Page 2 of 3
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:56 pm
by Arsen
Pringles wrote:I voted no, because I think players should interact more with eachother to get action going and not rely on the staff for some fun.
you mean to gank my pk with 5 guildys and call me nub? lol
btw there will be more action with more events because ppl would logg in more often. me for example.
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 3:57 pm
by Roser
Less auto tourny's. More real world events.
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 4:19 pm
by Light Shade
Rose wrote:Less auto tourny's. More real world events.
This.
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:05 pm
by McSchnurke
I didn't vote. Perhaps the poll should add "more events, less Trammel." Then I'd vote.
BTW, love the sig, Light Shade.
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:25 pm
by DrFaustus
Arsen wrote:Pringles wrote:I voted no, because I think players should interact more with eachother to get action going and not rely on the staff for some fun.
you mean to gank my pk with 5 guildys and call me nub? lol
btw there will be more action with more events because ppl would logg in more often. me for example.
I thought you quit.
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:35 pm
by Arsen
DrFaustus wrote:Arsen wrote:Pringles wrote:I voted no, because I think players should interact more with eachother to get action going and not rely on the staff for some fun.
you mean to gank my pk with 5 guildys and call me nub? lol
btw there will be more action with more events because ppl would logg in more often. me for example.
I thought you quit.
no things have changed, iam not moving to cologne and stay in berlin.
it was more a break for +-1month
Re: Events
Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 5:42 pm
by GuardianKnight
I accidentally voted no because i saw " more tourney events". sorry.
Re: Events
Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 11:54 am
by Dolos
I do not believe in giving players valuables foe nothing. Either make players pay in to play (which then goes to winner of event) or run the opportunity to lose something. The current setup is the reason why people join events AFK to get silver in ctf. There has to be some risk associated with the reword in my opinion.
Re: Events
Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 1:54 pm
by Brymstone
Worry more about FIXING DEXXERS and less Trammel BS like staff hosted tournies. Lightshade, LOVE the sig man!!
Re: Events
Posted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:01 pm
by Guerrilla
Moar events , Less bunchies plz, k thanks see you on irc <3's
Re: Events
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 6:59 am
by Arsen
best example for what is going wrong.
12:00am 1v1 non-Free Use Tournament
4:00am 1v1 Magic,Pots&Poisons Tourney [non-free-use]
9:30am 2v2 Magics,Pots&Poisons Tourney [non-free-use]
11:30am CTF Game (Urban)
11:00pm 2v2 Non-Free Use Tournament
wtf?
...
Re: Events
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:52 pm
by Berock Shagando
I voted yes because I love attending events. Doesn't matter if these events offer any kind of reward or whatever...I would attend regardless. Now, I love the era accuracy. I had the best time and couldn't get enough of uo back then and there weren't many events...if any...I don't recall. But I had fun because I had many close allies and guildmates who showed me alot and served as safety in numbers. But I don't think events would hurt the players' interaction with others. Some think it will but I think it might even help it. And some say automated quests will be trolled, but thats where the safety in numbers comes in and making allies and joining guilds. Leave that to the players. This will also thin out the pks camping the farming hotspots, giving them and farming up-and-comers more alternatives. The way I see it, it could benefit everyone. Except for maybe the staff whom it would create more work for. Which brings us back to what Corbin said. " It's their choice. It's their game." If they think events would help the server more than fixing current issues, they should work on them.
Re: Events
Posted: Mon Jul 04, 2011 8:12 pm
by iamreallysquall
Ronk wrote:I voted no (just now).
My reasons:
1. Automated events happening in a trammy zone and giving away free trammel silver with zero risk to participants is not only inaccurate, it is completely against T2A. If events require some sort of player investment and/or risk, I may be for them.
2. There are much more important issues that the staff should focus on without wasting time developing new event types.
Re: Events
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:11 am
by Spitfire
Dolos wrote:I do not believe in giving players valuables foe nothing. Either make players pay in to play (which then goes to winner of event) or run the opportunity to lose something. The current setup is the reason why people join events AFK to get silver in ctf. There has to be some risk associated with the reword in my opinion.
Agree with this. I'm not against events completely, but the big group fun games like CTF should not have a reward for the winners. If the tourneys are going to give rewards they should cost something to enter or you should be able to loot your opponent if you kill them.
Arsen, I think the premise behind having staff events at off peak times is to encourage players to do their own thing during peak hours. Player events could get a lot of participation at 8pm eastern, but wouldn't really work at 5am eastern.
Re: Events
Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:48 am
by Ronk
Spitfire wrote:
Agree with this. I'm not against events completely, but the big group fun games like CTF should not have a reward for the winners. If the tourneys are going to give rewards they should cost something to enter or you should be able to loot your opponent if you kill them.
This is why I always liked an 'anything goes' approach to tourneys. You could bring your really good expensive stuff to have a better shot at winnign but when you died you'd get looted and lose it. Thus tourneys were not only about skill but what you wanted to risk and what you felt you needed to compete.