DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Ground Zero Gaming Forum
HTML https://kamcraft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Polls
*****************************************************
#Post#: 5581--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: guest215 Date: July 23, 2015, 5:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
let me
find...
HTML http://kamcraft.createaforum.com/general-discussion/claiming-pois/
And everyone who says it is right. Only those who want it will
go.
The trick for me is finding incentive for people to interact
without negatively affecting those who do not.
#Post#: 5582--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: disguised zombie Date: July 23, 2015, 5:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=h0tr0d link=topic=768.msg5579#msg5579
date=1437679999]
1) You keep using the word forced, as if the more you say it the
more it becomes true. No one has "forced" anything.
2) You keep repeating that your playstyle should be untouched
and not forced but players choosing pvp should be forced to
condense more. I see that as ironic.
3) I would concede that if 90 pct of the server is PVE, the
server should focus on that and make sure that remains the focal
point. I am just trying to inject something in addition to
enhance our server, not detract from it.
4) I respect your opinion, but feel you are doing yourself a
disservice by sticking on these points in this manner.
5) I may have too much to do as it is.
It may be a pipe dream to try and have PVP the way the game is
structured.
Hermits can be a detriment to change.
6) Would you concede that people didn't denigrate any PVE
players when half the map was conceded for PVE only, restricting
PVP and forcing them into a condensed area? I didn't see PVP
players on the forums taking shots at anyone. You could probably
find some posts where I argued against it, but acquiesced to
giving it a shot. I would challenge people to find posts
negatively aimed to PVE.
7) No one complained when I added what I have to the different
zcoin and vote stores ( so that players don't have to travel for
certain things). Do you think those additions favors PVP
playstyle, or PVE playstyle? The ones who remain at home, or the
ones travelling looking for other players?
8) I also have consternation with the fact that I allowed for
what was the largest change we had and any small change back is
met with such resistance and so few open minds. We went from
100pct PVP world, to 50pct. I said, "It's worth a shot, despite
my objections." I didn't blast PVE players, I didn't attack
their character, I didn't malign their intent. It was worth a
shot at least, despite my reservations.
9) Because I never stated that. If you can find where I said
that I will apologize. If not, please recognize this is an
inference by you, not a fact or reality from me.
[/quote]
1) If you notice the quote from your original post, you are the
one that originally used the word forced in relation to changing
how pve works in the north. The quote below shows you saying
you are looking to make all the cities pvp in response to a
stagnation problem within pvp. That has nothing to do with
fostering interaction with players. And as far as opening up
more pvp choices for pve people, we have a choice already, half
the map is pve, the other is pvp.
[quote author=disguised zombie link=topic=768.msg5578#msg5578
date=1437679328]
[quote author=h0tr0d link=topic=768.msg5562#msg5562
date=1437584354]
The cities are spread out quite a bit. What I am hoping is that
even PVE players up north will be able to do PVP if they choose,
up north. Or at least be forced to be a bit more alert wherever
they are.
(my interpretation)--Players are forced to deal with pvp when
they choose pve. It's not that we are unable to pvp, it's that
we choose not to. I have walked from my base which is at the
top of the explored area in the north and it only takes 15 or 20
minutes when running with grain alcohol.
The closest city to GZ is 2k away, and there are many cities. No
one really needs to go to them anyway.
(my interpretation)--Minimizing a feature of the game to justify
changing them to pvp.
because as it stands no one is even choosing to come down south
to PVP and there is stagnation.
(my interpretation)--The original reason you want to change the
cities
[/quote]
2) I didn't say they should be forced, I was pointing out that
it is counter-intuitive to increase an area when there are so
few people in the original area to begin with. Out of the 3
options for increasing player concentration that one was the
most likely work in my opinion. And then in the next post I had
agreed with your idea of limiting the map all together. If
that's the only thing that can be done, then so be it.
3) Why the idea to make part of the pve area pvp? I like having
cities that are not pvp, it's nice to get some kills and some
loot without worrying about people wanting to kill me. The real
problem with people is that they are people, they will wait
until the most inconvenient time to try to kill someone, that's
not really a fight.
4) Because they haven't really been addressed. No where in your
posts are you recognizing your original words and intent which I
have quoted twice.
5) It's not a pipe dream, I just think it shouldn't fall on only
you to make changes. The fact of the matter is, people are
going to make their own choices even when presented with
changes. There will always be that hermit that chooses not to
be around people regardless of the changes made to the map. But
providing changes that give people no choice but to pvp if they
would like access to certain regions in the north is, in my
opinion, not going to solve the problem you are looking to
solve.
I felt like I was playing single player when I first came here,
but this is because I wasn't actively looking for people to play
with until I wanted to join up with you, Braizd, and BT. The
point is people are going to make their choices and if they
don't choose to be social, well, they get out of it what they
put in and they will soon be bored.
There needs to be some kind of goal that people can work toward
other than survival. It doesn't matter what part of the map you
choose, that gets boring after a while. If people are more
involved in objectives other than just playing the base game
they may very well choose to interact. Myself and the guys I
play with were preparing to come hunt you down when you
announced the prize for killing you. We were making plans for
various traps and shit for you to fall into. I even watched the
videos you make when pvping to try to ascertain the best way to
lure you in. For me it wasn't about the prize, it was about
hunting you down. Not meant as a personal attack, but it was an
objective I could work toward that was outside the norm of
killing and looting. My passion for this game was re-ignited
and I was prepared to make the choice to go to the pvp area.
You might be thinking that I could set my own objective in pvp
to kill lots of people but it's not the same. It felt like a
server wide challenge and we could compete with everybody, pvp
and pve alike, to see who could get you first.
6) I would concede this, but I have not blasted the pvp way of
life either. Me stating that people seem like they are
pretending to play pvp when they are far enough apart that it
might as well be pve isn't a lie. Also you have misunderstood
my point with player concentration. I was not saying it because
I felt pve was being wronged and I needed to somehow strike
back. It was purely an opinion based on some math know-how and
a bit of southern exploration throughout the time I have been
here, that was it. The hermit comment in my original post still
stands. You can't expect to have awesome pvp experiences all
the time when people live farther from one another.
7) This really comes down to what kind of player you are. If
you are a builder in pve then yes it benefits tremendously. If
you are more of a wanderer or explorer then no. It can benefit
people in pvp if it is used in the right way. Putting your
lootable containers inside an obvious base with no attempt to
hide them is a bad idea, yes. But if you take the time to think
about your base layout and construction you can easily use these
containers just as much as a builder in pve. So I don't think
it favors one over the other. It's just another tool to be
applied, and it's overall usefulness is contingent on how its
use is adapted to the chosen play style.
8) It must be difficult. But this is a general thing that does
not characterize my attitude because I have been receptive to
almost every change you have introduced, even when I had my
doubts. I tried out the changes and liked most of them. And
the ones I still didn't like, didn't have the effect I thought
they would so I adapted. It's unfair to pin that on me.
9) It was inferred by me. The real problem is I am going
through a bunch of shit right now and I'm very angry over things
that have nothing to do with you. As a result I am letting my
bias and anger amplify my opinions around this and that anger is
being directed at you which is unfair. I apologize for the
baseless comments contained in my posts and will remain calm and
respectful throughout the rest of the discussion.
#Post#: 5584--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: disguised zombie Date: July 23, 2015, 5:52 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
the smiley is supposed to be an 8, the first numbered list
corresponds to the second numbered list which is my response to
each point. Can't seem to find the edit button :(
#Post#: 5586--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: guest215 Date: July 23, 2015, 6:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't see the original post, and player vs player is a form of
interaction. I use the word to mean anything involving players
interacting with one another. This could be friendly, or
non-friendly. Co-op or shooting them in the head.
Forcing people to be alert is not the same thing. Again, I feel
that is misconstruing my use of the word.
I did not say "forcing people to pvp." Note the sentence before
that.
[quote]What I am hoping is that even PVE players up north will
be able to do PVP if they choose, up north.[/quote]
Then... in context...[quote]Or at least be forced to be a bit
more alert wherever they are.[/quote]
I feel disheartened here. I used the words hope and choose in
regards to PVE players and PVP in the north. This was my intent,
and it I feel like it is being twisted into "h0tr0d is
determined to force this upon us".
I would ask that the picking apart of messages and trying to
analyze each word on both sides end. I am starting to feel like
I am watching some biased "news" channel twisting things up and
do not want to believe anyone here, including myself, is going
to try and pick apart things in order to discredit intent of
another.
We are getting off-point with making this a h0tr0d vs. PVE or
h0tr0d vs dz
#Post#: 5588--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: disguised zombie Date: July 23, 2015, 6:17 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I addressed the context and the sentence with a response with
respect to the whole thing. All of those points except the last
have to do with this topic and is a response to what you have
said. It was civil and factual, where it was not purely factual
I provided the wording to indicate that it was my opinion.
So I'll sum up and whatever happens, happens.
Changing the area will do nothing but push pve further away. We
already have a choice, the real problem is there is no extra
motivation to go to pvp. We are not unable to pvp because we
live in the north and moving pve areas closer to us under the
condition that we are unable to pvp is false. If you want more
player interaction introduce some objectives other than survival
and you will see your problem solved.
#Post#: 5591--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: KaRnAgE Date: July 23, 2015, 7:09 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I seen someone asked what makes a pve player want to play on
this server my reply is i will pvp when i want and only when i
want not having a choice is what the other servers offer so
when I feel I have the gear to pvp I will go pvp if I want to
that is what this server offers.
As far as the cities being pvp, because i do want to pvp some
times, I dont see a problem. I will add that it does change the
way a pve player plays in the way they have to watch out for
players in the cities as well as zeds. For someone who does not
want to pvp at all, this does effect their play style they will
no longer be able to go into a city without the fear off a pvp
player stalking them in a tower or just following the zeds death
groan sounds to a pve player.
I think making the map smaller would go a long way towards more
player interaction both for pvp and pve if that is an option.
#Post#: 5594--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: guest215 Date: July 23, 2015, 7:18 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
You both make valid points, and I do take care not to negatively
affect playstyles.
But...it is impossible to not affect someone. Any change affects
someone.
The key is what you both mention, how to offer an incentive to
encourage PVP. And that may be nigh impossible until the
developers add things.
And I will limit the map next build, need to learn how. Think
10k in all directions? I've seen few people go past 10k, 10k.
#Post#: 5596--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: KaRnAgE Date: July 23, 2015, 7:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
10 k sounds more than big enough for both main play styles
#Post#: 5601--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: guest215 Date: July 23, 2015, 8:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
C'mon folks, more votes pls on the poll.
I want more opinions!
#Post#: 5603--------------------------------------------------
Re: Should cities be PVP?
By: guest215 Date: July 23, 2015, 8:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
This would change as well.
Currently PVE players cannot land claim certain POIS. If cities
became PVP they would them be open to PVE players land-claiming
them, wherever the city was. This includes special POIs in the
city.
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page