suggestions I have made in other threads, and @Yoink has made to get started) that can "fix" the majority of issues with this
  22. This would be a horrible step in the wrong direction. Far more people than you realize would like to main crafters, and do it's just meaningless at this point due to nerfs in crafted gear and they keep buffing War tribe gear. Another glaring mistake is you state things should be balanced around Hungerdome. Really? There aren't enough BR's out there for you yet? We need this game to be a BR or a MOBA? No way in hell this game should take another step in that direction, and suggesting they should balance or do away with crafters because they would not "fit in a hungedome team" is asinine. W
  23. I agree. On all points, this would be a nice change from the MOBA slope we are currently sliding down. On the topic of forts, I suggested in a different thread make taking and holding outposts in the vicinity of a keep a requirement for taking said keep. My point here being, something has to change in order to make this game worth playing. Good post.
×
×
  • Create New...