Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My theory:
1. You have an 8 on 8 battle.
2. Average Player has 400 HP
3. Base Weapon Damage is 40 DMG
4. Critical Bonus Potential = 20%
5. 8 vs 1 target at a time (focus fire) = 8x 40 = 320 + 80 = 400
*400 hp is a new player (unless numbers have changed). It's hard to say what an average player will have. Certainly it will depend upon how long the game has been out. I'd expect ballpark of 1000-1500 for a typical player later into the game, but that's just a guess since the max hp is supposed to be 2000ish with buffs.
*Crits don't add extra damage (see latest blog/posts by Stephen Cheney). Certainly 8 people would stack up a lot of injury points focus firing, but I don't think that's what you're going for.*As a quick and dirty way to roughly approximate damage, if you assume roughly equal skill all around:
-final damage ~ 0.85*damage factor*(base damage-resistance). The 0.85 is for equal skill. Move it up or down slightly if skill differences come into play.
-damage factor ~ 1.4, though that will vary between weapons and attacks
-base damage minus resistance is dependent upon keywords and damage types. Upper limits on it are ~100, but that's with a top end T3 weapon against a target with no resistance.
So if you're somehow using the absolute best weapons against someone who has no resistance (not likely) your final damage will be in the ballpark of ~0.85*1.4*100=119. Then: 8*119=952. Not enough to take them down in an alpha strike - and that's making assumptions that really up the damage.
For something more typical, you'll likely be in a midrange T2 weapon (base damage ~70). Compare that to midrange armor T2 physical resistance (ballpark 0 for cloth, 15 for light, 30 for medium, 45 for heavy). Those numbers are likely being tweaked by Stephen, so don't take them as final.
So that gives you:
average damage ~ 0.85*1.4*(70-x) where x=0,15,30,45 depending upon who you're attacking
then damage ~ 83.3, 65.5, 47.6, 29.8
(Numbers change if using non-physical damage, though we don't have examples yet so I can't ballpark).
Compare that to 1000+ hp for your target to see how many you need to focus fire in order to alpha strike someone.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would really love to see the game truck the number of Characters "engaged in melee" with a single target, and significantly reduce the effectiveness of ranged attackers when that number reaches a threshold.
I would also love to see the game allow "Guards" to provide "Cover" from ranged attacks.
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
I figure that the number of skilled characters required to drop even a new character before there's any chance to react will be high enough that it rarely happens.
I think that groups that specialize in preventing escapes will exist, and that few characters will escape from them.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I would really love to see the game truck the number of Characters "engaged in melee" with a single target, and significantly reduce the effectiveness of ranged attackers when that number reaches a threshold.
I would also love to see the game allow "Guards" to provide "Cover" from ranged attacks.
I hope the game uses the PnP 'firing into melee' rules that give a large chance of hitting your party members. Adds much hilarity in our campaigns (if you're the archer).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I hope the game uses the PnP 'firing into melee' rules that give a large chance of hitting your party members. Adds much hilarity in our campaigns (if you're the archer).I would really love to see the game truck the number of Characters "engaged in melee" with a single target, and significantly reduce the effectiveness of ranged attackers when that number reaches a threshold.
I would also love to see the game allow "Guards" to provide "Cover" from ranged attacks.
I have on occasion, lodged an arrow in my dwarven friend's posterior while aiming for the orc he was fighting.
I always apologizes afterwards in the tavern with a strong sturdy ale to relieve some of the pain he felt when sitting down. :P
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have on occasion, lodged an arrow in my dwarven friend's posterior while aiming for the orc he was fighting.
I always apologizes afterwards in the tavern with a strong sturdy ale to relieve some of the pain he felt when sitting down. :P
Did you offer to take up a collection to buy him one of those nice donut illows?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Or....you could be like my RL brother and 1 shot my kitsune rogue!!!! I kept it a secret that I was a kitsune and told everyone I was a human. But I had a "thing" where when ever I did something "Roguish" I would do it in fox-form. We were in combat and I hid in a corner, shapeshifted, then attacked an orc and killed it. My brother (Elven ranger archer spec) was like "WTF?" and shot me, crit confirmed, near max damage and shotted me. Im like "WTF!?!!?!?!" lol.
His response...."You scared me!" so he walked home that day :-)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Here is an interesting question I put out there.
If UNC sticks to just PvP / banditry directed at feud, faction and war targets, what would be the response if we select our targets based solely on their numbers?
Say for instance we continue our plans for being a training company for would be bandits, taking in low experienced players and we direct them along with our veterans at feuding other low level companies.
What is the general opinion of waging feuds on a EvE University-esque types of organizations?
If we are training new bandits, it seems reasonable that they would learn their trade against new merchants and harvesters. We would want to have a fairly target rich environment at the entry level of PvP. A bit less so at the mid range of skill and difficulty. Saving the truly dangerous opponents for non training purposes, but probably in defensive feuds.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
That is part of my question, although not previously stated. The ""newbie" area is not exempt from PvP, specifically feuds, factions, wars, bounties, assassinations and death curses.
If the UNC ends up feuding a large merchant company, that also includes a large number of new players, that does not take the new trainees out of our target pool. In fact they would become a primary target for our new trainees, and still remain a legitimate target for the rest of our company.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
That is part of my question, although not previously stated. The ""newbie" area is not exempt from PvP, specifically feuds, factions, wars, bounties, assassinations and death curses.
If the UNC ends up feuding a large merchant company, that also includes a large number of new players, that does not take the new trainees out of our target pool. In fact they would become a primary target for our new trainees, and still remain a legitimate target for the rest of our company.
I was under the assumption that "the newby area" (whatever that is) was off limits or NPC guarded. Or at least that it wasn't detailed yet. If it isn't, then I think that the same applies. You will be unpopular, but it is open. Either it can be done or it can't. I suppose that GW could warn veterans out if they like and enforce it somehow without mechanics. That seems like it would be a hassle from hell.
If you mean, will people frown on veterans and your younger bandits attacking just newbs... I will hazard a guess that, yes, they will. Probably the veteran vs. newb part will not be embraced.
What about arrainging "training conflicts" that both sides could benefit from?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
What about arrainging "training conflicts" that both sides could benefit from?
Training is a poor substitute compared to getting thrown into the deep end. It is also not a priority for a bandit company to train merchants how to better counter bandit tactics.
Then there is the political implications to consider. One way to defeat our enemies is to demonstrate how they are ineffective, especially in the eyes of their newest members. One of the more demoralizing attacks that can be waged is sowing the seed of lack of confidence in a leadership's ability to protect its newest members.
I'm certain this is coming off as cutthroat, but it will be a reality in PFO and practiced by many.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is an interesting question I put out there.
If UNC sticks to just PvP / banditry directed at feud, faction and war targets, what would be the response if we select our targets based solely on their numbers?
Say for instance we continue our plans for being a training company for would be bandits, taking in low experienced players and we direct them along with our veterans at feuding other low level companies.
What is the general opinion of waging feuds on a EvE University-esque types of organizations?
If we are training new bandits, it seems reasonable that they would learn their trade against new merchants and harvesters. We would want to have a fairly target rich environment at the entry level of PvP. A bit less so at the mid range of skill and difficulty. Saving the truly dangerous opponents for non training purposes, but probably in defensive feuds.
So the question is whether we would take offense at you robbing "training"-style companies?
Personally, I agree with what Bringslite said. If they venture out into the world as a part of their training they should expect things can happen to them. And if they stay a part of that group and run around, they shouldn't expect being a member will shield them from you.
Now, if you feud them with the intent of camping right outside the newbie areas I might take offense. ;)
Edit for clarity: I'd take offense but I wouldn't decry you as a griefer for even that action.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
That is part of my question, although not previously stated. The ""newbie" area is not exempt from PvP, specifically feuds, factions, wars, bounties, assassinations and death curses.
If the UNC ends up feuding a large merchant company, that also includes a large number of new players, that does not take the new trainees out of our target pool. In fact they would become a primary target for our new trainees, and still remain a legitimate target for the rest of our company.
You're such a bully... :)
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're such a bully... :)Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
That is part of my question, although not previously stated. The ""newbie" area is not exempt from PvP, specifically feuds, factions, wars, bounties, assassinations and death curses.
If the UNC ends up feuding a large merchant company, that also includes a large number of new players, that does not take the new trainees out of our target pool. In fact they would become a primary target for our new trainees, and still remain a legitimate target for the rest of our company.
I'm certain this is coming off as cutthroat, but it will be a reality in PFO and practiced by many.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're such a bully... :)Interesting question. Can't answer as I have few plans of actually training people as a regular thing, although I certainly will if asked by my company/settlement leadership.
In that case I would say that it would not make you popular, but I don't see it as "against" the game in any way. It will just force those that train your adversaries to guard likewise with their veterans. Once you are outside of the newby areas "it is on!", is it not?
That is part of my question, although not previously stated. The ""newbie" area is not exempt from PvP, specifically feuds, factions, wars, bounties, assassinations and death curses.
If the UNC ends up feuding a large merchant company, that also includes a large number of new players, that does not take the new trainees out of our target pool. In fact they would become a primary target for our new trainees, and still remain a legitimate target for the rest of our company.
I'm certain this is coming off as cutthroat, but it will be a reality in PFO and practiced by many.
You're certain about a lot of things, mmmhmm.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason it's not a problem is because the folks who are doing the Feuding are also setting themselves up to be hunted right back.
I don't see the slightest problem with UNC Feuding the Newbie Training Company, just like I don't see the slightest problem with the Newbie Protection Company Feuding UNC.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
You're certain about a lot of things, mmmhmm.I'm certain this is coming off as cutthroat, but it will be a reality in PFO and practiced by many.
Well, I am certainly certain about the tone I was hoping to convey and certainly expected that some would receive it that way.
In the military and corporate world they teach management / leaders to always speak with certainty, even if they expect they might be wrong. If it turns out as a positive, no one will think it happened by accident. If it turns out bad, accept responsibility for the mistake but don't apologize for it. Just own the decision, and accept the chips will fall where they may.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is an interesting question I put out there.
If UNC sticks to just PvP / banditry directed at feud, faction and war targets, what would be the response if we select our targets based solely on their numbers?
Say for instance we continue our plans for being a training company for would be bandits, taking in low experienced players and we direct them along with our veterans at feuding other low level companies.
What is the general opinion of waging feuds on a EvE University-esque types of organizations?
If we are training new bandits, it seems reasonable that they would learn their trade against new merchants and harvesters. We would want to have a fairly target rich environment at the entry level of PvP. A bit less so at the mid range of skill and difficulty. Saving the truly dangerous opponents for non training purposes, but probably in defensive feuds.
I think that attacking an organization that a lot of established players in lots of other organizations like, support, and feel some loyalty to is a way of getting more meaningful player interaction than one can handle.
It might be a bad idea, but it's the the kind of bad choice that PFO is supposed to enable.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are actually two types of "player zones" in PfO
NPC settlement hexes no pvp in the settlement, griefers be ded here.
Everywhere else pvp open season. if you are near an npc settlement expect heavy npc resistance (whether or not it comes). griefers be really ded... if they get found. which they will. bounty system.
that said, no problem I can see bludd, except the in-game ramifications already stated and expected by your company and others.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There are actually two types of "player zones" in PfO
NPC settlement hexes no pvp in the settlement, griefers be ded here.
Everywhere else pvp open season. if you are near an npc settlement expect heavy npc resistance (whether or not it comes). griefers be really ded... if they get found. which they will. bounty system.
that said, no problem I can see bludd, except the in-game ramifications already stated and expected by your company and others.
Although GW has avoided the use of the term zones, there seems to be three or four kinds of zones.
NPC Settlement Hex: NPC Warden Patrolled; PvP limited to just Feuds, Wars, Faction, Bounties, Assassinations; Criminal Flagging set by GW.
Player Settlement Hexes: Limited Warden Patrolled; No PvP Limitations; Criminal Flagging set by player settlement.
Monster Hexes: Escalation Site; No Warden Patrols; No PvP Limitations; No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: Rarest Resources; No Warden Patrols; No PvP Limitations; No Criminal Flagging.
These are the four to the best of my understanding, although the last two might be the same.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
No Criminal Flagging means No Criminal Flagging. The absence of laws. The absence of building up the Criminal stack.
That Blog you linked is more than a year old and has at last been changed in the naming of the hexes.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
I've also pointed this out a number of times but yet I still keep reading the same false assumptions from him.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
No Criminal Flagging means No Criminal Flagging. The absence of laws. The absence of building up the Criminal stack.
That Blog you linked is more than a year old and has at last been changed in the naming of the hexes.
Where have you read that these "lawless hexes" will allow players to kill each other with the absence of flagging and reputation loss?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I've also pointed this out a number of times but yet I still keep reading the same false assumptions from him.Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
What laws will be in place in the Echo Wood, or other unsettled and uncontrolled hexes?
The Criminal Flag is applied when a law is violated, that means either the NPCs or PCs controlling the hex have set laws in place.
I'm not suggesting or assuming that the Hostility state is disabled, just the Criminal Flagging.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where have you read that these "lawless hexes" will allow players to kill each other with the absence of flagging and reputation loss?
Where did you read in my statement "No Hostility state" or "No Reputation Loss"? That is your assumption.
You will still generate a Hostility state and still lose reputation if you attack unflagged targets outside of the methods described by GW (ie SADs).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where have you read that these "lawless hexes" will allow players to kill each other with the absence of flagging and reputation loss?Where did you read in my statement "No Hostility state" or "No Reputation Loss"? That is your assumption.
You will still generate a Hostility state and still lose reputation if you attack unflagged targets outside of the methods described by GW (ie SADs).
I wasn't assuming you just worded your point in a very deceiving way. Let me break it down for newer posters on these forums as to avoid confusion:
There is no hex that will allow the free slaughter of unflagged players without reputation loss and some kind of "hostile flag."
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Where have you read that these "lawless hexes" will allow players to kill each other with the absence of flagging and reputation loss?Where did you read in my statement "No Hostility state" or "No Reputation Loss"? That is your assumption.
You will still generate a Hostility state and still lose reputation if you attack unflagged targets outside of the methods described by GW (ie SADs).
I wasn't assuming you just worded your point in a very deceiving way. Let me break it down for newer posters on these forums as to avoid confusion:
There is no hex that will allow the free slaughter of unflagged players without reputation loss and some kind of "hostile flag."
There was nothing deceiving about it, you just don't understand the difference between earning the Criminal Flag and earning the Hostile State.
I suggest you read the Dev Blogs:
http://goblinworks.com/blog/the-windows-a-wound-the-road-is-a-knife/
http://goblinworks.com/blog/on-we-sweep-with-threshing-oar/
http://goblinworks.com/blog/the-man-in-the-back-said-everyone-attack/
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
There was nothing deceiving about it, you just don't understand the difference between earning the Criminal Flag and earning the Hostile State.
And new folks to these forums won't either, which is why it's important for us to try to make it clear instead of leaving it misleading.
You will get Flagged for attacking non-Hostiles, even in Wilderness or Monster Hexes.
|
Goblinworks Executive Founder
|
Monster Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
Uncontrolled Hexes: ... No Criminal Flagging.
I'm not sure how much emphasis you're placing on the word "Criminal" there, but the way you're stating it, it's extremely misleading to casual observers. If you attack someone who isn't Hostile to you, you'll get Flagged and you'll lose Reputation; it doesn't really matter where that happens. There might be some true FFA zones, but they haven't really talked about them much.
[Edit] Check out Over the Hill and Far Away for the official word on Hex Types.
No Criminal Flagging means No Criminal Flagging. The absence of laws. The absence of building up the Criminal stack.
That Blog you linked is more than a year old and has at last been changed in the naming of the hexes.
"No criminal stack" is not the same thing as "No reputation penalty". Your wording caused many to thing that you were saying the latter when you meant the former.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK you are correct that bludd wasn't explicitly stating that there will anywhere you can PVP without any sort of consenquence. What he WAS saying is that you won't get the criminal flag if you do anything in a hex that has no laws. That is just 1 flag. You will still get hostile flagged to your opponate, and still lose rep and alignment, but you won't have the long term flag known as criminal. You MIGHT earn the "Murderer" flag if you kill a lot, but that isn't a crime in a hex without laws so you won't ever be a criminal.
Does that spell it out clear enough? If new posters have questions they can ask, but I really feel you guys are nit picking here. you can't be a criminal if there is no law to break. Yes you STILL LOSE REP AND ALIGNMENT FOR ATTACKING AND KILLING NON-HOSTILE TARGETS, but you won't be a criminal.
Next question.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ "The Goodfellow"
Are you sure about where you can get the criminal flag and its stacks? Why are you sure of that?
From the alignment and reputation dev blog
Committing acts that are crimes in territory controlled by a settlement gets you the Criminal flag and decreases your Law vs. Chaos rating. Settlements can set a number of laws based on their Settlement Alignment.I would assume it is not a huge stretch to say that the criminal flag is not received in hexes not controlled by a settlement (where effectively there are no laws set).
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have also been misleading because I failed to mention that you can be an Elf as one of the four playable races. You can also enter uncontrolled hexes as an Elf, I believe, however there is no Dev Blog or Dev Post supporting my assumption.
Are there any other unrelated disclaimers that need mentioning?
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@ "The Goodfellow"
Are you sure about where you can get the criminal flag and its stacks? Why are you sure of that?
From the alignment and reputation dev blog
Committing acts that are crimes in territory controlled by a settlement gets you the Criminal flag and decreases your Law vs. Chaos rating. Settlements can set a number of laws based on their Settlement Alignment.I would assume it is not a huge stretch to say that the criminal flag is not received in hexes not controlled by a settlement (where effectively there are no laws set).
It is a stretch until we hear about flags, hostility, etc... There are "thief" and "traitor". I think that they can apply in areas outside of settlements. They are being squeezed down into "criminal". Some of the recent posts (mini blog almost) in the "How terrible is the UNC" thread make me wonder if they are not condensing everything into "hostile" or not. The difference perhaps being who sees the "hostile" condition.
Are stacks of "killer" that lead to "murderer" applicable inside and outside settlements?
Yet.... my assumptions are probably more severe than yours.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I have also been misleading because I failed to mention that you can be an Elf as one of the four playable races. You can also enter uncontrolled hexes as an Elf, I believe, however there is no Dev Blog or Dev Post supporting my assumption.
Are there any other unrelated disclaimers that need mentioning?
Yes
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
I truly believe that assuming an implication in every lacking statement is couterproductive.
A clerification would have been enough. Bundling that clerification with an accusation is, in my view, unneeded hostility.
On the other hand Bluddwolf didn't say that he didn't torture and kill US Army service dogs and their puppies during his deployment, so take that as you will.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah, I normally wouldn't pick nits about not explicitly mentioning every possibility. But I have a strong personal interest in giving new forum readers reliable information, and the phrasing Bluddwolf used gave a very strong impression that wasn't true.
No Warden Patrols; No PvP Limitations; No Criminal Flagging.
That might make some folks think he's trying to say there are "No PvP Limitations". That would be unfortunate.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
But I have a strong personal interest in giving new forum readers reliable information, and the phrasing Bluddwolf used gave a very strong impression that wasn't true.
The way you phrased it made it look like you have a personal interest in attacking Bluddwolf. That is why I said the clerification would have been enough.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
Yeah, I normally wouldn't pick nits about not explicitly mentioning every possibility. But I have a strong personal interest in giving new forum readers reliable information, and the phrasing Bluddwolf used gave a very strong impression that wasn't true.
No Warden Patrols; No PvP Limitations; No Criminal Flagging.That might make some folks think he's trying to say there are "No PvP Limitations". That would be unfortunate.
But the phrasing that I used was true. I can't control what some people may insert or remove from my comment. I was specific when I said "Criminal Flag".
You are free to mention the Reputation System in every post, but don't expect others to bring it up when the post has nothing to do with it.
To my knowledge, Reputation System is not tied to hexes it is universal.
I'll worry about "what I'm trying to say", and you are welcome to point out (with proof) what I said was inaccurate. You are welcome to express a hope or an opinion that is counter to what I say.
Trying to counter what I didn't say does come off as nit picking or shopping for controversy.
|
Goblin Squad Member
|
@Bluddwolf, I didn't accuse you of intentionally misleading anyone, and I didn't say you were incorrect.
In general, I try to make things clear to the folks who are coming here for information. Your phrasing could easily have misled someone who didn't have a lot of information, so I took the opportunity to clarify that. I also asked you to be cognizant of that, and maybe make an effort along the same lines. You're certainly free to ignore that request, just as I'm free to continue pointing out when I think things are misleading and clarifying them.