Page 4 of 5
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:21 am
by Tron
Biohazard wrote:Tron wrote:i'll tell you what's ignorant.
trying to break a law that could get the server shut down because your preferred playstyle differs from the current norm here.
keep pushing this subject, IT WILL HAPPEN.
oh wait, no it won't. time to stfu?
I'm sorry I didn't realize you can't carry a normal conversation. my bad...
It has nothing to do with my playstyle.
Restricting extra accounts only to people who can pay for it is definitely a playstyle change.
You may think it's ok to pay 20$/month for this 10 year old game today, and so you will.
How many won't and therefore have to change the way they play because all the sudden they don't have the resources they used to?
You make a minority of those who choose to do this or those that don't and someones playstyle is affected.
It doesn't matter, this won't happen.
Derrick is not going to start charging a f*cking sub fee.
it's ignorant to even introduce the idea into the conversation.
and you're making me ignorant for addressing you on it.
keep on trying to insult me though, you're really getting somewhere.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 1:15 am
by Orsi
You're a loser, Tron.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 1:36 am
by Tron
Orsius wrote:You're a loser, Tron.
It's about time someone listened to me!
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 3:06 am
by Faust
Have you noticed Tron has derailed both threads associated with free use running off which ever way he has to in order to change the off topic subject that he starts discussing...
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 3:27 am
by Tron
Faust wrote:Have you noticed Tron has derailed both threads associated with free use running off which ever way he has to in order to change the off topic subject that he starts discussing...
paranoid much?
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:32 pm
by Faust
That must be it. You got me son...
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 2:54 pm
by Psilo
I think the best way to go around free use/balancing issue is to do this:
First, be aware that having a boxed in area 1v1ing with no chance of saying "outta garlic" or recalling is not t2a accurate. In other words dueling rings like this one never existed in this way.
Also become aware that CTF never existed in 1997-1999 t2a either. However, free use is not the fix for our issue, no use adding a silly inaccurate feature on something that never existed.
I. in order to remedy our free use/lack of goldsink issue we need to allow a bank to be accessed during the 1v1 match around the perimeter of the duel area and also a bank area able to be accessed in the spawning points of teams in CTF.
This way people that want to spam spells or potions will need to stock their bank with supplies such as regs and kegs, and people won't be able to just grab 1 of each reg and make 6k selling silver after winning a CTF match.
We need gold sinks for sure.
And I'd also like to add that the "survival" game needs to be fixed. No mobs should be dropping gold or items because there is 0% of losing items. This is very wrong being as how many high-level mobs spawn so the player gets tons of gold and possible powers/vanqs with 0 chance of being pked or looted?
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 3:09 pm
by Hemperor
First, be aware that having a boxed in area 1v1ing with no chance of saying "outta garlic" or recalling is not t2a accurate. In other words dueling rings like this one never existed in this way.
That's opinion, really. Dueling rules could have varied from shard to shard and situation to situation.
One thing that is definitely not accurate is an automated sudden death, so I really think that voids the argument of "you cant limit regs, that's not accurate!"
Limiting regs will make these fights end much less random, the leet pvpers that are so against this were counted mini healing 50+ times in under five minutes yesterday, yet they would rather that after 10 minutes it come down to who hits and harm spam.
Regardless sudden death should be removed, especially if limiting regs can not go in for accuracy reasons.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 4:29 pm
by Orsi
I don't understand why there must be a tournament event in a secluded land anyways. Just pop up gates leading to Jhelom and have duels in the Jhelom duel pit. Redecorate the duel pits for more spectator seating and fenced off matches. Have a sign-up sheet, put a time-limit for each round, have breaks in between for people to run to the bank, and you got yourself a classic Roman Colosseum.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:27 pm
by Biohazard
\
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:45 pm
by Tron
Biohazard wrote:Tron wrote:Restricting extra accounts only to people who can pay for it is definitely a playstyle change.
You may think it's ok to pay 20$/month for this 10 year old game today, and so you will.
How many won't and therefore have to change the way they play because all the sudden they don't have the resources they used to?
You make a minority of those who choose to do this or those that don't and someones playstyle is affected.
It doesn't matter, this won't happen.
Derrick is not going to start charging a f*cking sub fee.
it's ignorant to even introduce the idea into the conversation.
and you're making me ignorant for addressing you on it.
keep on trying to insult me though, you're really getting somewhere.
go look at all your responses... they are hardly constructive. Then you just repeat yourself incessantly and go no where with what you are saying.
I haven't insulted you yet. ignorant is not necessarily an insult and saying you can't carry a conversation is just obvious because you are just repeating yourself
anyway playstyle should not be affected by how many accounts you have. That's what makes it BS. a subscription would bring in money for the server and also curb people with numerous accounts(and all things that come along with multi-accounting). it would'nt be illegal either as it would be like a donation. You are right it probably won't happen. but you know what? many things are discussed here that will or wont happen... but if they aren't ever talked about then they DEFINITELY wont ever happen. This has been talked about before(in other threads as well)... it wasn't ignorant then and it still is not now. I'm not the only one that thinks multi-accounting is a hurtful thing to the shard and community. a sub fee for extra accounts is merely one idea i had to curb such a thing. If there is something better i am all ears. anything anyone talks about as a suggestion i would say is hardly ignorant unless its obviously out of the era or just outlandish as an idea in general. This is very possible. I just asked for general constructiveness when i talk to anyone. saying NOPE WONT HAPPEN ILLEGAL TIME TO STFU 3 or 4 posts in a row is not constructive.
i wouldn't have to repeat myself if you'd let it fucking die already. this is your like 3rd repeating yourself as well?
why bring up discussions for something that won't happen? why continue discussing it even now? why discuss it in this thread?
why not just bring up discussions for every pub 16 feature in all kinds of threads that are about a totally different topic? it's ok to waste our time talking about sh*t that well never happen. how about we start talking about frog sex? it's totally irrelevant too. like a f*cking sub fee that derrick has already said will never happen.
i have a better idea. why not keep the discussion where it should be (free use) instead of using every topic as a platform to push your 1 account agenda. every topic you hop in and try and turn it into a discussion about account numbers
Biohazard wrote:lets wipe the shard and make it more true to era in the speed of building skills, make the economy better, and create the same policies.
p.s. and allow only one account per person and if you want another account you have to pay 10 dollars per each extra account.
NO MORE QUAKE UO PLZ
this sh*t is getting old.
stay on f*cking topic.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 5:53 pm
by Biohazard
/
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:10 pm
by Tron
Biohazard wrote:Tron wrote:this sh*t is getting old.
stay on f*cking topic.
You are an absolute treat tron.
Does that mean you're finally getting it?
Or are you trying to knock me for self censored adult language?
If the latter, grow up.
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:12 pm
by Biohazard
|
Re: The unbalancing (and repetitive) effect of Free Use.
Posted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:15 pm
by Tron
Biohazard wrote:could you possibly just chill out? plz? talk about topic at hand.
sweet then you are getting it.
