Sirius234 wrote:Maybe you could have the option of enabling pvp in the menu??
There is, it's called criminal acts.
It just has the downside that if others turn on criminal acts, they are free to pvp you.
Sirius234 wrote:Maybe you could have the option of enabling pvp in the menu??
Gorbane wrote:Selfish capitalist pigs. . . Trying to attain resources for personal gain?
They then go on to complain that they are being "mistreated" in their wimpy nature.
Nolidor wrote:Dumb game.
I read the OP, and it never explains why the first 12 hours shouldn't be protected. It only talks about the general aspect of PvP.
PvP is nice when people become developed. There's a difference between snuffing someone's candle out versus blasting off a firework show...
...but when you say newcomers are exposed to getting ransacked and destroyed such that they can't develop a reliable foundation, you expose people to becoming successful out of luck instead of skill. In other words, they don't really relate with success. Success primarily becomes a matter of external circumstance instead of internal commitment. This is especially true since everyone in the gameworld doesn't join at the same time. Players who are lucky enough to find and join the game earlier become able to grief those who are unlucky to find and join the game later. This is something which has nothing to do with skill whatsoever, and deserves no consequence.
The argument about a "small enough effort" is garbage. What's small enough is subjective, and it ignores the objective principle of commitment. I mean if you want to talk about realism and how "the air is free" is an unrealistic game, then let's also consider the unrealistic nature of how people don't consent to join the world. In turn, they're entitled by default to protection of their childhood in compensation of the coercion naturally endured. To ignore this is to just pick and choose when you want to have a realistic interpretation.
On the other hand, I'd have to say the OP is naive about the interpretation of personal versus natural space. Claiming natural space is not an offensive action. What's natural is nobody's, not everybody's. If anything, the OP's equivocation between personal and natural space could be made AGAINST PvP, but again, PvP is fun. It's just not fun when you have no reliable foundation to develop with.
Furthermore, you shouldn't even have a reliable player base to ransack or destroy in the first place since the lack of reliable foundations should discourage people from bothering to play to begin with. If Yeomanry wasn't so expensive, this wouldn't be such an issue, but it is. On top of that, the chance of you finding a random ranger to help you out in the beginning is slim to none. Even advertising on the forum is hopeless since you have no coordinate system to rally help towards.
It's no wonder your community is so small, and I wouldn't be surprised to see it fail into the future. Newcomers are discouraged, and oldtimers will get bored. You've put luck before skill which just isn't relatable unless you're emotionally riled by chaos, and even then, chaos has to be sustainable. Even a fire needs fuel to breathe. Yes, fire is fun, but your fire is burning itself out.
All and all...
...meh.
AnnaC wrote:Because that's an arbitary restriction to coddle players unnecessarily. If you're killed or raided in your first 12 hours you haven't lost anything that isn't easily recoverable. First off, people assume the timescale of play in this game is something it's not. There is no instant gratification for resources and development; real time and logistical planning needs to be invested to make anything worthwhile in the Hearthlands, something that is interesting about it and sets it apart from other games. About the protection for the "first 12 hours", well that's again arbitrary and unnecessary, and it also allows such young hearthlings power to do potentially destructive economic tasks while under this protection (as it is using fresh new hearthlings en-masse had been used to great effect in sieges before).
The only "luck" is where you intitially spawn, and that can be easily changed unless you've spawned on a small island with few resources (as swimming early on is dangerous). Success is all about internal commitment and logistical planning, something you obviously don't have as you assume a much shorter timescale than actually occurs in the gameworld (an instant gratification baby).
It's easy to survive as a new hearthling because you're not tied to any specific location or resource, so it's easy to stay hidden and obscure. Obscurity is your first and always present line of defense, and always will be. Even with brickwalls and warriors, not being in a place an enemy knows or goes to will always be the best defense. I lived in leantos and fenced gardens spread out across the wilderness for almost a month this world without incident. If you want the child aspect, join a faction that takes in newbies, there is that option. The point is the game itself does not hold your hand or expect you to be it's child; sure players can do this, and unfortunately the community of recent worlds has continually grown less likely to do so, but the game itself should never have to do this through mechanics. This isn't a themepark mmo.
Claiming "natural space" is an offensive action because it's an action that denies another another player a potential action or resource. You're the one extremely naive about everything about this subject, to be honest.
Yeomanry isn't expensive compared to the ridiculous power claimed terrain has. Personal claims have been overpowered as hell since the curio system (one of the actual downsides to the curio system). Also there is a coordinate system, havenmap.sabinati.com
Nolidor wrote:I dunno how it works, but I'm assuming there's some growth element to it? The more you claim, the harder it becomes to claim more?
Ninijutsu wrote:Nolidor wrote:I dunno how it works, but I'm assuming there's some growth element to it? The more you claim, the harder it becomes to claim more?
No. That's not how it works at all. How about you actually learn about the basic concepts of the game and then you can argue that the fundamental system under which it operates is suffering from the flaws you claim upon it (which it isn't).
Nolidor wrote:If that's not there, then that would create a problem in the game. It would let old players expand to the point of squishing new players out.
I was giving the game the benefit of the doubt of not being problematic. Jeez.
AnnaC wrote:Yeomanry isn't expensive compared to the ridiculous power claimed terrain has. Personal claims have been overpowered as hell since the curio system (one of the actual downsides to the curio system).
Users browsing this forum: Yandex [Bot] and 3 guests