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

talfryn

Member
  • Content Count

    322
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About talfryn

  • Rank
    Treepie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Interests
    I game, I write, and I read. Currently on a Sanderson kick.
  1. I have no idea what has taken place in this thread but since it's you guys I know it'll have been... interesting. @bomzulu Lantern Watch
  2. ahh CAPTCHA ... they often make my girlfriend question her humanity when she gets it wrong. Most amusing. But that's interesting about the hidden check boxes. I really should read more about web design in my off time.
  3. Hello new folks, old folks no hello for you. You're too old hat now.
  4. What I'm wondering is why you think it needs to be separated. Essentially those who like/want conflict in the EKs would be happy with an EK that has it so that you are at the risk of conflict all the time, hurrah! But it would segregate the community that is probably not going to be terribly massive anyway given the general direction of the game as a whole. So why not just layer that EK on top of the hypothetical "one world" EK by having players, at the creation of their account, either opt in or out of the 'All PvP, all the time' EK vs. the toggle on and off PvP EK? That way we keep the community together (since people that don't opt in can still feed into the conflict) but those who want to be at risk can be so. Though personally I think it doesn't quite mesh with what the devs have spoken about because you'll get situations like Uncle Bob who controls the entire map. Which they have purposefully designed the game around to not happen.
  5. Well you did choose to reply and run with it once people started posting. You could have let someone else banter back and forth, so in my opinion anything you feel is completely self induced.
  6. We already know that they are at least listening to suggestions. Folks concerned about the telegraphs in combat had a dev response informing them that they were looking into it and that there was going to be an aiming reticule. And bairloch hasn't suggested that they aren't doing so. He has stated that if the ideas don't necessarily fit into the current direction of the game they won't be picked up compared to those that do. But stating outright that the devs aren't going to listen at all has never been stated. And while we don't have a vision quote, we do have the information about the game that the devs have given us so far. We know what direction they are currently wanting to go just by the systems they have released (EKs, Dying Worlds, Internal Heroes, etc.). They have stated that the game is not going to be Shadowbane or Wiz/Pirates or SWG or any of the other games they have had a hand in. It's something that takes inspiration from all of the experiences they have had so far. It'll change, for sure, since we have a little less than 2 years now before the core module is released (if it's released on time). But hopefully it won't change due to the whims of the most vocal forum goers who clamor for this, that, or the other. They'll consider suggestions, take what they like, and ditch what they don't. And as bairloch has stated in several of his posts, what they keep and what they leave behind depends on where they (the devs) are thinking about taking the game.
  7. I understand politics in many applications but that isn't what is being discussed here. Why do you assume that there are only two guilds involved and decide when they are going to have a friendly bout of poke and tickle? If you enable the PvP aspect wouldn't it make more sense that you're now considered open season. And if you want to switch out you can but your reputation would be in the ... dregs. Since it seems to be a widely spread opinion not to have the game mechanics provide the consequences but instead the community.
  8. But why does it need to be on a completely different EK? What you're suggesting is that the PvP crowd gets their own EK that enables PvP, loot, etc. automatically. What I'm asking is why is there a need when you can just have it so that everyone would be on the same EK but those who would want to PvP, loot, etc. would get to do so by just flipping a switch on their monarchy. This way there can be battles going on in the EK, interesting things to watch, but if your monarchy isn't flagged you don't get to participate. Why move that into a separate server when other kingdoms that aren't flagged can benefit as well from the conflict (feeding into the economy and game politics) by selling you stuff. Conflict folks get more land. prestige, etc. But the crafters can get their name out and sell their wares.
  9. They wouldn't be able to attack unless they themselves would be open. How would what you are proposing make any sense? Especially since most of the people that would be watching (with popcorn) wouldn't want to attack you anyway.
  10. I personally have no stake in EKs. I'm not going to be developing mine since I'll just campaign hop so your assumptions are your own sir. But for those who are interested in having these things, I don't see the harm in discussing them. But you say that you aren't trying to drag people into what they don't want, but this thread has been discussing how to force people into doing things. So many you personally have not been advocating for it, but the issue has been raised by both sides equally. And just because some one doesn't want to PvP in the EKs doesn't necessarily mean they don't like to PvP elsewhere. This entire carebear labeling schtick is so juvenile.
  11. But isn't that a good thing? It is a game that isn't for everyone. But for those that are still interested in the shape it is currently taking, the devs are providing parts that interest those who like this over that and players that like that over this. And even parts for players that just don't care either way. It just seems that the two sides just focus on the areas that may not be for them and glare. So if they made the EKs one giant persistent world but you still have to enable PvP wouldn't that suffice? That way those interested in fighting could fight. Those interested in providing weapons/armor/equipment to those that like to fight could do so in safety. Why do you want an entirely separate version?
  12. Why is it that conflict is the only way that you see meaning in the EKs? Let's say that they make the EKs into one giant world, but there is no FFA PvP or sieges unless you follow the devs' ideas for their kingdom warfare. Let's also say that you'd even get to keep the kingdom but depending on where it is located in relation to your own, defending it would be ... interesting. So you see all of the monarchies and trade can be established, politics can play out, etc. Would that make it more "meaningful" to those of you who are clamoring for conflict in the EKs? Because the Eks are a fluffy, glorified safe zone with no meaning ... to you. They are lobbies that need more impact on the game by having conflict ... to you. If there are no sieges or ways of losing your land it isn't fun/no purpose ... to you. For every one of the reasons folks have complained about this there are a myriad of other opinions out there. Just because you don't see the value of its current state (because it can always change depending on what the devs want, or who complains the most) doesn't mean everyone shares that opinion. Why are you punishing those that don't necessarily want to PvP in the EKs? There is plenty of it in the campaigns so why are you limiting those who want to make their name known via crafting by forcing them to have their PvP flag turned on? They have just come back from places where they are in danger of dying and losing all their stuff. Why should they be limited in how much or what quality of stuff they can sell? It makes no sense, to me. The base line should be, sell whatever you want, but if you turn on your PvP flag you can gain a minor buff in some way. But don't limit someone for their playstyle that fits perfectly fine into the devs' vision for how the Eks are going to work.
  13. I've backed things using Paypal before and it's never charged me extra. Also since I think the OP mentioned this, Kickstarter isn't using Amazon payments anymore. They've switched to a different company called Stripe. Maybe that will help you.
×
×
  • Create New...