Goblin Squad Member
|
Things I find interesting.
This is really more for everyone else's benefit, but I'm really, really glad that you proved your points about me.
And Nihimon why can't you give straight answers ever? Like EVER? You just counter with a question to deflect from what I'm getting at and then disappear.
...
It seems if you cannot win the argument you just deflect and avoid it all together.
I guess it wasn't really all that important to you that I actually address your question about who quoted whom saying what. As I knew all along, it was just another cudgel to try to use to tear someone else down.
It's tiresome. All I can hope is that reasonable people out there see through you as clearly as I do.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
That charter section has changed with this years rewrite. It now states:6.7 CHARACTERS IN OTHER GUILDS: Pax members are expected to be community-minded and work within existing Pax Guilds and Divisions; however we understand that there are circumstances where this is not always possible, due to the ever changing nature of the MMO world, the business models, and the broader player base, itself. While we feel that players should, in general, not have alt characters in a non-Pax guild, it is permitted. Nevertheless, Pax members should not behave in a way that harms the Pax Community. Prior to joining another guild, a Pax member must first inform their respective Guild Master or leadership council. If a member’s membership in another guild is perceived to create a conflict of interest with Pax Gaming, they may be required to renounce membership with the other guild to remain a member in good standing within Pax Gaming. In cases where the privilege is abused, further action up to and including a permanent ban from the Community may be taken. Please keep in mind that your behavior in other guilds is still representative of our standards in Pax Gaming and any egregious behavior can still affect your Pax Gaming membership.
Thanks- that section was one of my major sticking points about Pax in general, and I was unsatisfied with the consequences of the answer I got at the time.
It will be interesting to see what fails to qualify as a 'conflict of interest'.
One time a Pax member, Bjorn had asked me, "Would the UNC bandits ever raid a Paxian merchant?"My answer was without hesitation, "Absolutely". Then I explained that even our friends will not be exempt from our greed, but being our friends would come with a discount for our SADs and if forced to fight, we would fight and kill them in an honorable fashion.
The only way to be truly exempt from our raiding is to contract us not to raid you. Yes I call it a contract, you will call it extortion, I'm comfortable with either term.
So if you see that the UNC is working with Pax, TEO, TSV or any of the other companies / settlements out there, it will be the result of a contract.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Nihimon
I'm happy to take you at your word, and I'm glad you made a point of saying that. I was actually hoping to see Pax distance itself from Areks' statement. It's much less concerning to think that Areks is only gaining some kind of personal benefit from trash-talking Andius, and insinuating that there's strife when there's not (that's actually a pretty consistent theme for him, going way back).Although, I'm still curious what personal benefit Areks sees in it.
"Personally" means this is just about me. So there is no need for Pax to distance itself from anything.
I was under the assumption there was one group. There is not. There are two.
The point of the original group as I understood it to be was to practice PvP and work together as a community.
So if this is going on... why is Andius offering PvP and whatnot lessons in Darkfall... we have a group isn't this already going on?
I'm told, "well there is a TEO group and a community group but they are allied."
Then you decided to chime in when I was asking whether or not he was part of the original effort.
I had the impression that everyone was going to be in the same organization not splinter along the same lines that we have developed here. Please do not take the term "splinter" in a negative connotation as that is not how I mean it.
... the group had already splintered because of differences.That's a very interesting way of putting it. And it really makes me curious why you think it would benefit you and Pax to put it that way.
Personally, the whole idea of everyone working together was rather intriguing. I was actually considering purchasing the game until I found out that the group had already splintered because of differences.
So what we have here are two instances where I attempted (and in the case of interpretation by Nihimon) FAILED miserably.
I stated clearly that it was my personal opinion and how I was interpreting things. I clarified that I did not want to imply negativity with the word "splintering".
I do not know how I could have been any more clear.
So what exactly do you want to see Pax distance itself from?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be interesting to see what fails to qualify as a 'conflict of interest'.
Honestly Decius, this is a tricky one for us. Intra-divisional conflicts of interest are handled by our Inner Sanctum. As Charlie said, this is somewhat of a recent change so there is not a clear precedent.
I will say that there have been statements made by Bluddwolf in the past that Pax Aeternum has taken exception to and the great thing about Pax is everything is documented. So this is something that we have already encountered and handled. The details are Pax business but they may come to light one day.
Again, we don't have to explain ourselves. No organization does. However, obviously there are some misconceptions about our organization so hopefully we've clarified that a bit.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
It will be interesting to see what fails to qualify as a 'conflict of interest'.
...
One time a Pax member, Bjorn had asked me, "Would the UNC bandits ever raid a Paxian merchant?"My answer was without hesitation, "Absolutely". Then I explained that even our friends will not be exempt from our greed, but being our friends would come with a discount for our SADs and if forced to fight, we would fight and kill them in an honorable fashion.
The only way to be truly exempt from our raiding is to contract us not to raid you. Yes I call it a contract, you will call it
I will try to explain how it is not a conflict of interest, but I doubt you will understand.
In PFO the leadership of Pax understands the nature of an Open World PVP MMO, and they understand that bandits will do what bandits do, they even understand the RP aspects of it all as well.
They understand the role that we have created for The UnNamed Company, and they appreciate the fact that we will be adding content to the game. They also know that we are an anti griefer company, but also, that we are intelligent enough not to "over fish the pond."
They also understand that if contracted, the UNC will meet the conditions of that contract.
So, back to the OP... PVP: AN INTRODUCTORY GUIDE AND USEFUL REFERENCE?
I have been working on establishing several PVP oriented associations, proving grounds, and events (present and future for all).
* The UnNamed Company
* The Brethren of the Wildlands
* The Outlaw Council
* EvE Online (PVP Roams)
* Rift (working on this, maybe by next weekend)
* Darkfall (although I don't have much time for this, as I suspected,
and I have already deleted my toon and uninstalled the game -
hard drive space is running low)
I am open to any other F2P MMOs, but EVE remains my primary choice.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
It will be interesting to see what fails to qualify as a 'conflict of interest'.Honestly Decius, this is a tricky one for us. Intra-divisional conflicts of interest are handled by our Inner Sanctum. As Charlie said, this is somewhat of a recent change so there is not a clear precedent.
I will say that there have been statements made by Bluddwolf in the past that Pax Aeternum has taken exception to and the great thing about Pax is everything is documented. So this is something that we have already encountered and handled. The details are Pax business but they may come to light one day.
Again, we don't have to explain ourselves. No organization does. However, obviously there are some misconceptions about our organization so hopefully we've clarified that a bit.
You use the royal plural, so I assume you are speaking as an officer. I will continue to judge Pax based on all of the information I have, including what I have seen of what Pax considers fit for public consumption.
Andius and TEO in Darkfall are working very closely with Goblin Squad; just tonight we learned, together, how to capture a village. We discussed TS communications procedure and how to request silence on the channel ("Break - Break - Break" being my preferred phraseology, as opposed to "Shut up, I hear woodcutting").
I don't think that not sharing a particular chat window is a major flaw.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You use the royal plural, so I assume you are speaking as an officer. I will continue to judge Pax based on all of the information I have, including what I have seen of what Pax considers fit for public consumption.Andius and TEO in Darkfall are working very closely with Goblin Squad; just tonight we learned, together, how to capture a village. We discussed TS communications procedure and how to request silence on the channel ("Break - Break - Break" being my preferred phraseology, as opposed to "Shut up, I hear woodcutting").
I don't think that not sharing a particular chat window is a major flaw.
Excellent distinction. As always Decius, I would expect nothing less from you.
"Breaking" is used commonly in the military. As is Wilco, cantco, etc. Having everyone on the same page when it comes to tactics (radio etiquette included) is a necessity. The thing about tactics is making them SOP isn't enough. Everyone has to have the same interpretation of those SOPs.
"What are the courses of action on unprovoked contact?"
"What factors go into determining a specified course of action?"
"What are the risks involved in this action and how can we mitigate them?"
All that might seem a bit complicated but the more you practice it the better you get at it. The more you look at things from a tactical standpoint the more it becomes second nature. Evaluation leads to increased efficiency.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ DeciusBrutus,
Congrats on your first village capture! Was the village well defended? How long did it take?
I have put up a thread where we can share our PVP experiences, you are welcome to post your account of the sacking there.
It will be interesting to here the details so that some day we may be able to compare them with sacking a settlement in PFO.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
That charter section has changed with this years rewrite. It now states:6.7 CHARACTERS IN OTHER GUILDS: Pax members are expected to be community-minded and work within existing Pax Guilds and Divisions; however we understand that there are circumstances where this is not always possible, due to the ever changing nature of the MMO world, the business models, and the broader player base, itself. While we feel that players should, in general, not have alt characters in a non-Pax guild, it is permitted. Nevertheless, Pax members should not behave in a way that harms the Pax Community. Prior to joining another guild, a Pax member must first inform their respective Guild Master or leadership council. If a member’s membership in another guild is perceived to create a conflict of interest with Pax Gaming, they may be required to renounce membership with the other guild to remain a member in good standing within Pax Gaming. In cases where the privilege is abused, further action up to and including a permanent ban from the Community may be taken. Please keep in mind that your behavior in other guilds is still representative of our standards in Pax Gaming and any egregious behavior can still affect your Pax Gaming membership.
Thanks- that section was one of my major sticking points about Pax in general, and I was unsatisfied with the consequences of the answer I got at the time.
It will be interesting to see what fails to qualify as a 'conflict of interest'.
There are consequences for every choice we make, but I don't see Bludd's clarification of UNC as problematic. The fact that he will possibly be a target, or we will be a target of his, does not concern me personally this far out from a launch.
For one I like competition. For another I seldom have issue with keeping a level of sportsmanship with wins and losses. For a third Bludd was never shy with us on his aims. If he was looking to infiltrate us, he is certainly using an interesting tactic.
There might end up being a conflict of interest. Right now there isn't one. If that changes, again, I am sure there will be proper announcements on the matter.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
@ DeciusBrutus,
Congrats on your first village capture! Was the village well defended? How long did it take?
I have put up a thread where we can share our PVP experiences, you are welcome to post your account of the sacking there.
It will be interesting to here the details so that some day we may be able to compare them with sacking a settlement in PFO.
Quick summary: An intermediate step, before capturing a village, is to control a holding within range of that village.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
For a third Bludd was never shy with us on his aims. If he was looking to infiltrate us, he is certainly using an interesting tactic
Charlie George...
Don't you know, I'm the "silver tongued" sympathizer and agent of the impending Zerg hordes, spinning my web of fear and discord for any attempt to bring this community together?
When I say prepare for war, I really mean for the community to embrace those that would conquer them.
When I said to fight wolves, you had to become wolves, that was really my secret encouragement for you to remain sheep.
Yes, you must take everything that I have said and reverse its intent. Then take everything that Andius has said and ignore its implications and accept them as being your only savior from the impending horde.
We shall stop the Zerg Horde by not using terms like "Care Bear", on the forums. One look at all of the sheep, and the wolves will say, "This is a place for sheep and not wolves, we shall become sheep ourselves so we can fit in."
So as another component to the PVP: AN INTRODUCTORY GUIDE AND USEFUL REFERENCE?
I suggest we add....
1. Don't expect that by presenting a passive front, those that would slaughter you will have a change of heart.
2. If you believe in what you are doing, you will use any tactic to preserve it, if you are facing utter destruction.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I think it's similar enough to be the exact opposite: You have to win a siege before you can start to seize villages.
You can steal from them more easily, just walk up to the control point, use it, and then survive for 15 minutes.
So is capturing a control point similar to what it is in MWO, or simply a capture the flag game.... You may not even have to fight for it, just be there when no one else is and hold it for 15 minutes?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I'd just like to remind you Bludd, that one bear can kill several wolves in the wild. Bears may be sleepy and slow at times, but when riled ...
You have killed Bluddwulf: 736 times :)
That does not apply to carebears.
In the wild, one wolf gets fed till he cannot eat anymore by carebears.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I said to fight wolves, you had to become wolves, that was really my secret encouragement for you to remain sheep.I took it as your attempt to inure this community to the kinds of behavior that I generally consider toxic grief-play.
Depends which ones we're talking about: It's more like Bluddwolves than Bluddwolf; some are more friendly than others, but they all like meat just the same so we can be sure: They're all carnivorous... :p
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I said to fight wolves, you had to become wolves, that was really my secret encouragement for you to remain sheep.I took it as your attempt to inure this community to the kinds of behavior that I generally consider toxic grief-play.
I'm sure in My Little Pony Online, it would be. So now your belief is that meeting aggression with aggression is toxic grief play.
Maybe Andius should think, you are the propagandist for Goonswarm? So far just about every suggestion you have made would make the in-game community softer and ripe for the pickings.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
When I said to fight wolves, you had to become wolves, that was really my secret encouragement for you to remain sheep.I took it as your attempt to inure this community to the kinds of behavior that I generally consider toxic grief-play.I'm sure in My Little Pony Online, it would be. So now your belief is that meeting aggression with aggression is toxic grief play.
Maybe Andius should think, you are the propagandist for Goonswarm? So far just about every suggestion you have made would make the in-game community softer and ripe for the pickings.
I believe the sentiment is All Aggression All The Time is not the direction we wish to see this game go. And the feeling is that whenever someone wishes to allow for non-aggression, it is rallied against strongly by a very vocal few.
It was my thinking that we were making a Sandbox MMO with open PvP. Not a fantasy death match game with an open world.
In either event, I think we are not getting anywhere on discussion of wolves and carebears. This is getting fairly from an introduction to PvP.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
This is getting fairly from an introduction to PvP.
This is true, and I have brought the conversation back on point or at least attempted to, on a few occasions.
I would be interested in reading what other's opinions are on the subject of Motivations of PvP. Particularly, what meaningful scenarios can we or even GW create to encourage PvP?
To get this started I would like to suggest a resource that I've never seen fought over in any MMO, Water.
Access to water, known as "Water Rights", can take several forms. Drinking water, water transportation, water as a strategic resource, and water for irrigation have all played significant roles in historical conflicts.
I can thing of few things more devastating to a settlement's DI than being denied access to a water supply.
Rerouting Water
Damning Up Water
Poisoning / Diseased Water
Controlled Flooding
Are just a few actions that can be taken, even to support a siege, that would be very effective against a settlement's DI.
Just a few thoughts, feel free to add to them.....
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Water rights could be a complex mechanic. But imagine having a big settlement in the area with maximum DIs that sucks so much water out of the aquifer that neighboring settlement growth is limited by its mere presence. It happens to suck the water out before the water can get to those other settlements.
Such a mechanic is likely to breed a lot of strife even within nations and alliances, though. Not sure if that is the kind of impact that GW wants to create though. They've already stated this is not a game about the darkness in the hearts of men, so I don't think they want to go heavy on reasons to betray and backstab each other within an a group. But I could be wrong.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
With every action there are consequences. People who poison wells might gain a long term heinous flag. By long term I mean lasts as long as the poison is present + 24 hours.
On the other hand, this is the River Kingdoms. The water table is like 2 meters down. Yeah, it's foul water, but once it's turned into ale it's only nasty.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Id prefer to play Hello Kitty Online then PFO.
In Hello Kitty Online we can shoot Love Arrows and swing Hammer Kisses at each other... In PFO there may be deaths, do not want.
/sarcasm
Nihimon - Areks is right, you do deflect a lot. Im pretty sure you knew exactly what Bludd was talking about... I think he may be wasting his time trying to educate everyone.
Although I do agree with what he is trying to do, some people will not accept anything except My Little Pony Online.
The "Not one Coin" crowd is going to end up with "Not one Coin."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
More about balance: There's people from pathfinder who are generally interested in pathfinder as per adventurers "EXPERIENTIAL" motivation to explore, adventure.
We've also got the likes of EVE (the best mmorpg sandbox?) and expectations of development and dominion, the "RESULTS" seekers.
So we are looking to cater 2 different delivery systems. Both groups can add social possibilities to the game that make it a cut apart from other mmorpgs, I think.
It's been said all four are the pillars that hold up the game table. Losing one makes the table fall over. But we are asking the question: Are 2 legs different sizes to the other 2? Something like that! Which do we chop down or extend to make them all fit?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More about balance: There's people from pathfinder who are generally interested in pathfinder as per adventurers "EXPERIENTIAL" motivation to explore, adventure.
We've also got the likes of EVE (the best mmorpg sandbox?) and expectations of development and dominion, the "RESULTS" seekers.
So we are looking to cater 2 different delivery systems. Both groups can add social possibilities to the game that make it a cut apart from other mmorpgs, I think.
It's been said all four are the pillars that hold up the game table. Losing one makes the table fall over. But we are asking the question: Are 2 legs different sizes to the other 2? Something like that! Which do we chop down or extend to make them all fit?
Just because I argue for PVP does not mean I do not want the adventures as well. Its one of the selling points of the game. I am looking forward to it. If some do not fight for PVP, then it will be castrated.
Well said AvenaOats.
I do not think any of them needs to be chopped down. They all can fit in quite well. Play with the mind set of "Be Prepared." Players want to strike it rich out in the wilderness all by themselves and have no worry about consequences for their actions.
Risk vs Reward has to be played into that. If it is not, then we may as well be playing one of the hundred other Themeparks out there.
Gathering and Crafting will be driven by PVP. Sure you can take gear to PVE with, but in PVE alone there is no loss (yes I know you can die). No PVP then Crafters will starve.
PVP is setup with consequences. What more needs to be said?
PVE will provide resources for everyone, and allow settlements to increase in size and wealth.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon - Areks is right, you do deflect a lot. Im pretty sure you knew exactly what Bludd was talking about... I think he may be wasting his time trying to educate everyone.
No, Bludd isn't wasting his time trying to educate everyone.
It's the obstinate few who completely ignore valid points and vigorously avoid discussion that proves detrimental to their idea of what PfO should be like.
While we are equally obstinate in our position, we at least engage in the discussion about their points. That is no longer necessary.
Simply ignore them. Educating those that are less familiar and newer to the community must continue otherwise this really will be "My Little Pony Online". If we want this to resemble anything close to what we were promised, an Open world PvP Sandbox, we have to continue driving home our points but we don't need to do it on the field of their choosing... which is really what this is all about. Stop quoting them, stop debating them, stop acknowledging them... and do so truly.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sure you can take gear to PVE with, but in PVE alone there is no loss (yes I know you can die).
I actually just had an amusing image of sentient NPCs looting corpses. Oh? You didn't have that sword threaded, you say? Careful when you come back, lest you find it when one of the orcs that killed you tries to plant it in your face!
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Nihimon - Areks is right, you do deflect a lot. Im pretty sure you knew exactly what Bludd was talking about... I think he may be wasting his time trying to educate everyone.
No, Bludd isn't wasting his time trying to educate everyone.
It's the obstinate few who completely ignore valid points and vigorously avoid discussion that proves detrimental to their idea of what PfO should be like.
While we are equally obstinate in our position, we at least engage in the discussion about their points. That is no longer necessary.
Simply ignore them. Educating those that are less familiar and newer to the community must continue otherwise this really will be "My Little Pony Online". If we want this to resemble anything close to what we were promised, an Open world PvP Sandbox, we have to continue driving home our points but we don't need to do it on the field of their choosing... which is really what this is all about. Stop quoting them, stop debating them, stop acknowledging them... and do so truly.
Agreed
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
So now your belief is that meeting aggression with aggression is toxic grief play.I've been fairly consistent that using "griefer" tactics is bad, even if you're using them against "griefers".
Who said anything about using griefer tactics, against griefers or anybody for that matter?
And before you take my statement out of context, snipping it just to make your usual false point....
if you believe in what you are doing, you will use any tactic to preserve it, if you are facing utter destruction.
I completely expect that you would leave that part of my quote out. You would probably have just used "if you believe in what you are doing, you will use any tactic ".
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
...Sure you can take gear to PVE with, but in PVE alone there is no loss (yes I know you can die). No PVP then Crafters will starve.
Gross concept error, -all, read the relevant blog post on item loss (the one that specifically replaces all previous looting details).
Dieing in PvE is exactly as much of an equipment drain on the economy as dieing in PvP- 25% of unthreaded and 1 durability on threaded equipment.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Items degrade through simple usage as well as death. Everyone using gear is consuming gear regardless of if they PVP or not. Darkfall has proven this a successful model as everything on a person when they die is 100% lootable and there is no durability loss on death. So with the exception of gear determined so cheap it is left on the body or salvaged, all gear loss happens through usage and none of it happens through PvP.
Their gear market is doing fine.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Items degrade through simple usage as well as death.I don't think that's right. I think only threaded items ever decay, and they only decay on death.
So now, every time you die, your threaded items lose a point of durability.That may be out of context, though...
I think Nihimon is correct through what we know has been stated for PFO. Items degrading through use has been an interesting mechanic in other games. The issue may be that not all items are used. PFOs mechanic takes into account loss chances on items that can only be used once (resources to be refined, crafted) as well as equipped gear. Threading eliminates the destruction chance on equipped gear, which is why the decay mechanic was put into place.
Either system would work. But I would warn against a hybrid of the two.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@ Onishi
Faction conflict in Pathfinder RPG is meaningful based on supporting the lore of the setting. Faction conflict is usually based on conflict between two or more Deities. To suggest that such conflicts that trickle down to mere mortals is meaningless is to suggest that the Dieties and their respective Alignment differences are likewise meaningless.
GW has said that to participate fully in faction warfare, a character must show a certain amount of dedication to it. It is not until they reach level 3 in a faction will they be able to engage other opposing factions without out consequences to their alignment / reputation. That level of dedication is only achieved through focused and meaningful PvP.
Consequences for PvP do not give PvP meaning. The purpose / motivation for PvP is what gives it meaning. You can have meaningful PvP without negative consequences, for the winner, and it still be meaningful PvP. It is only if you remove the reasons for PvP or the consequences of losing PvP, that you end up with meaningless PvP.
I'm way late to respond to this, as I kind of forgot about this thread, and haven't fully caught up, but I figured I'd explain my point a bit deeper. The issue is there's a lack of long term consequences, unless you define disposable gear that you are expected to lose often as meaningful somehow.
A settlement divvying for control of a harvesting source, conquest, etc... is pretty meaningful. Bandit's and their continual arms and strategy against cargo runs, is also pretty meaningful. The biggest thing is, both have means to an end at some point. The merchants get some bounty hunters and drive the bandits away from route X, or the bandit's arrange a payment plan for the merchants to pay not to be robbed. Settlements and nations fall, or arrange peace. Longterm there is an end goal that they are fighting for, even if it is never reached, the fact that it is there, adds a meaning to the conflict.
A war between the gods, or between any NPC characters that never reach the foreground, and never changes beyond some sort of point system they reward their followers in. Can factions rise and fall? Can their friends/enemies change? Does Joe killing bob, have any impact at all to anything in the world besides Joe and Bob's gear and faction rep? If the answer is no to those questions, I have a hard time calling it "meaningful".
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
At Onishi,
It is up to the Devs to make the reasons for participating in Faction Warfare meaningful. We at this time do not know what their plans are, they only mentioned that there will be faction warfare.
Even if Faction Warfare amounts to nothing more than having a higher faction standing, that is still meaningful to those that choose to fight for that standing.
I have played in many MMOs, and in all I have always known someone that would refer to themselves as a "Completionist". These players strive to complete every available aspect, or accolade there are in the game.
If there are factions, with standing, then completing the faction ladder is meaningful. If that means that they must go out there and kill dozens or even hundreds of players, just to meet that goal, it it still meaningful.