It's a PvP poll not a flame thread o_o

[sprite]

you may have noticed despite my intense dislike of it I do participate in the mercenary capacity.

Unfortunately I have. Did you realise when you (once again, despite it being done to death) suggested limiting the number in OP battles that that would mean you and your ilk would be out of a job?

[grimjim]

but with so many people totally against your opinion I think even you should admit your out of touch with the people who enjoy PvP

I don't think it's really so many to be honest, they're just loud and strident and completely unwilling to compromise. The problems with it are the problems with it and they don't change. Opinion only really seems to shift depending on what side you're on.

[grimjim]

Unfortunately I have. Did you realise when you (once again, despite it being done to death) suggested limiting the number in OP battles that that would mean you and your ilk would be out of a job?

I'd rather have a working, more satisfying and less unbalanced PvP system. Depending which one was implemented limited numbers could lead to smaller, lower level guilds hiring high powered mercs anyway, it could even increase the market. That's a secondary concern over what's best for the game in any case.

One other alternative is to remove the 'essential' quality of PvP by the alternate revenue stream model for crystals and other outpost aspects (but mainly crystals) by providing other methods to get hold of them, even if they're less efficient. Then there wouldn't be so much clash.

[ajsuk]

I don't think it's really so many to be honest, they're just loud and strident and completely unwilling to compromise.

baha! pot, kettle...

but anyway, the point is, limiting more people from taking part is silly and not a good solution to anything. We've gone over this point a hundred times already anyway so discuss a better idea...
(which I wont be coming up with as I'm fine with things how they are but if something worthwhile turns up it'd be worth considering...)

[grimjim]

baha! pot, kettle...

but anyway, the point is, limiting more people from taking part is silly and not a good solution to anything. We've gone over this point a hundred times already anyway so discuss a better idea...
(which I wont be coming up with as I'm fine with things how they are but if something worthwhile turns up it'd be worth considering...)

And we keep coming back to the idea because it is a good solution, it just has a couple of drawbacks. Depending what side you're on you either see that as too much of a drawback, or not.

Things 'as they are' are pretty much unsustainable in the long term.

The pros of a more restricted setup are tactical and more even battles, greater OP transfer, better bragging rights (A victory would actually mean something) and an end to zerg-wars.

The cons are excluding people from participating - once the limit is hit - and concentrating participation in the hands of the high levels. That isn't necessarily too different to the current situation, though anyone can join in influence over a battle to a meaningful extent is limited to the higher level people.

Limiting it to guild members has a different set of problems and benefits and potential exploitation problems with guild swapping etc.

IMO the best option is to create the alternate revenue stream model to de-emphasise the importance of outposts, but that doesn't solve the internal PvP problems of making it more engaging and tactical, it just means it can be ignored by those who don't want to participate.

[sprite]

it just means it can be ignored by those who don't want to participate.

Considering the people who enjoy it are generally the ones who want to participate in the first place, what's the problem?

I'd much prefer it if they gave you something to keep you happy instead of changing something that keeps lots of other people happy as it is.

[grimjim]

Considering the people who enjoy it are generally the ones who want to participate in the first place, what's the problem?

I'd much prefer it if they gave you something to keep you happy instead of changing something that keeps lots of other people happy as it is.

So we can have our teleports back then?

All that would mean though would be that people wouldn't have to care, it wouldn't solve the problems with the PvP implementation and would likely skew the current problems even more one way than they already are. So that's not perfect either.

[sprite]

All that would mean though would be that people wouldn't have to care, it wouldn't solve the problems with the PvP implementation and would likely skew the current problems even more one way than they already are. So that's not perfect either.

Why did you suggest it then?

[grimjim]

Why did you suggest it then?

Because it's another solution and one that does allow people to completely divorce themselves from PvP. No solution is perfect, least of all the current situation.

[d29565]

I believe Rushin requested that this thread try to stay flame free. Was going quite well until page eight when Jackoba said something to Jy.